Employment and Poverty in India, 2000-2005

Author(s): K. Sundaram
Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 42, No. 30 (Jul. 28 - Aug. 3, 2007), pp. 3121-3131
Published by: Economic and Political Weekly
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4419843
Accessed: 22-02-2016 19:03 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic and Political
Weekly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 150.131.192.151 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:03:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Employment and Poverty
in India, 2000-2005
This paper is principally focused on the changes in the size and structure of the workforce
and the changes in labour productivity, wages and poverty in India in the first quinquennium
of the 21st century. The period between 2000 and 2005 saw a sharp acceleration in
workforce growth, and, on the obverse side, a slowdown in the rate of growth of labour
productivity across most sectors and in the economy as a whole, and, a slowdown (a decline)
in real wage growth in rural (urban) India. Consistent with the trends in labour
productivity and real wages, relative to the 1994-2000 period, the pace of poverty reduction
between 2000 and 2005 shows, at best, a marginal acceleration (or a marginal
deceleration, depending on the choice of poverty lines) in rural India and a clear slowdown
in urban India. This period also saw a small rise in the number of working poor
and a substantial rise in the number of self-employed and regular wage/salary
workers in the "above poverty line" households.

K SUNDARAM

his paperis principallyfocusedon the changesin the size we use the survey-based WPRs (all-ages) - separately for
and structureof the usual (principal plus subsidiary) status rural males, rural females, urban males and urban females -
workforce in India in the first quinquennium of the 21st to derive the workforce estimates by gender and rural-urban
century. It also examines the changes in labour productivity, location for 2004-05. These estimates indicate a significant
wages and poverty over this period. The estimates of poverty acceleration in the growth of workforce - especially the female
are derived by combining comparable estimates (on mixed ref- workforce - between 2000 and 2005 relative to both the 1980s
erence period) for 2004-05 of the proportion of households in and the 1990s.
"below poverty line" households from the 61st round Consumer The second section analyses the changes in the structure of
ExpenditureSurvey of the National Sample Survey and the size- workforce. We begin by examining the changes in the activity-
distribution of persons from the 61st round Employment- status of the workforce. This brings out the sharp growth in self-
Unemployment Survey. These estimates suggest that the extent employment and the reduction in the share of casual labour, with
of decline in poverty between 2000 and 2005 is significantly the proportionof regular wage/salary workers not showing much
smaller than indicated by Himanshu (2007) and Mahendra Dev of a variation except for urban females who show a rise in the
and Ravi (2007). Our estimates of poverty also enable us to share of such workers. Even with more or less unchanged shares
address the issues of the working poor and of the quality of of RWS workers, the sharp growth in total workforce ensures
employment growth over this period. a significant increase in the average annual increments in such
The paper is organised as follows. workers relative to both the 1980s and the 1990s to dispel. any
The first section presents and discusses the estimates of notion of "jobless growth". This section examines next the
population and workforce over the period 1983-2005 as a back- changes in the broad industrial and occupational distribution of
drop to the more detailed analysis of the changes in the size and the workforce in the first quinquennium of the 21st century.
structureof workforce between 2000 and 2005. Following our Building on the analysis of the industrial distribution of the
earlierpaper[Sundaram2007], the discussion highlights the issue workforce, the next section examines the growth in labour
of age-distribution underlying the overall (all ages) worker- productivity by broad industrial sectors and the changes in
population ratios (WPRs) coming from the NSS employment- real wages of adult casual labourers by gender and rural-urban
unemploymentsurveys, and, using the smoothed age-distribution location.
of population from the population Censuses of 1981, 1999 and Against the backdrop of the slowdown in growth of labour
2001 . brings out the critical differences between the survey-based productivity and in the growth of real wages of casual labourers
and the census age-distributions. It is shown that, with the in rural areas (and a decline in real wages in urban India)
census-based age-shares as weights to derive the overall WPRs Section IV presents the estimates of poverty among the general
from the survey-based age-specific WPRs, the slowdown in the population. Our estimates indicate only a marginal acceleration
growth of workforce between 1993-94 and 1999-2000 relative (or a marginal slowdown, depending on the choice of the poverty
to that between 1983 and 1993-94 is much less marked than in line) in rural India and a clear slowdown in urban India in the
other analyses. A similar comparison of the age-distribution of pace of poverty reduction between 2000 and 2005 relative to
the population as per the 61st round Employment Survey and that in the 1994-2000 period.
that from population projections carried out by Mari Bhat, The final section presents our estimates of the working poor
shows the two age-distributionsto be fairly close. Consequently, and examines the quality of employment - especially of the

Economic and Political Weekly July 28, 2007 121

This content downloaded from 150.131.192.151 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:03:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
self-employed - in terms of average annual increments of such censuses, Table 2 presents the survey-based age-distribution and
workers located in "above poverty line" households. the (closest) census-based age-distrubutions for 1981, 1991 and
2001. This brings out the nature of the differences in the two
I age-distributions,especially for 1983 (relative to the 1981 Census)
WPRsandWorkforce
Population, Growth where the survey-based share of 0-9 is higher for rural males
and urban males and for 1993-94 relative to the 1991 Census
Estimatesof population,separatelyfor ruralmales, ruralfemales,
urbanmales and urbanfemales, for (the mid-point) of the survey Table 2: Survey and Census-based Age-Distribution of
years, provide the starting point for estimating the size of the All-India Population by Gender and Rural-Urban Location:
workforce by gender and rural-urban location. 1981 - 2004-05
Per 1000 Distributionof Populationby RuralAge-Groups
Table I provides the estimates of all-India population for the
four survey years: (January-December) 1983; and (July-June) Survey-based Census-based (Smoothed)
1993-94, 1999-2000 and 2004-05. For the first three time points, Age- 1983 1993- 1999- 2004- 1981 1991 2001 2005
Group 94 2000 05
the segment-wise population totals are based on inter-censal
interpolations based on the 1981, 1991 and the 2001 Population Panel A: RuralMales
0-9 284 261 255 238 278 268 255 237
Censuses. The estimates for 2004-05 are based on population
10 - 14 136 120 128 127 127 121 122 118
projections for India and states, 2001-2026 prepared by the 15 - 29 244 258 250 253 250 259 261 272
Technical Group on Population Projections constituted by the 30 - 59 270 294 296 311 280 289 295 302
National Commission on Population, May 2006 [ORG and CCI 60+ 66 68 71 71 65 63 67 71
AllAges 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
2006].
As can be readily seen, in all the four population segments, Panel B: RuralFemales
0-9 275 254 248 230 280 269 252 231
there has been a significant slowdown in the rate of growth 10-14 121 107 117 113 122 115 116 115
of population in the first quinquennium of the 21st century: 15 - 29 255 266 258 258 256 265 261 264
from a little under 2 per cent per annum between 1994 and 30 - 59 280 304 304 324 284 289 298 311
2000 to a little under 1.7 per cent per annum. Nevertheless, 60 + 68 69 73 75 58 63 73 79
AllAges 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
India's population has grown by close to 88 million between 2000
Panel C: UrbanMales
and 2005. 0-9 241 218 202 183 236 225 196 177
In a recent paper [Sundaram 2007] we had drawn attention 10-14 125 115 116 104 118 113 110 100
to the fact that the segment-specific overall worker population 15 - 29 294 292 291 300 298 292 296 303
ratios (WPRs for short) are nothing but weighted averages of 30 - 59 287 321 331 349 300 317 336 353
60+ 52 55 59 64 48 53 62 67
age-specific WPRs with the (survey-based) share of each age- AllAges 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
group in the (segment-specific) population total, as per the survey, Panel D: UrbanFemales
providing the weights. It was shown that using the survey-based 0-9 249 216 201 179 256 236 199 177
age-distribution results in a sharp slowdown in the growth of 10 - 14 122 114 114 108 122 115 109 98
prime age (15-59) population - from 2.74 per cent per annum 15 - 29 291 291 287 283 295 297 293 303
30 - 59 275 314 327 354 275 295 328 347
(pcpa) between 1983 and 1994 to 1.93 pcpa between 1994 and 60 + 63 65 71 76 52 57 71 75
2000. In the context of the observed slowdown in the rate of AllAges 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
growth of total population (reflecting fertility decline) over the Notes: Startingwiththe moredetailed(by5 year age-group)age-distributions,
same period, equally problematic is the acceleration - albeit small for1981,1991 and2001 has been smoothed
the census age-distribution
- in the rate of growth of population in the 0-9 age-group raising using the smoothing procedurespelt out in the Reportof Technical
doubts about the order of decline in the share of 0-9 age-group Groupon PopulationProjections(pp3-4). For2005, the age-distribution
between 1983 and 1993-94 (as per the two surveys). has been computedby the authorby interpolationof age-sex-location-
specificpopulationsforJanuary1,2005 frompopulationprojectionsby
Taking care of the concerns about age misreporting in the age-sex and locationfor April1, 2002 and April1, 2007 kindlymade
population census by using "smoothed" age-distributions for the availableby MariBhat.

Table 1: All-India Population by Gender and Rural-Urban Location 1983 - 2004-05

(All-IndiaPopulation)
('OOs)
PopulationSegment 1983 1993-94 1999-2000 2004-05 Rates of Growth(Per Cent Per Annum)
(1.7.83) (1.1.1994) (1.1.2000) (1.1.2005) 1983-1994 1994-2000 2000-2005
Ruralmales 281,288 339,642 374,432 400,865 1.81 1.64 1.37
Ruralfemales 266,637 319,411 353,785 379,102 1.73 1.72 1.39
Ruralpersons 547,925 659,053 728,217 779,967 1.77 1.68 1.38
Urbanmales 91,217 124,031 145,878 164,732 2.97 2.74 2.46
Urbanfemales 80,445 111,104 131,244 148,332 3.12 2.82 2.48
Urbanpersons 171,662 235,135 277,122 313,064 3.04 2.78 2.47
Total(R+U)males 372,505 463,673 520,310 565,597 2.11 1.94 1.68
Total(R+U)females 347,082 430,515 485,029 527,434 2.07 2.01 1.69
Total(R+U)persons 719,587 894,188 1005,339 1093,031 2.09 1.97 1.69
Notes: Segment-wisepopulationtotalsfor1983,1993-94 and 1999-2000 are based on inter-censalinterpolationsof totalpopulation,share of urbanarea intotal
populationand the share of females in ruraland urbanarea based on the 1981, 1991 and 2001 Censuses. The estimates for2004-05 are based on an
interpolationof the totaland urbanpopulationas on October1,2004 and March1,2005 as per PopulationProjectionsfor Indiaand States, 2001-2026
[ORG&CCI, 2006]. The segment-wise sex-compositionas per the 2001 PopulationCensus is used to derive the estimates for2004-05.

3122 Economic and Political Weekly July 28, 2007

This content downloaded from 150.131.192.151 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:03:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
where the survey-based age-shares in this and the next age-group being higher than the 1999-2000 level, are still lower than the
are substantially lower for females. level for 1993-94.
The previously stated concerns about the consequences of In row 9 of Table 3, we present the overall (all-ages) WPRs
adopting the survey-based age-distributidn (acceleration in with the survey-based age-shares providing the weights to derive
the rate of growth of population in the 0-9 age-group and the weighted-average of age-specific WPRs, while row 10 reports
a slowdown in the rate of growth of prime age-population) the overall WPRs when the census-based (projections-based for
lead us to choose the census age-distribution to weight the age- 2004-05) age-shares are used to weight the age-specific WPRs
group-specific WPRs from the NSS Employment-Unemployment from the respective surveys.
Surveys, takenas they are, to derive, for each of the four population In deriving our estimates of usual (principal plus subsidiary)
segments the overall (all-ages) WPRs for 1983, 1993-94 and statusworkforce, for reasons alreadydiscussed, for 1983, 1993-94
1999-2000. and 1999-2000 we combine the segment-specific population
Table 2 also presents for 2004-05 a comparison of the survey- totals (Table 1) with the overall WPRs given in row 10, However,
based age-distributionwith our estimates based on interpolations we prefer to use the survey-based overall WPRs (row 9) in the
of projected populations for April 1, 2002 and 2007.1 four population segments together with the projected population
For the ruraland urbanfemales, the age-distributions are fairly totals for the four population segments, to derive our workforce
well-matched. For rural males the age-share in the 0-9 and 60+ estimates for 2004-054 (Table 4).
age-groups are well matched but the projections-based age- The growth rates presented in Table 4 point to the following
distribution shows a higher share for the 15-29 age-group with conclusions:
lower shares for both the 10-14 and the 30-59 age-groups. First,the extent of slowdown in rateof growth of total workforce
Forurbanmales, the projections-baseddistributionshow smaller between 1993-94 and 1999-2000 (relative to the 1983-94 period),
shares for the 0-9 and 10-14 age-groups and fractionally higher from 1.71 to 1.45 pcpa, is much less marked than the decline
shares for the 15-29 and the 30-59 age-groups. As we shall see from 2.04 to 0.98 pcpa indicated in the Report of the Task Force
presently, the projection-based age-distributions yield a some- on Employment Opportunities [Gol 2001].
what higher overall WPRs for males in both ruraland the urban Second, this slowdown in the rate of growth of workforce in
areas of the country and slightly lower WPR for rural females. the 1990s was primarily a rural phenomenon, though females
Given thatour estimates of age-distribution for 2004-05 are based in both rural and urban areas experienced a sharp slowdown in
on projections ratherthan a census count for 2004-05, we accept growth.
the survey-based age-distributions for 2004-05.2 Focusing on the 1999-2000 to 2004-05 period, we find:
In Table 3. we present the age-specific WPRs on the usual (1) Relative to the growth between 1994 and 2000, we have a
(principalplus subsidiary) status for the four population segments sharp acceleration in workforce growth in all the four population
for 1983, 1993-94, 1999-2000 and 2004-05 to see the changes
Table 3: All-IndiaAge-specific Usual (Principal Plus
between 2000 and 2005, which is what we will focus on, against Subsidiary) Status Worker-PopulationRatios by Gender and
the backdrop of trends since 1983. Rural-UrbanLocations: 1983 - 2004-05
For rural males, the changes in age-specific WPRs are either Per 1000 Worker-Population
Ratios
small or broadly in line with the trends since 1983 - except for RuralMales RuralFemales
the (16 points per 1000) rise in WPR in the 25-29 age-group.3 Sr Age-Group 1983 1993- 1999- 2004- 1983 1993- 1999- 2004-
For urban males, the sizeable increase in WPRs in the 15-19, No 94 2000 05 94 2000 05
20-24, 25-29 age-groups do appear to be out of line with the Panel A: RuralAreas
trends since 1983. 1 0-9 13 6 4 2 13 7 4 2
The increases in WPRs for males - the four cases identified 2 10-14 253 138 91 68 240 141 96 74
3 15-19 666 578 503 497 452 364 304 319
above - pale into insignificance compared to the big jumps in 4 20 - 24 897 859 844 849 488 456 410 410
the age-specific WPRs for females. For rural females we have 5 25 - 29 968 958 950 966 557 525 491 513
a 22-point (per 1000) rise in the 25-29 age-group, a 42-point 6 30 - 44 985 986 982 984 614 598 572 614
rise in the 30-44 age-group and a whopping 51-point rise in the 7 45 - 59 955 968 958 962 552 543 518 569
8 60 + 670 695 625 644 233 242 218 253
45-59 age-group. 9 AllAges (1) 547 553 531 546 340 328 299 327
In the 25-29 age-group, the 22-point rise in WPR on UPSS 10 AllAges (2) 558 545 535 555 341 319 297 322
is made up of a 6-point decline on the principal status and a UrbanMales UrbanFemales
28-point rise on the subsidiary status. The increase in the UPSS Sr Age-Group 1983 1993- 1999- 2004- 1983 1993- 1999- 2004-
WPR for rural females in the 30-44 age-group is made up of No 94 2000 05 94 2000 05
a 15-point rise on the principal status and a 27-point rise on the Panel B: UrbanAreas
subsidiary status while in the 45-59 age-group, the rise in the 1 0-9 4 3 2 1 3 3 1 2
UPSS WPR overwhelmingly reflects a rise in WPR on the 2 10 - 14 113 66 49 48 70 45 36 33
3 15-19 414 356 314 335 155 123 105 128
principal status. In all the three age-groups, the WPRs on the 4 20 - 24 727 674 658 684 182 180 155 201
subsidiary status are still below the levels in 1993-94. And, there 5 25-29 921 904 883 909 229 224 194 229
is no a priori basis for not accepting the increases in WPRs on 6 30 - 44 975 975 969 975 291 295 266 310
the principal status. 7 45-59 926 935 921 923 276 283 250 252
8 60 + 505 442 402 366 140 113 94 100
For urbanfemales the increases in WPRs are significant in the 9 AllAges (1) 512 521 518 549 151 155 139 166
15-19 and the 20-24 age-groups and are out of sync with the 10 AllAges (2) 525 517 528 558 150 149 140 167
trends since 1983. In the 30-44 age-group, three-fourths of the
Notes: Estimatesof overall(allages) WPRs in row9 representsthe weighted
rise in the UPSS WPR reflects a rise in WPR on the principal averageofage-specificWPRswithsurvey-basedage-shares as weights
status and the underlying WPR on the subsidiary status, while whilethose in row 10 have the census-based age-shares as weights.

Economicand PoliticalWeekly July 28, 2007 3123

This content downloaded from 150.131.192.151 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:03:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
segments, with a near doubling of the rate of growth of total In the country as a whole, the number of regular wage/salary
workforce, while the rate of growth of female workforce rises workershas increased by a little over 10.7 million in the five years
fivefold. separating the 55th and 61st round employment-unemployment
(2) In terms of levels, we have an increase of a little over 57 surveys, i e, at over 2.14 million per annum. In contrast, the
million in the total workforce of which about 20 million took annual average increment to the number of RWS workers
place in urban India. between July 1, 1983 and January 1, 1994 (the 1980s) was about
(3) In terms of gender-composition, the share of females in the a third at 0.41 million. Between 1993-94 and 1999-2000 (the
total workforce has increased from 30.8 per cent in 1999-2000 1990s) the average annual increment to the number of RWS
to 32.5 percent in 2004-05. Even at this level, the share of women workers, at 1.46 million was more than twice that realised during
in the total workforce is less than their share in 1983 (33.5 per the 1980s. So that the widely-held perception of the 1990s being
cent) and, only marginally higher than their share in 1993-94 a period of "jobless growth" based on a simple comparison of
(32.2 per cent). the DGE&T numbers on organised sector employment is at
(4) To conclude this section, it is useful to note that if we had Table 4: All-India, Usual (Principal and Subsidiary) Status
used the age-shares from the 2001 Census to weight the 2004- Workforce by Gender and Rural-Urban Locations 1983 - 2004-05
05 age-specific WPRs, the total, all-India workforce would have Usual (pspss) Status Workforce(OOOs)
been 444.4 million or about 13.5 million lower than our present Numberof Workers AnnualRate of Growth
estimates. The difference (13.5 million) measures the impact of Population (000) (Per Cent Per Annum)
the changes in age-distribution since 2001 and is a rough indicator Segment 1983 1993- 1999- 2004- 1983- 1994- 2000-
of the so-called "demographic dividend". 94 2000 05 1994 2000 05
Ruralmales 156,959 185,105 200,321 218,872 1.58 1.33 1.79
II Rural
females 90,923 101,892 105,074 123,966 1.09 0.51 3.36
Structureof Workforce:
Activity-Status, Rural
OccupationalandIndustrial
Distribution persons 247,882 286,997 305,395 342,838 1.41 1.04 2.34
Urbanmales 47,889 64,124 77,024 90,438 2.82 3.10 3.26
We begin this discussion of the changes in the structure of Urban
females 12,067 16,555 18,374 24,623 3.06 1.75 6.03
workforce by focusing on the activity-status distribution of the Urban
workforce separately for ruraland urbanIndia and for males and persons 59,956 80,679 95,398 115,061 2.87 2.83 3.82
females (Table 5). Total(R+U)
In ruralIndia, we have a significant reversal of the past trends males 204,848 249,229 277,345 309,310 1.89 1.80 2.21
Total(R+U)
in the activity-status distribution of the workforce. The share of females 102,990 1.34 0.69 3.78
118,447 123,448 148,589
the self-employed, which had declined from 610 (per 1000) in Total(R+U)
1983 to 580 in 1993-94 and further to 554 (per 1000) in 1999- persons 307,838 367,676 400,793 457,899 1.71 1.45 2.70
2000, rose sharply to 601 in 2004-05. The rise in the share of Notes: Segment-wise estimates of workforcefor 1983, 1993-94 and 1999-
casual labourers from 314 in 1983 to 355 per 1000 in 1993-94 2000 have been derived by combiningthe populationestimates in
and further to 377 in 1999-2000 gives way, in parallel, to an Table 1 withthe overall(allages) worker-population ratiosreportedin
row10 of Table 3. Estimatesfor2004-05 have, however,been derived
equally sharp fall to 328 per 1000 in 2004-05. As for the regular usingthe overall(all-ages)worker-population ratiosreportedinrow9 of
wage salary workers (RWS workers for short), after a decline Table3 based on the populationage-distributionas per the Surveyas
in its share between 1983 and 1993-94 (from 76 per 1000 to they are broadlyin line withthe projectedage-distribution.
65 per 1000), the share of RWS workers registers a small rise
- both between 1993 and 1999-2000 (to 69 per 1000) and between Table 5: Per 1000 Distribution of Workforce by Gender,
Activity-Status and Rural-Urban Location:
1999-2000 and 2004-05 (to 71 per 1000). All-India, 1999-2000 - 2004-05
In urban India, after moving narrowly (between 417 and 423 Per 1000 Distribution
per 1000) over the period 1983 to 1999-2000, the share of the Population 1999-2000 2004-05
self-employed records a sharp rise (from 420 to 454 per 1000) Segment SE RWS CL All SE RWS CL All
with an offsetting decline in the share of the casual labourers. Ruralpersons 554 69 377 1000 71 328 1000
601
The share of the RWS workers, which had fallen between 1983 Urbanpersons 420 399 181 1000 454 396 150 1000
and 1993-94 (from 403 to 394 per 1000), after rising by 5 points Males 510 179 311 1000 542 183 275 1000
Females 549 77 374 1000 610 90 300 1000
(per 1000) by 1999-2000, slips down fractionally (to 396 per Totalpersons 522 147 331 1000 565 152 283 1000
1000) to be just above its share in 1993-94.
By gender, the rise in the share of the self-employed (and the
Table 6: Number of Usual Status Workers by Activity-Status,
offsetting fall in the share of the casual labourers) between 2000 Gender and Rural-Urban Location: All-India, 1994-2000
and 2005 is sharper for females than for males. Over the same
period, the share of RWS workers in female workforce also Population SE RWS CL All SE RWS CL All
records a significant rise (fiom 77 to 90 per 1000) while, for Segment
male workers,the rise in the share of RWS workers, while present, Rural
is more subdued. person 169,194 20,010115,191 305,395 206,183 24,260112,395 342,838
Urban
Let us focus briefly on the growth of regular wage-salary Person 40,105 38,056 17,237 953,982 52,244 45,059 17,308 115,061
workers, which, we have argued elsewhere [Sundaram 2007] is Males 141,468 49,518 86,279 277,345 167,750 56,405 85,155 309,310
a good indicator (better than the Directorate General of Employ- Females 67,831 9,468 46,149 12,344 90,677 13,364 44,548 148,589
ment and Training estimates) for tracking the growth of "jobs" Person 209,299 59,066 132,428 400,793 258,427 69,769 129,703 457,899
in the country (Table 6). Source:DerivedfromTables 4 and 5.

3124 Economic and Political Weekly July 28, 2007

This content downloaded from 150.131.192.151 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:03:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
complete variance with the fact of much faster and rising growth Consistent with the declining share of agriculture, the share
of jobs in terms of the number of RWS workers in the country of Division 6 (Farmers, Fishermen, Hunters, Loggers and related
since 1993-94. workers) records a 32 point decline between 2000 and 2005.
In terms of absolute numbers, the largest increase over this
period has been that of the self-employed: by over 49 million Table 7: Industrial Distribution of Usual (Principal plus
with 75 per cent of this increase taking place in rural India. The Subsidiary) Status Workforce by Gender and Rural-Urban
number of casual labourers, on the other hand, declined by a Location: All-India, 1999-2000 - 2004-05
Per 1000 Distributionof Workforce
little over 2.7 million.
We turn now to a discussion of the changes in the industrial 1999-2000 2004-05
distribution of the workforce (Table 7). At the outset, it needs Industry-Group Rural Rural Rural Rural Rural Rural
Male Female Person Male Female Person
to be emphasised that the classification adopted in the 55th and
the 61st round surveys is based on NIC 1998. So that while the Panel A: RuralAreas
Agricultureand
composition of broad industry groups are by and large compa- alliedactivity 714 853 762 665 832 725
rable with the results for 1993-94, there are some differences. Miningand
Notably, repair services is now a part of the Trade, Hotels and quarrying 4 3 4 6 3 5
Restaurantsand not of Social, Community and Personal Services Manufacturing 73 76 74 79 84 81
as earlier. So that, for rural and urban areas taken together, the Electricity,gas
and water 2 0 1 2 0 1
share of the Trade. Hotels and Restaurants for 1993-94 would Construction 45 11 33 68 15 49
need to be raised by about 9 points per 1000 to be comparable Trade,hotels and
with the shares presented here for 1999-2000 and 2004-05 restaurants 68 20 52 83 25 62
Transport,storage
[Sundaram 2001 ]. and communication 32 1 21 38 2 25
As one would expect, we have a continuation of the long-term Finance,insurance,
trendof a decline in the shareof "AgricultureandAllied Activities" realestate and
business services 5 0 3 7 1 5
and, at the present pace of decline, another decade might see Social, community
the share of agriculture in employment going below the 50 per andtpersonalservices 57 36 50 52 38 47
cent mark. Despite this sizeable decline in its share, the absolute All 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
number of workers in this sector has increased by nearly 18 1999-2000 2004-05
million, i e. over 30 per cent of the incremental workforce Industry-Group Urban Urban Urban Urban Urban Urban
(Table 10). Male Female Person Male Female Person
In all the four population segments the first quinquennium of Panel B: UrbanAreas
this century has witnessed a rise in the share of manufacturing Agricultureand
in workforce and this increase has been particularly large (over alliedactivity 65 176 86 61 181 87
Miningand quarrying 9 4 8 9 2 8
4 percentage points) for urban females. Combined with a 2.7 224 240 227 235 282 245
Manufacturing
per cent per annum growth in the total workforce, this rise in Electricity,gas
share of manufacturing in all segments has resulted in a spec- and water 8 2 7 8 2 7
tacular 4.8 per cent per annum growth in total manufacturing Construction 87 48 80 92 38 80
Trade,hotels and
sector employment. This sector accounted for a little over 20 per restaurants 294 169 270 280 122 246
cent of the incremental workforce during this period. Transport,storage
The secondary sector, covering Manufacturing, Electricity, and communication 104 18 87 107 14 87
Gas and Water Supply and Construction, raises its share from Finance,insurance,
real estate and
15.8 per cent in 1999-2000 to 18.2 per cent in 2004-05. This business services 45 25 41 59 32 53
sector added a little over 20 million to its workforce and ac- Social, community
counted for 35 per cent of the incremental workforce over this and personalservices 165 317 194 149 327 187
All 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
period.
In the tertiaryor the services sector, we have a reduction, albeit 1999-2000 2004-05
small, in the share of the Social, Community and Personal Industry-Group Male Female Person Male Female Person
services. The other services sectors - Trade, Hotels and Restau- Panel C: AllAreas
rants, Transport, Storage and Communication and Finance, Agricultureand
alliedactivity 534 752 601 489 724 564
Insurance, Real Estate and Business Services - each added 7
Miningand quarrying 5 3 4 3 6
between 4 and 6 points (per 1000) to its share. Overall, the share Manufacturing 115 100 110 124 117 122
of services went up only slightly from 23.7 to 24.8 per cent. Electricity,gas
and water 4 0 3 4 0 3
Focusing on female workforce, we have a more moderate Construction 57 17 45 75 18 57
decline in the share of agriculture and allied activities (by 28
Trade,hotels and
points per 1000 as against the 45 points decline for males). Almost restaurants 116 42 93 127 41 99
all of this decline in the share of agriculture is offset by the rise Transport,storage
of the share of manufacturing(17 points) and social, community and communication 52 4 37 58 4 41
Finance,insurance,
and personal services (8 points). real estate and
To completeourdiscussionof the changesin the structureof work- business services 16 4 12 22 6 17
force,theestimatesof theoccupationaldistributionof the workforce Social, community
and personalservices 102 78 95 94 86 91
;:wepresentedat the one-digit occupation, division level (Table 8) All 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
as well as for identified two-digit occupation groups in Table 9.

Economic and Political Weekly July 28, 2007 3125

This content downloaded from 150.131.192.151 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:03:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
However, reflecting the rise in the share of the self-employed Except for a marginaldecline in theirsharein the ruralworkforce,
and the decline in the share of casual labourers, at the two-digit service workers (Division 5) record a marginal rise overall,
level, we have a small rise in share of "Cultivators"and a sharp, reflecting a rise in the share of service workers, primarily as
49 points per 1000, decline in the share of agricultural labourers. domestic workers (with the share of personal services showing
The fact that decline in the share of Occupational Division 6 a small decline), in the female workforce.
(32 points) is smaller than the decline in occupational groups In the broad occupation category of Production Process and
61 (cultivators) and 63 (agricultural labourers) taken together, related workers, Transport Equipment Operators and Labourers
(43 points) implies that there has been a measure of occupational not Elsewhere Classified (Divisions 7, 8 and 9. taken together),
diversification within Division 6. we have a rise in the share of Tailors, Dressmakers, etc, in all
At the upper end of the skill-spectrum, the share of both the population segments. Also, reflecting the rise in the share
Divisions 0-1, and 2 (Professional, Technical and related workers of construction activities, occupational group 95 (Brick Layers
and Administration and Managerial Workers) shows a rise - and Other Construction Workers) records a rise in its share in
smaller for Division 1 relative to Division 2 - in all the segments almost all segments - except for females. The decline in the share
distinguished. Within the broaderDivision 0-1, for females, there of this occupation group in female workforce is in line with the
has been a marginal reduction in the share of healthcare sector decline in the share of construction for urbanfemales by 10 points
and a slight rise in the share of Teachers. (per 1000). As for the share of transport equipment operators,
Continuing the trend noted over a longer period, since 1961 where the presence of female workers is negligible, we have a
[SunUdaralln2()()1], the share of clerical workers in the urban rise in the rural, urban and the total workforce.
workforce declines further (lrom 79 per 1000 to 68 per 1000) Overall, despite the above-noted changes, our conclusion
in the first five years of the 21st century. However, reversing about the occupational structure of the Indian workforce as
earlier trends, the share of sales workers shows a rise in all the of 2000 [Sundaram 2001] still holds true: India remains a land
segments, despite a fall in the share of "Merchants and Shop- of farmers, fishermen, hunters and loggers, with marginal gains
keepers" in urban India (Table 9). in the share of production process workers and of professional

Table 8: Occupational Distribution of Usual (Principal plus Subsidiary) Status Workforce by Gender and Rural-Urban Location:
All-India, 1999-2000 to 2004-05
Per 1000 Distributicnof Workforce
Occupation 1999-2000 2004-05
Division
Codes Description Rural Urban Male Female Person Rural Urban Male Female Person
0- 1 Professional,technicaland
relatedworkers 20 89 38 33 36 22 92 40 38 40
2. Administrative,executive and
managerialworkers 14 84 37 15 30 16 92 43 17 35
3 Clericaland relatedworkers 13 88 40 12 31 12 76 35 12 28
4 Sales workers 39 166 87 28 69 48 176 103 33 80
5 Service workers 24 96 39 44 41 23 100 39 48 42
6 Farmers,fishermen,hunters,
loggers and relatedworkers 754 92 529 748 596 723 87 489 724 564
7,8,9 Productionprocess and related
workers,transportequipment
operatorsand labourersnec 137 386 230 120 196 156 376 251 128 211
1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000

Table 9: Per 1000 Share of Some Key Identified 2-digit Occupation Codes of UPSS Workforce: All-India 1999-2000 to 2004-05
Per 1000 Share in Workforce
Occupational 1999-2000 2004-05
Group
Code Description Rural Urban Male Female Person Rural Urban Male Female Person
08 Nursingmedicaland healthtechnicals 1 7 2 5 3 2 7 3 4 3
15 Teachers 12 38 16 24 18 14 43 18 29 21
30-35 Clerical workers 11 79 34 12 27 9 68 30 11 24
40 Merchants and shopkeepers 27 97 55 19 44 32 89 58 20 46
51-54 Domesticservices 5 44 9 28 15 8 55 13 35 20
55-56 Personalservices 10 13 11 10 11 8 16 11 8 10
61 Cultivators 371 35 283 309 291 384 37 283 326 297
63 Ag labourers 305 31 205 317 239 245 23 163 247 190
71 Minersand quarrymen 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 2 3
75 Spinners, weavers, etc 10 28 13 18 15 9 29 13 16 14
77 Food and breavage processors 6 13 8 7 8 6 8 7 6 7
79 Tailors,dress makers,etc 9 34 14 16 15 12 46 17 28 20
95 Briklayers and otherconstruction
workers 21 44 33 10 26 31 47 45 5 33
98 Trspteqpt operators 14 52 33 0 23 17 54 38 Nil 26
99 Labourers nec 24 49 36 15 30 24 30 32 12 25

3126 Economic and Political Weekly July 28, 2007

This content downloaded from 150.131.192.151 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:03:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
and technical workers and administrators, executive and mana- In the manufacturing sector, where employment grew at an
gerial workers. impressive 4.75 per cent per annum between 2000 and 200()()5,
the growth in GDP averaged 6.44 per cent per annum. The high
Ill employment elasticity of manufacturing sector implicit in these
LabourProductivityand RealWages two numbers also implied that labour productivity in this sector
grew at less than 1.6 per cent per annum - roughly half the rate of
Table 10 presents our estimates of number of workers by broad growth of labour productivityof the total workforce. So that, the
Industry groups, built up by combining segment-specific excess of labour productivity in manufacturingrelative to that in
estimates of workforce (Table 4) and (segment specific) the economy as a whole falls from 33 to 23 per cent over this period.
industry-group shares (Table 7), for all-India for 1999-2000 and Two sectors, Trade, Hotels and Restaurants, and Transport,
2004-05. Combining these estimates with the NAS - estimates Storage and Communication (together employing 14 per cent of
of GDP (at constant 1999-2000 prices) for the two years, we the total workforce) -especially the latter- recorda strong growth
derive constant price estimates of GVA per worker for the two in labour productivity over the period 2000-2005.
years. Below the estimates for 2004-05, we also present the Except for the two sectors noted above, and the Construction
compound rates of growth of the relevant variables over the sector, where a small negative growth between 1994 and 2()00
period 2000-2005. For easy comparison, column 9 presents turns into a small positive growth between 2000 and 2005, in
comparable rates of growth for GVA per worker over the period each and every other sector and for the economy as a whole.
1993-94 to 1999-2000. labour productivity growth over the period 2000()-205 has beell
Having discussed the rates of growth in sectoral workforce in lower, and significantly so, than the growth in labourproductivity
the previous section, let us focus on the trends in labour pro- realised between 1993-94 and 1999-20()(0.
ductivity across sectors as measured by GVA per worker, and While the levels of and trends in labour productivity directly
their rates of growth between 2000 and 2005. impinge on the returns to labour of the self-employeyd across
In terms of levels, Agriculture and Allied Activities, with over sectors, in a market economy, they also shape the level of and
56 per cent of the workforce, not only continues to have the lowest the trends in real wage rates of casual labourers.
GVA per workerbut also, its position vis-a-vis the productivityof Given the significant slowdown in the rate of growth of labour
the total workforce has worsened from being 42 per cent of overall productivity between 2000 and 2005 relative to that realised
GVA per worker in 1999-2000 to just 37 per cent in 2004-05. between 1994 and 2000, the significant slowdown in the rate
Construction, with about 6 per cent of the workforce, has the of growth of real wage rates for ruralmale and ruralfemale casual
second lowest GVA per worker (still three times that in the labourers(Table 11) should not surprise anyone. What is striking
agriculturesector).Over the period2000-2005, labourproductivity however, is the fact that, both for males and females, the real
grew at less than one-fourth of one per cent per annum adding wage rates for adult casual labourers in urbanareas have actually
less than Rs 150 per year. declined. Significantly, over this period there has been very little
Table 10: Number of Workers, Gross Value Added and GVA Per Worker at 1999-2000 Prices by Broad Industry Groups:
All-India, 1999-2000 - 2004-05
1999-2000 2004-05
S IndustryGroups No of Workers GDP GVAPer No of Workers GDP GVAPer Worker Rate of
No (000) (Rs Crore) Worker (000) (Rs Crore) (Rs) Growthof
(Rs) GVA/Worker
1994-2000
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
1 and alliedactivities
Agriculture 2,40,896 4,54,061 18,849 2,58,663 4,97,351 19,228 2.65
(1.43) (1.84) (0.40)
2 Miningand quarrying 1,883 41,594 2,20,892 2,548 52,594 2,06,413 10.69
(6.24) (4.80) (-1.35)
3 Manufacturing 44,260 2,64,113 59,673 55,900 3,60,822 64,548 5.61
(4.75) (6.44) (1.58)
4 Electricity,gas and water 1,054 44,732 424,402 1,211 53,097 4,38,456 11.59
(2.82) (3.49) (0.65)
5 Construction 17,747 1,05,149 59,249 25,998 1,55,920 59,974 (-)0.48
(7.94) (8.20) (0.24)
6 Trade,hotels,restaurantsand 41,453 2,54,143 61,309 49,593 3,71,410 74,892 4.16
repairservices (3.65) (7.88) (4.08)
7 Transportation,storage and communication14,848 1,31,754 88,735 18,587 2,38,705 1,28,426 2.73
(4.59) (12.62) (7.67)
8 Finance,insurance,realestate and 4,925 1,40,567 2,85,415 7,780 2,16,131 2,77,810 6.84
business services (9.58) (8.99) (-0.54)
9 Social, communityand personalservices 33,727 263,994 78,274 37,619 3,43,218 91,235 7.63
(2.21) (5:39) (3.11)
10 All 4,00,793 17,92,292 44,719 4,57,899 23,93,671 52,275 5.37
(2.70) (5.96) (3.17)
Notes: (1) FiguresforGVA(and GVAper worker)in row8 exclude contributionto GDP fromdwellingsby way of actual and imputedrentals.
(2) Figureswithinbracketsindicatethe compoundrateof growth(percent per annum)between 1999-2000 and 2004-05 of the variablein each cell.
(3) Figuresin column(9) forrateof growthof GVAper workerbetween 1993-94 and 1999-2000 are based on GDPvalues at 1993-94 prices and with
the 1993-94 workforceestimates by sectors revised as per NIC1998 and comparableto the present set of estimates.
Sources: (1) Estimatesof numberof workerscomputedby the author,separatelyby gender and rural-urban locationforeach broadindustry-group
combining
level estimate of totalworkforce(Table4) and industry-group
shares in Table 6.
(2) Estimatesof gross domestic productas 1999-2000 prices fromCSO, NationalAccounts Statistics2006, July2006.

Economic and Political Weekly July 28, 2007 3127

This content downloaded from 150.131.192.151 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:03:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
increase in the number of casual labourers (only 70,000 over a It needs to be stressed that our estimates of the proportion of
five-year period) in urban India. households below the poverty line for 2004-05 are based on the
61st round Consumer Expenditure Survey results for mixed
IV reference period and are, therefore comparable with the results
Estimatesof Povertyin India:1994-2000 of the 55th round Consumer Expenditure Survey. So that; prima
facie, there is a strong presumption that the results of both
Two recent papersby S MahendraDev and Ravi, and Himanshu Himanshi and Mahendra Dev and Ravi about the order of
(both in EPW, February 10, 2007), have analysed recent trends decline in HCRs in both rural and urban India over the period
in poverty and inequality and have come to broadly similar 2000-2005 need to be substantially revised downwards.
conclusions: thatthe pace of poverty reductionaccelerated(sharply To answer the question whether the pace of poverty reduction
according to Himanshu) between 2000 and 2005 relative to the has accelerated between 2000 and 2005 relative to the period
reduction between 1994 and 2000. 1994-2000, Table 12 also presents the estimates of HCRs for
In the absence of a size-distribution of persons by expenditure
Table 11: Rate of Growth of Real Wages of Adult (15.59) Casual
classes on the mixed reference period in the only published report Labourers: All India 1983-2004-05
(Report No 508) based on the 61st round Consumer Expenditure Rate of Growth
Survey. Himanshu's results are based on estimates of household (Per cent per annum)
consumer expenditure canvassed on a worksheet in the NSS 55th Segment/Period 1983-1993-94 1993-94 to 1999-2000 to
and 61st employment-unemployment surveys both using a mixed 1999-2000 2004-05
reference period. Mahendra Dev and Ravi too have to approxi- Ruralmales
mate the size-distribution on mixed reference period with only Agriculture 2.75 2.78 1.43
the size-distribution of persons on uniform reference period and Non-agriculture 2.39 3.70 0.73
mean per capita expenditure on MRP, which, in many cases, fall Allactivities 2.51 3.59 1.80
Ruralfemales
outside the defined expenditure class intervals, as available 3.09 2.94 1.10
Agriculture
raw materials. Non-agriculture 4.08 4.07 1.57
However, at least at the all-India level. there is a better alter- Allactivities 4.10 5.04 1.44
native available in Tables 6R and 6U of Report 508. They present Urbanmales
Agriculture 1.97 2.73 (-)1.22
the per 1000 break-up of households by adjusted MPCE Class Non-agriculture 1.45 2.93 (-) 0.51
(based on 365-days' datafor clothes, footwear, education, medical Allactivities 1.50 3.09 (-) 0.39
(institutional) and durable goods). This can be used directly to Urbanfemales
Agriculture 4.21 2.96 (-) 2.35
estimate, in the first instance, the proportionof households below 2.97 4.18 (-) 0.74
Non-agriculture
the poverty line in 2004-05 with parallel estimates from the NSS Allactivities 2.91 3.91 (-)1.05
55th round Consumer Expenditure Survey - with or without
Source: For ruralareas, estimates for the periods 1983-1993-94 and 1993-
adjustments for so-called "contamination". And, corresponding 2000 are drawnfromSundaram(2001).
to this proportion of households below the poverty line on the Forurbanareas, estimates forthe periods1983-1993-94and 1993-94
mixed reference period drawn from the 61st round Consumer to 1999-2000 are drawnfromSundaramand Tendulkar(2006).
Forthe period1999-2000 to 2004-05, growthrates of realwages (at
Expenditure Survey, we can derive the proportion of persons 1999-2000 prices)inbothruraland urbanareas have been computed
below the poverty line or the headcount ratio (HCR) from the from published reports (Nos 458 and 515) of NSS Employment-
61st round Employment-Unemployment Survey.5 UnemploymentSurveys for 1999-2000 and 2004-05.
However, this is possible only at the all-India level. So that,
Table 12: Estimate of Head Ratios of Households and Persons
we cannot derive the all-India HCR as a weighted average with Planning Commission and Alternative Poverty Lines:
of state/segment specific HCRs. However, given an all-India All-India: 1993-94 - 2004-05
poverty line, this procedure can be implemented by using the HeadcountRatios
all-India poverty line on the all-India size-distribution - in this (Per cent)
case, of households - from the 61st Consumer Expenditure Households Person
Survey in the first instance, and, thence, derive estimates of 1993- 1999- 2004- 1993- 1999- 2004-
94 2000 05 94 2000 05
headcount ratios (of persons below poverty line) from the 61st
round Employment-Unemployment Survey. Panel A: WithPlanningCommissionPovertyLines
Before presenting our results, which are based on a slightly Rural 28.0 23.3 18.8 31.8 27.0 22.7
Urban 22.7 18.1 16.6 28.1 23.4 21.9
different set of poverty lines for all-India, let us first put together
the results based on the Planning Commission poverty lines for PC PovertyLines: 1993-94: Rural:205.84 Urban:281.33
1999-2000 and 2004-05 (Table 12). 1999-2000: Rural:327.56 Urban:454.11
2004-05: Rural:356.30 Urban: 538.60
As can be readily seen, the order of decline, between 2000
and 2005, in the proportion of poor households (4.5 percentage Panel B: WithAlternativePovertyLines
Rural 30.3 25.1 21.7 34.2 28.9 25.5
points in rural India and 1.5 percentage points in urban India) Urban 21.3 17.8 17.4 26.4 23.1 22.8
and that in HCR for persons (respectively, 4.3 and 1.5 percentage
AlternativePovertyLines: 1993-94: Rural:211.30, Urban:274.88
points in rural and urban India) are roughly the same. 1999-00: Rural:335.46, Urban:451.19
In contrast, Mahendra Dev reports a decline in HCR between 2004-05: Rural:371.29, Urban:546.20
2000 and 2005 of the order of 5.6 percentage points for rural
India and 3.7 points for urban India, while Himanshu reports Notes: (1) Alternativepovertylines have been updatedbyreferenceto CPIAL
forruralIndiaand CPIIWforurbanIndia.
a whopping 9.1 percentage point reduction for rural India and (2) Allestimatesfor1993-94areon mixedreferenceperiodandestimated
a 3.9 percentage point reduction for urban India. fromUnitRecordData.See Sundaramand Tendulkar(2005).

3128 Economic and Political Weekly July 28, 2007

This content downloaded from 150.131.192.151 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:03:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
households and persons for 1993-94 with Planning Commission labourers in rural India and the absolute decline in real wages
poverty lines for all-India. of casual labourers in urban India that we discussed in the
In terms of households below the poverty line in rural India, previous section.
the average annual decline between 1994 and 2000 was 0.75
percentage points per year, i e, at a compound rate of a little V
over 3 per cent per annum while the rate of decline between 2000 The WorkingPoor and the Quality
and 2005 was 0.9 percentage points per year or, on a smaller of Employment
base, at a little over 4.2 per cent per annum.
In urban India, the rate of reduction in HCR of households In this the final section of the paper, we track the changes in
was 0.77 points per annum at a compound rate of 3.7 per cent the numberof workers in "below poverty line" or BPL households
per annum between 1994 and 2000, while between 2000 and or the working poor and its complement, those located in house-
2005, the urban HCR for households declined by just 0.3 points holds above the poverty line or APL households. As we have
per year or 1.7 per cent per annum. argued elsewhere [Sundaram 2007], changes in the number of
In terms of persons, with the Planning Commission poverty workers in APL households are a good indicator of the quality
lines, in rural India, HCR declined by 4.8 percentage points or of employment - especially of the self-employed.
0.8 points per year or at 2.7 per cent per annum between 1994 Consider first our estimates of the working poor and the
and 2000 and by 0.9 points per year or at 3.4 per cent per annum underlying headcount ratios for workers differentiated by gender,
between 2000 and 2005 indicating a small increase in the pace activity-status and rural-urban location (Table 13).
of poverty decline in the first five years of the 21st century. In In the country as a whole and taking all activity-status and
urbanIndia, however, in terms of HCR for persons also we have gender categories together, we find a small increase (1.3 million)
a clear slowdown - from 0.78 points per year between 1994 and in the number of working poor who totalled a little under 105
2004 to just 0.3 points per year between 2000 and 2005. million at the beginning of 2005. This rise in the number of the
Our estimates of poverty, based on alternative poverty lines working poor occurs despite a fall in the headcount ratio for the
(Panel B, Table 12) however indicate that this result of a slightly total workforce: from 25.7 per cent to 22.8 per cent between 2000
faster pace of poverty reduction between 2000 and 2005 is and 2005.
reversed with a small reduction in the pace of poverty reduction The rise in the total number of working poor is primarily the
from 2.8 per cent per annum to 2.5 per cent per annum. Our net result of two offsetting movements: an increase of a little
estimates with alternative poverty lines also reinforce the result under6.2 million in the number of self-employed poor more than
of a slower reduction in urban poverty between 2000 and 2005 compensating a decline in the number of casual labourers by a
relative to that between 1994 and 2000. little under 5.5 million. While the rise in the number of self-
The above results of a marginal rise (or a marginal reduction employed poor occurs despite a 1.6 percentage points decline
depending upon the choice of poverty lines) in the pace of poverty in HCR, the reduction in the number of casual labourers in BPL
reduction in rural India and a clear slowdown in the pace of households reflects the combined effect of an absolute reduction
poverty reduction in urban India between 2000 and 2005 are in the number of casual labourers - from 132.4 million in 2000
consistent with the slowdown in the rate of growth of labour to 129.7 million in 2005 - and a reduction in the HCR for such
productivity across most sectors and in real wages of casual workers from 39.3 per cent to 35.9 per cent over the same period.

Table 13: The Working Poor in India by Gender, Activity-Status and Rural-Urban Location: All-India, 1999-2000 to 2004-05
Numberof UPSS Workersin BPLHouseholds
PopulationSegment 1999-2000 2004-05
SE RWS CL Total SE RWS CL Total
Rural(Males+ Females) 35,151 2,615 44,528 82,294 38,281 2,611 38,590 79,482
(20.8) (12.4) (38.7) (26.9) (18.6) (10.8) (34.3) (23.2)
Urban(Males+ Females) 9,243 4,103 7,522 20,868 12,271 4,740 7,994 25,005
(23.0) (10.8) (43.6) (21.9) (23.5) (10.4) (46.2) (21.7)
Males(Rural+ Urban) 28,449 5,432 32,560 66,441 31,402 5,451 30,090 66,943
(20.1) (11.0) (37.7) (24.0) (18.7) (9.7) (35.3) (21.6)
Females (Rural+ Urban) 15,945 1,286 19,490 36,721 19,150 1,900 16,494 37,544
(23.5) (13.6) (42.2) (29.7) (21.1) (14.2) (37.0) (25.3)
Person (Rural+ Urban) 44,394 6,718 52,050 103,162 50,552 7,351 46,584 104,487
(21.2) (11.4) (39.3) (25.7) (19.6) (10.5) (35.9) (22.8)
Notes: Figures within brackets refer the proportion of workers in that population segment and activity-status, who are located in below poverty line (BPL)
households.HCRsare based on the alternativepovertyline indicatedin Table 11.

Table 14: Average Annual Increments to Workers in APL-Households by Activity-Status and Rural-Urban Location:
All-India, 1983-2005
AverageAnnualIncrementsto Workersin All-Households
Rural Urban AllAreas
1983-94 1994-2000 2000-05 1983-94 1994-2000 2000-05 1983-1994 1994-2000 200Q-05
SE 2697 1149 6772 572 923 1822 3269 2072 8594
RWS 283 435 651 629 1038 1363 912 1473 2014
CL 1910 2613 629 112 385 (-) 80 2022 2998 543
All 4890 4496 8052 1313 2346 3105 6203 6842 11,152

Economic and Political Weekly July 28, 2007 3129

This content downloaded from 150.131.192.151 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:03:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 By gender, women workers experience a sharper reduction in workforce, we have a 2.8 million reduction in the number of
their HCR relative to their male counterpart. Consequent upon working poor in rural India.
an over 5 percentage point reduction in HCR, there is a sharp Finally, we look at the quality of employment growth. In an
reduction in the number of female casual labourers in BPL earlier paper [Sundaram 2007], we had argued that a useful
households - by 3 million - in the first quinquennium of this indicatorof employment quality especially for the self-employed
century. Curiously. despite a marginal reduction in their HCR, where the returns to labour per se are ill-defined and virtually
there is a rise in the number of female RWS workers in poor impossible to measure through single visit surveys such as the
households. The biggest contributors to the rise in the number NSS Employment-Unemployment Surveys - would be whether
of female workers in BPL households are, however, the self- they are located in "above poverty line" or APL households.
employed. The number of poor female self-employed workers In Table 14, we present our estimates of the average annual
increasedby over 3 million (despite a reduction in HCR for female increments to the numberof workers in APL households for three
self-employed workers) between 2000 and 2005. time periods: 1983-94; 1994-2000; and 2000-2005. They are
In urbanIndia. while the RWS workers recorda small reduction presented separately for the rural and the urban areas and for
in HCR (but a very marginal rise in the number of such workers the country as a whole. In each case, the three activity-statuses
in BPLhouseholds)boththe self-employed andthe casual labourers - namely, self-employment, regular wage/salary work and casual
- especially the latter - record a rise in HCR. At 2.6 percentage labour - are distinguished.
points. the rise in HCR for casual labourers in urban India is In comparison with the 1980s (the period between the 1983
quite sizeable but is also entirely consistent with the absolute and 1993-94 NSS Employment-Unemployment Surveys), we
decline in real wages of such workers discussed earlier. Overall, find that, in rural India, while the annual increments to the self-
the number of working poor in urban India rose by a little over employment workers in APL households records a sharp rise of
4 million between 2000 and 2005. nearly 6.8 million between 2000 and 2005 after a 1.5 million
In ruralIndia, there is a decline in HCR for all the three activity- reductionbetween 1994 and 2000, the average annual increments
status categories. Aided by a 2.8 million reduction in the total to casual labourersfalls in APL households by close to 2 million
number of casual labourers in rural India and a decline in their between 2000 and 2005 after a small rise (0.7 million) between
HCRby 4.4 percentagepoints, the numberof ruralcasual labourers 1994 and 2000. The annual increments to RWS workers in APL
in BPL households declined by close to 6 million between 2000 households records a steady rise over the three periods.
and 2005. This is only partially offset by the rise in the Taking all three activity-status categories together, the average
number of self-employed poor in rural India (by a little over annual increments to the rural workers in APL households has
3 million). So that, despite a significant growth in the total rural risen by a little over 80 per cent in 2000-2005 periodrelative to that

INDIRAGANDHI INSTITUTEOF DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH

Film City Road, Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400065

Young Scholars' Programme

Young scholars in the field of Social Sciences, Humanities, Mathematics and Statistics who are interested in Human
Development are invited to participate in a Young Scholars' Programme for capacity development. This programme
is the second batch of the successful and well-received YSP first held in June 2007 and is planned for the end of
September-first week of October period. The Programme is supported by UNDP/ Planning Commission and hopes
to build research capacity on various aspects of Human Development. Those who have finished their master's degree
this year or the preceding three years may apply. Recently appointed college lecturers are also encouraged to apply.
The total intake will be 35-40 students from all over India.

The Programme will consist of lectures, discussion groups and individual research, for which libraryand other facilities
will be provided by IGIDR. All selected participants will be expected to give a short presentation or write a 2000 word
note on a human development topic of their interest.

Those selected will be given full boarding and lodging on a twin-sharing basis at IGIDR, and a modest stipend for
out-of-pocket expenses. Travel expenses will be reimbursed for an amount up to Three-tier AC travel (including Tatkal
charges where necessary). Accommodation may also be available for those wishing to stay on preceding or succeeding
days in case of travel exigencies.

Selection will be on the basis of CV and a half page note on motivation. These should be sent by email to: ysp@igidr.ac.in
on or before 19th August 2007. Only those selected will be informed along with the firm dates.

3130 Economic and Political Weekly July 28, 2007

This content downloaded from 150.131.192.151 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:03:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
between 1994 and 2000 and by close to two-thirds relative to the Our analysis of poverty shows that, on a comparable basis,
averageannualincrementsin such workersbetween 1983and 1994. reduction in poverty is substantially smaller than indicated by
In urban India, the average annual increments to workers in Himanshu and Mahendra Dev and Ravi. Relative to the pace of
APL households has increased over the successive periods, with poverty reduction between 1994 and 2000, we have, at best, a
the 2000-2005 period recording a 32 per cent jump relative to marginal acceleration (or, deceleration, depending on the choice
that realised between 1994 and 2000. Relative to the 1980s, the of the poverty lines) in ruralIndia, and a clear slowdown in urban
annual average increments to "good quality" employment has India in the pace of poverty reduction between 2000 and 2005.
more than doubled in the first five years of this century. This Finally, reflecting largely the net result of a decline in the
has been made possible by a near-doubling of the annual average number of casual labourers in BPL households (5.5 million) and
increments to the number of self-employed located in APL a rise in the number of self-employed from (6.2 million), the
households in the period 2000-2005 relative to the 1994-2000 number of working poor rose by a little over 1 million between
period. Not surprisingly, given the rise in HCR among urban 2000 and 2005 with their number totalling a shade under 104.5
casual labourers between 2000 and 2005 noted earlier, there is million as on January 1, 2005. 33
an absolute decline in the number of urban casual labourers
located in APL households. Email: sundaram@econdse.org
In the country as a whole, a little over 11.1 million workers
were added every year to the above poverty line households Notes
between 2000 and 2005 which very nearly equals the average
annual increments to the total workforce over this period (with [The authoris gratefulto SurjeetSingh. Centrefor DevelopmentEconomics,
BPL workers growing by 0.26 million per annum). Mirroring Delhi School of Economics for excellent typing support.]
the situation in rural India, there has been a big jump (over 30 1 These projectionswere carried out (and kindly made available to me)
per cent) in the average annual increments to the self-employed by P N MariBhat.Needless to say, the responsibilityforthe interpolation-
workers in APL households. based estimatesof age-distributionsfor January1, 2005 rests solely with
the author.
It is also significant that the number of RWS workers in APL 2 If we had gone with projections-basedage-distributions,the estimated
households has increased by a little over 2 million per annum workforce would be higher by 3.5 million, which, at 0.76 per cent of
between 2000 and 2005 - more than double the average annual the estimate based on the survey-basedage-distribution,is quite small.
3 The WPR in the 60+ age group for 1999-2000 is perhapstoo low and
growth in such workers in the 1980s. Even between 1994 and the 2004-05 figure more in line with the trends since 1983.
2000, the average annual increments to RWS workers in APL 4 As noted in an earlier footnote the differences are quite negligible.
households was over 50 per cent higher than that between 1983 5 A similar methodology was used by us earlier to analyse the poor in
and 1994. This, taken with the larger increments to the total the Indian labour force [Sundaramand Tendulkar 20031.
number of RWS workers should dispel any lingering notion of
the period since 1993-94 being a period of "jobless growth". References
As a group, casual labourers,have not done as well - especially
Government of India, National Sample Survey Organisation (2001):
in the urban areas - as the other two activity-status categories.
'Employment and Unemployment Situation in India 1999-2000, NSS
The sharp slowdown in the average annual increments to casual 55th Round (July 1999-June2000)', Report No 458, New Delhi, May.
labourers in APL households between 2000 and 2005, relative - (2006): 'Employmentand Unemployment Situation in India, 2004-05,
to both the 1994-2000 and the 1983-1994 periods, well reflects NSS 61st Round (July 2004-June 2005)', Report No 515, New Delhi,
September.
the slowdown in the growth of real wages of adultcasual labourers - (2006): 'Level and Patternof Consumer Expenditurein India, 2004-05,
in rural India and the absolute decline in real wages of these NSS 61st Round (July 2004-June 2005)', Report No 508, New Delhi,
workers in urban India between 2000 and 2005. December.
To summarise: Governmentof India,PlanningCommission(2001): Reportof the TaskForce
on EmploymentOpportunities(Chairman:Montek S Ahluwalia), New
The first quinquenniumof the 21 st century saw a sharp accele- Delhi, June.
ration in workforce growth - especially of females - with a little Himanshu(2007): 'RecentTrendsin PovertyandInequality:Some Preliminary
over 57 million added to the total workforce. Of this incremental Results', Economic and Political Weekly, February 10.
MahendraDev, S and C Ravi (2007): 'Poverty and Inequality: All-India
workforce 49 million were self-employed and 10.7 million were and States, 1983-2005', Economic and Political Weekly,February 10.
RWS - workers- dispelling any notion of "jobless growth". The Office of RegistrarGeneralandCensusCommissioner,India(2006): 'Census
number of casual labourers, however declined by a little over of India 2001, PopulationProjectionsfor India and States 2001-2026',
2.7 million. Report of the Technical Group on Population Projections constituted
In terms of industrial distribution, a spectacular 4.8 per cent by the National Commission on Population, New Delhi, May.
ORG and CCI (2006): 'Report of the Technical Group on Population
per annumgrowth in manufacturingemployment and a continued ProjectionsConstitutedby the NationalCommissionon Population',May.
decline in the share of agriculture - to a little over 56 per cent Sundaram,K (2001): 'Employmentand Poverty in 1990s: FurtherResults
- is noteworthy.Despite some occupational diversification, India fromNSS 55th RoundEmployment-UnemploymentSurvey, 1999-2000',
Economic and Political Weekly, August 11.
still remains a land of farmers, fishermen, hunters and loggers, - (2007): 'Growth of Work Opportunitiesin India, 1983-99 to 2000' in
with marginal gains in the share of production process workers A VaidyanathanandK L Krishna(eds), Institutionsand Marketsin India's
and of professional and technical workers, and administrators, Development,Essaysfor K N Raj, Oxford University Press, New Delhi.
executive and managerial workers. Sundaram,K andSureshTendulkar(2003): 'Poorin the IndianLabourForce:
Scenario in the 1990s', Economic and Political Weekly,November 27.
The obverse side of the acceleration in workforce growth is - (2005): 'Poverty Outcomes in India in the 1990s' in Angus Deaton and
the slowdown in the rate of growth of labour productivity across Valeri Kozel (eds), The Great Indian Poverty Debate, Macmillan,
most sectors and in the economy as a whole. Not surprisingly, New Delhi.
we also have a slowdown in the rate of growth of real wages - (2006): 'ChangingStructureof India Workforce,Quality of Employment
and Real Earnings, 1983-2000' in Institute for Human Development,
of casual labourers in rural India and an actual decline in real India: Meeting the EmploymentChallenge, Conference on Labourand
wages in urban India. EmploymentIssues, July 27-29, New Delhi.

Economicand PoliticalWeekly July 28, 2007 3131

This content downloaded from 150.131.192.151 on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 19:03:31 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions