Resource centre on India's rural distress
 
 

HDI Overview

KEY TRENDS

 

• In 2017, India's Human Development Index (HDI) ranking was 130th (HDI value 0.640) among 189 countries, while China's ranking was 86th (HDI value 0.752), Sri Lanka's 76th (HDI value 0.770), Bhutan's 134th (HDI value 0.612), Bangladesh's 136th (HDI value 0.608) and Pakistan's 150th (HDI value 0.562) **

 

• In 2015, India's Human Development Index (HDI) ranking was 131st (HDI value 0.624) among 188 countries, while China's ranking was 90th (HDI value 0.738), Bhutan's 132nd (HDI value 0.607), Bangladesh's 139th (HDI value 0.579) and Pakistan's 147th (HDI value 0.550) $#

• Between 1990 and 2015, the average annual HDI growth for India was 1.52 percent, China was 1.57 percent, Bangladesh was 1.64 percent, Pakistan was 1.24 percent and Sri Lanka was 0.82 percent $#
 

• In 2014, India's Human Development Index ranking was 130th (HDI value 0.609) among 188 countries, while China's ranking was 90th (HDI value 0.727), Bhutan's 132nd (HDI value 0.605), Bangladesh's 142nd (HDI value 0.570) and Pakistan's 147th (HDI value 0.538). The value of India's HDI was 0.428 in 1990, 0.496 in 2000, 0.586 in 2010, 0.597 in 2011, 0.600 in 2012, 0.604 in 2013 and 0.609 in 2014 $$

 

• During 2013 India ranked 135th (HDI value 0.586) among 187 countries in terms of HDI, whereas Pakistan ranked 146th (HDI value 0.537), China ranked 91st (HDI value 0.719), Sri Lanka ranked 73rd (HDI value 0.750) and Bangladesh ranked 142nd (HDI value 0.558). India fared worse than the average global value of 0.702 $

 
• During 2012 India ranked 136th (HDI value 0.554) among 187 countries in terms of HDI ranking, whereas Pakistan ranked 146th (HDI value 0.515), China ranked 101st (HDI value 0.699), Sri Lanka ranked 92nd (HDI value 0.715) and Bangladesh ranked 146th (HDI value 0.515). India fared worse than the average global value of 0.694 ?

• In 2012 India's ranking in terms of Gender Inequality Index was 132nd (GII value 0.610) whereas in the same area Pakistan ranked 123rd (GII value 0.567), China ranked 35th (GII value 0.213), Sri Lanka ranked 75th (GII value 0.402) and Bangladesh ranked 111th (GII value 0.518) ? 

• The top 5 states in terms of HDI during 2007-08 were: Kerala (0.790), Delhi (0.750), Himachal Pradesh (0.652), Goa (0.617) and Punjab (0.605)

• According to HDR 2011, inequality in India for the period 2000-11 in terms of the income Gini coefficient was 36.8 ##
 
 
** Human Development Indices and Indicators: 2018 Statistical Update, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), please click link1, link2 and link3 to access
 
$# Human Development Report 2016: Human Development for Everyone, UNDP (please link1, link2 and link3 to access)
 
$$ Human Development Report 2015: Work for Human Development prepared by UNDP (please click here to access)
 
$ Human Development Report 2014 entitled: Sustaining Human Progress: Reducing Vulnerabilities and Building Resilience, prepared by UNDP,

http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr14-report-en-1.pdf

http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/2014-human-development-report-media-package
 
? 2013 Human Development Report–"The Rise of the South: Human Progress in a Diverse World"

# India Human Development Report 2011: Towards Social Inclusion, which has been prepared by Institute of Applied Manpower Research, Planning Commission, GoI, http://www.im4change.org/docs/340IHDR_Summary.pdf 

 

## Economic Survey 2011-12, http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2011-12/echap-13.pdf

 

**page**

 

According to the report entitled [inside]Human Development Indices and Indicators: 2018 Statistical Update[/inside], which has been prepared by United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (please click link1, link2 and link3 to access):

• In 2017, India's Human Development Index (HDI) ranking was 130th (HDI value 0.640) among 189 countries, while China's ranking was 86th (HDI value 0.752), Sri Lanka's 76th (HDI value 0.770), Bhutan's 134th (HDI value 0.612), Bangladesh's 136th (HDI value 0.608) and Pakistan's 150th (HDI value 0.562).

• India's HDI ranking has improved from 129th to 130th between 2016 and 2017, whereas China's ranking has remained the same at 86th over the same time span.

• Between 1990 and 2017, the average annual HDI growth for India was 1.51 percent, China was 1.51 percent, Bangladesh was 1.69 percent, Pakistan was 1.23 percent and Sri Lanka was 0.78 percent.

• Between 1990 and 2017, India’s HDI value increased from 0.427 to 0.640 — an increase by 49.9 percent.

• In 2017, India’s life expectancy at birth was 68.8 years, expected years of schooling was 12.3 years, mean years of schooling was 6.4 years and Gross National Income (GNI) per capita was 6,353 in 2011 PPP $ terms.

• India’s 2017 HDI of 0.640 is below the average of 0.645 for countries in the medium human development group, but above the average of 0.638 for countries in South Asia.

• India’s HDI for 2017 is 0.640. However, when the value is discounted for inequality, the HDI falls to 0.468, a loss of 26.8 percent due to inequality in the distribution of the HDI dimension indices. Bangladesh and Pakistan show losses due to inequality of 24.1 percent and 31.0 percent, respectively. The average loss due to inequality for medium HDI countries is 25.1 percent and for South Asia it is 26.1 percent. The Coefficient of Human Inequality for India is 26.3 percent.

• Gini coefficient (official measure of income inequality, which varies between zero and 100, with zero reflecting complete equality and 100 indicating absolute inequality) of India is 35.1 while that of China is 42.2 and Bhutan is 38.8.

• The female 2017 HDI value for India is 0.575 in contrast with 0.683 for males.

• In 2017, the value of India's Gender Development Index – ratio of female HDI to male HDI – was 0.841, which is lesser than that of China (GDI value 0.955), Nepal (GDI value 0.925), Bhutan (GDI value 0.893), Sri Lanka (GDI value 0.935) and Bangladesh (GDI value 0.881).

• During 2017, India ranked 127th (GII value 0.524) in terms of Gender Inequality Index while China ranked 36th (GII value 0.152) out of 189 countries. In comparison, Bangladesh (GII value 0.542) and Pakistan (GII value 0.541) were ranked 134th and 133rd, respectively on this index.

• In 2017, maternal mortality ratio (MMR) in India was 174 while in China it was 27. MMR is the number of maternal deaths during a given time period per 1,00,000 live births during the same time period.

• Nearly 11.6 percent of seats were held by Indian women in Parliament in 2017 as compared to 24.2 percent in China.

• In India 39.0 percent of adult women (25 years and above) reached at least some secondary level of education as compared to 63.5 percent of their male counterparts during the period 2010-17.

• Female labour force participation rate (15 years and above) in India is 27.2 percent whereas male LFPR is 78.8 percent. Female LFPR in China is 61.5 percent and male LFPR is 76.1 percent. LFPR is defined as the number of persons in the labour force per 100 persons (of the population).

• Old age pension recipients as a proportion of statutory pension age population during the period 2006-2016 was 24.1 percent in India, whereas it was 100.0 percent in China.

• The 2018 Update presents HDI values for 189 countries and territories with the most recent data for 2017. Of these countries, 59 are in the very high human development group, 53 in the high, 39 in the medium and only 38 in the low.

• The top five countries in the global HDI rankings are Norway (0.953), Switzerland (0.944), Australia (0.939), Ireland (0.938) and Germany (0.936).

• The bottom five are Burundi (0.417), Chad (0.404), South Sudan (0.388), the Central African Republic (0.367) and Niger (0.354).

 

**page**

 

According to the [inside]Human Development Report 2016[/inside]: Human Development for Everyone prepared by UNDP (please link1, link2 and link3 to access):

• In 2015, India's Human Development Index (HDI) ranking was 131st (HDI value 0.624) among 188 countries, while China's ranking was 90th (HDI value 0.738), Bhutan's 132nd (HDI value 0.607), Bangladesh's 139th (HDI value 0.579) and Pakistan's 147th (HDI value 0.550).

• India's HDI ranking has stayed at 131st between 2014 and 2015, whereas China's ranking has improved from 91st in 2014 to 90th in 2015.

• Between 1990 and 2015, the average annual HDI growth for India was 1.52 percent, China was 1.57 percent, Bangladesh was 1.64 percent, Pakistan was 1.24 percent and Sri Lanka was 0.82 percent.

• Between 1990 and 2015, India’s HDI value increased from 0.428 to 0.624 -- an increase by 45.7 percent. Between 1990 and 2015, India’s life expectancy at birth increased by 10.4 years, mean years of schooling increased by 3.3 years and expected years of schooling increased by 4.1 years. India’s GNI per capita increased by about 223.4 percent between 1990 and 2015.

• India’s 2015 HDI of 0.624 is below the average of 0.631 for countries in the medium human development group and above the average of 0.621 for countries in South Asia.

• India’s HDI for 2015 was 0.624. However, when the value is discounted for inequality, the HDI falls to 0.454, a loss of 27.2 percent due to inequality in the distribution of the HDI dimension indices. Bangladesh and Pakistan show losses due to inequality of 28.9 percent and 30.9 percent, respectively. The average loss due to inequality for medium HDI countries is 25.7 percent and for South Asia it is 27.7 percent. The Human inequality coefficient for India is equal to 26.5 percent.

• During 2015, life expectancy at birth in India was 68.3 years, expected years of schooling was 11.7 years, mean years of schooling was 6.3 years and Gross National Income (GNI) per capita (in terms of 2011 PPP $) was 5,663.

• Gini coefficient (official measure of income inequality, which varies between zero and 100, with zero reflecting complete equality and 100 indicating absolute inequality) in India is 35.1 while in China it is 42.2 and Bhutan is 38.8.

• The female HDI value for India was 0.549 in contrast with 0.671 for males.

• In 2015, the value of India's Gender Development Index was 0.819, which is lesser than that of China (GDI value 0.954), Nepal (GDI value 0.925), Bhutan (GDI value 0.900), Sri Lanka (GDI value 0.934) and Bangladesh (GDI value 0.927).

• During 2015, India ranked 125th (GII value 0.530) in terms of Gender Inequality Index while China ranked 37th (GII value 0.164) out of 159 countries. In comparison, Bangladesh and Pakistan were ranked at 119th and 130th respectively on this index.

• In 2015, maternal mortality ratio (MMR) in India was 174 while in China it was 27. MMR is the number of maternal deaths during a given time period per 1,00,000 live births during the same time period.

• Nearly 12.2 percent of seats were held by Indian women in Parliament in 2014 as compared to 23.6 percent in China. 

• In India 35.3 percent of adult women reached at least some secondary level of education compared to 61.4 percent of their male counterparts.

• Female participation in the labour market was 26.8 percent as compared to 79.1 for men.

• Old age pension recipients as a proportion of statutory pension age population during 2004-2013 was 24.1 percent in India, which was 74.4 percent in China.

 

**page**

 

According to the [inside]Human Development Report 2015[/inside]: Work for Human Development prepared by UNDP (please click here to access):

• In 2014, India's Human Development Index ranking was 130th (HDI value 0.609) among 188 countries, while China's ranking was 90th (HDI value 0.727), Bhutan's 132nd (HDI value 0.605), Bangladesh's 142nd (HDI value 0.570) and Pakistan's 147th (HDI value 0.538). The value of India's HDI was 0.428 in 1990, 0.496 in 2000, 0.586 in 2010, 0.597 in 2011, 0.600 in 2012, 0.604 in 2013 and 0.609 in 2014.

• India's HDI ranking has improved from 131st in 2013 to 130th in 2014. The average annual HDI growth during 1990-2014 was 1.48 percent.

• During 2014, life expectancy at birth in India was 68 years, expected years of schooling was 11.7 years, mean years of schooling was 5.4 years and gross national income (GNI) per capita (in terms of 2011 PPP $) was 5,497.

• During 2005-2013, Gini coefficient (official measure of income inequality, which varies between zero and 100, with zero reflecting complete equality and 100 indicating absolute inequality) in India was 33.6 while in China it was 37.0 and Bhutan it was 38.7.

• The value of India's Gender Development Index was 0.795, which is lesser than that of China (GDI value 0.943), Nepal (GDI value 0.908), Bhutan (GDI value 0.897), Sri Lanka (GDI value 0.948) and Bangladesh (GDI value 0.917).

• During 2014, India ranked 130th (GII value 0.563) in terms of Gender Inequality Index while China ranked 40th (GII value 0.191).

• In 2013, maternal mortality ratio (MMR) in India stood at 190 while in China it was 32. MMR is the number of maternal deaths during a given time period per 100000 live births during the same time period.

• Nearly 12.2 percent of seats were held by Indian women in Parliament in 2014 as compared to 23.6 percent in China. 

• In India, the percentage of population who are satisfied with quality of healthcare, educational quality, and standard of living in 2014 stood at 58 percent, 69 percent and 58 percent, respectively. Only 52 percent of the population feel safe in India. As compared to females (75 percent), more males (79 percent) are satisfied with the freedom of choice. The overall life satisfaction index in India is 4.4 whereas the same in Pakistan is 5.4 (0 means least satisfied and 10 means most satisfied), although the latter has a worse HDI ranking than the former. 

• Nearly, 73 percent Indians have trust in national government, whereas the figure for Pakistan is 43 percent and Sri Lanka is 77 percent during 2014. In case of China, this figure is not reported.

• Almost 67 percent Indians have confidence in judicial system, whereas the figure for Pakistan is 57 percent and Sri Lanka is 74 percent during 2014. In case of China, this figure has not been reported.

• During 2013, percentage of Indian population who feel active and productive has been 47 percent, whereas in China the same is 45 percent. 

• A basic and modest set of social security guarantees through social transfers in cash and in kind can reasonably be provided for all citizens. The cost of setting such a floor with universal pension, basic health care, child benefits and employment schemes would range from about 4 percent of GDP in India to 11 percent of GDP in Burkina Faso.

• The share of old age pension recipients as a percent of statutory pension age population during 2004-2012 was 24.1 percent for India, which was 74.4 percent in China.

• As the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme began to revamp prior employment programmes, evaluations have found that job creation accelerated from less than 1 billion working days among 20 million households in the act’s first year of operation, 2006/2007, to 2.5 billion among 50 million households in 2010/2011. A simulation estimated that GDP would increase 0.02–0.03 percent, that labour income would rise about 700 million rupees and that the welfare of the poorest households (as measured by Slutski-adjusted consumption relative to initial consumption) would increase up to 8 percent. People belonging to Scheduled Tribes or Scheduled Castes would also benefit.

• In India unpaid care is estimated at 39 percent of GDP while in South Africa it is 15 percent.

• During 2005-2013 the percentage of child labour in the age group 5-14 was 11.8 percent. As a percentage of total employment, during 2000-2010 the percentage of females who worked as domestic workers was 2.2 percent as compared to 0.5 percent of males.

• In 2004/05 India had 4.2 million domestic workers — 1 percent of total employment —about a quarter of them men. More than 70 percent were women working predominantly as housemaids or servants. Some were full-time live-in domestic workers— they might have relatively stable employment and reasonable living conditions but little freedom. Others worked part time, living at home but visiting their employer’s house once or twice a day. They could thus work in more than one household, with somewhat greater choices and exit options.

• During 2005-2013, the number of non-fatal occupational injuries reported was 6,000 and the cases of fatal occupational injuries reported was 2140.

• In India informal work accounted for 46 percent of national non-agricultural output in 2008.

• Globally participation rates for women have fallen slightly in recent years, as have men’s. The drop in the rate for women is due mainly to reductions in India (from 35 percent in 1990 to 27 percent in 2013) and China (from 73 percent in 1990 to 64 percent in 2013).

• In China and India 23 million jobs in clean energy are increasing environmental sustainability.

• In 38 countries, including India, Mexico, Pakistan and Uganda, more than 80 percent of women are unbanked. By contrast, in Japan and the Republic of Korea more than 90 percent of women have bank accounts.

• In India, the percentage of population who are using internet in 2014 has been 18 percent, although mobile phone subscriptions per hundred people has been 74.5. In China, the percentage of population who are using internet in 2014 has been 49.3 percent, and mobile phone subscriptions per hundred people has been 92.3 percent.  

• As of 2013, only 39 percent of women in India were Internet users, compared with 61 percent of men. In China the percentage was 44 percent for women and 56 percent for men, and in Turkey only 44 percent of women were, compared with 64 percent of men.

• Between 2000 and 2010 the number of direct jobs in information and communications technology in India jumped from 284,000 to more than 2 million. In recent years India has maintained a strong position as an offshoring destination for service jobs, but offshoring destinations are becoming increasingly diverse.

• In India farmers and fishers who track weather conditions and compare wholesale prices through mobile phones increased their profits 8 percent, and better access to information resulted in a 4 percent drop in prices for consumers. In India, Kenya and Uganda farmers can call or text hotlines to ask for technical agricultural services.

• If Internet access in developing countries were the same as in developed countries, an estimated $2.2 trillion in GDP could be generated, with more than 140 million new jobs—44 million in Africa and 65 million in India.

• In Andhra Pradesh, India, women run e-Seva centres that provide a wide range of online services. In addition to Internet browsing and access to online auctions, customers can use these centres to pay bills, obtain land and birth certificates, file complaints and grievances, and gain access to tele‑medicine and tele-agriculture.

• A survey of 763 commercial entrepreneurs in India who experienced a transition from commercial to social entrepreneurship between 2003 and 2013 and a quantitative analysis of a final sample of 493 entrepreneurs indicate that 21 percent of the successful entrepreneurs shifted to social change efforts.

• Using cash transfer programmes to provide employment for local young people and poor people. In India and Uganda these programmes have provided resources for funding job searches and for supporting high-quality training and skills development.

• Evidence from India suggests that activities led by sex worker collectives have helped identify 80 percent of trafficked minors and women in West Bengal, showing that sex workers can be allies in assisting such victims.

• Given globalization, the technological revolution and changes in labour markets, support is needed for emerging forms of collective action (such as the Self-Employed Women’s Association in India), innovative organizations for flexible workers (such as the Freelancers Union in the United States) and collective bargaining, including peaceful protests and demonstrations.

• One dimension of population growth is the expansion of a sizeable global middle class, defined as households with daily expenditure of $10–$100 per capita (in purchasing power parity terms). That global middle class is expected to be 4.9 billion—nearly 57 percent of the global population—in 2030, with 3.2 billion in Asia and the Pacific, mostly in China and India. Consumption by the middle class in the 10 countries with the largest middle-class population (Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, the Russian Federation and the United States) is forecast to be $38 trillion in 2030.

• There are four extension workers (those who provide agricultural extension services) per 1,000 family farms in Brazil and Ethiopia, but less than one per 1,000 in India. Their reach among female farmers tends to be especially poor—a concern because women typically have a substantial role in agriculture in developing countries but have less access to market information, inputs and finances.

• In India results of an industry survey suggested that off-grid solar photovoltaic technologies systems generated about 90 direct (involved in the actual manufacture of solar panels) and indirect (through employment with dealers, manufacture of products such as solar lanterns, home-lighting kits and the like) jobs per megawatt.

 

**page**


As per the [inside]Human Development Report 2014[/inside] entitled: Sustaining Human Progress: Reducing Vulnerabilities and Building Resilience, which has been prepared by UNDP,

http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr14-report-en-1.pdf

http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/2014-human-development-report-media-package:

Indian scenario

• During 2013 India ranked 135th (HDI value 0.586) among 187 countries in terms of HDI, whereas Pakistan ranked 146th (HDI value 0.537), China ranked 91st (HDI value 0.719), Sri Lanka ranked 73rd (HDI value 0.750) and Bangladesh ranked 142nd (HDI value 0.558). India fared worse than the average global value of 0.702.

• Despite India’s progress, its HDI of 0.586 is below the average of 0.614 for countries in the medium human development group, and of 0.588 for countries in South Asia.

 

• The cut-off points are HDI of less than 0.550 for low human development, 0.550–0.699 for medium human development, 0.700–0.799 for high human development and 0.800 or greater for very high human development. Therefore, India with HDI 0.586 is now included among medium human development group.

• The value of India's Gender Inequality Index in 2013 was 0.563 (Rank: 127) whereas in 2012 it was 0.610 (Rank: 132).

• The value of India's Gender Development Index (i.e. ratio of female to male HDI) in 2013 was 0.828 (Rank: 132).

• Nearly 55.3 percent of India's population live in multidimensional poverty i.e. 63.2 crore people are affected by multidimensional poverty. Approximately, 27.8 percent of the population lives in severe poverty.

• Persistent vulnerability is rooted in historic exclusions — women in patriarchal societies, Black people in South Africa and the United States, and Dalits in India encounter discrimination and exclusion due to longstanding cultural practices and social norms.

• In India paying for health care has become a major source of impoverishment for the poor and even the middle class. Ill health of the main wage earner can push households into poverty and keep them there (Narayan and Petesch 2007). Recent data suggest that more than 40 percent of hospital patients either borrow money or sell assets and that close to 35 percent fall into poverty because of having to pay for their care (Raman and Björkman 2000).

• Equally, long-standing unequal treatment and denials of rights feed into deep discrimination, and at times groups or communities seek to redress long-established inequities through violent means. In India estimates range from a tenth to a third of districts having insurrection movements or armed struggles in one form or the other by such dissident groups as the Naxalites and other Maoist groups. Horizontal inequality and unmet basic rights are often the causes of group violence.

• The amendments to the Criminal Law in India following recent rape cases do not criminalize marital rape, highlighting both the scope and limits of law as an agent of social change. In India actual or threatened violence by husbands prevents many women from participating in meetings of self-help groups.

• India’s failure to transition into industry has to be remedied—jobs in business process outsourcing are a boon for the balance of payments but hardly for mass employment.

• Improving accountability through transparency measures such as India’s Right to Information Act can expose corruption and graft and boost efficiency.

• Smallholder farmers in South Asia are particularly vulnerable to climate change—India alone has 93 million small farms.

Global scenario

• Norway (Rank: 1; HDI: 0.944), Australia (Rank: 2; HDI: 0.933), Switzerland (Rank: 3; HDI: 0.917), Netherlands (Rank: 4; HDI: 0.915) and United States (Rank: 5; HDI: 0.914) remain in the lead in terms of Human Development Index for another year, while Sierra Leone (Rank: 183; HDI: 0.374), Chad (Rank: 184; HDI: 0.372), Central African Republic (Rank: 185; HDI: 0.341), Democratic Republic of the Congo (Rank: 186; HDI: 0.338) and Niger (Rank: 187; HDI: 0.337) continue to rank bottom of the list.

• The Inequality-Adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI), calculated for 145 countries, shows that the lowest levels of inequality are to be found in Norway, Finland, and Czech Republic.

• The new Gender Development Index (GDI), which for the first time measures the gender gap in human development achievements for 148 countries, reveals that in 16 of them (Argentina, Barbados, Belarus, Estonia, Finland, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Mongolia, Poland, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Ukraine and Uruguay), female HDI values are equal or higher than those for males.

• According to income-based measures of poverty, 1.2 billion people live with $1.25 or less a day. However, the latest estimates of the UNDP Multidimensional Poverty Index reveal that almost 1.5 billion people in 91 developing countries are living in poverty with overlapping deprivations in health, education and living standards. And although poverty is declining overall, almost 800 million people are at risk of falling back into poverty if setbacks occur.

• Across Asia and the Pacific, over a billion people live just above the extreme poverty line, on more than US$1.25 but less than US$2.50 a day. The report asserts that those who face multiple deprivations are especially at risk of falling back into poverty if a disaster or crisis should occur.

• Regarding South Asia, the Human Development Report 2014 says that there is no country in the very high human development group from the region. The average HDI value for the region, at 0.588, is below the world average of 0.702.

• The HDR 2014 argues that countries in Asia and the Pacific do not have to wait to become rich in order to provide adequate social protection or basic social services. It shows that Nordic countries as well as countries such as Republic of Korea and Costa Rica were able to provide universal basic social services when their per capita GDP was lower than that of India or Pakistan today. 

• The HDR 2014 introduces the idea of life cycle vulnerabilities, which arise from sensitive points in life where shocks can have greater impact. It stresses the importance of the first 1,000 days of life, and of the transitions from school to work, and from work to retirement.

• The HDR explores structural vulnerabilities – those that have persisted and compounded over time as a result of discrimination and institutional failings, hurting groups such as the poor, women, migrants, people living with disabilities, indigenous groups and older people. For instance, 80 percent of the world’s elderly lack social protection, with large numbers of older people also poor and disabled.

• The Report calls for governments to recommit to the objective of full employment, a mainstay of macroeconomic policies of the 1950s and 1960s that was overtaken by competing policy goals following the oil shocks of the 1970s.

• The Report highlights that a lack of decent, well paid jobs – especially for youth – is a major challenge in Asia and the Pacific. In many countries of the region, youth unemployment is relatively high: 23 percent in Iran, 22 percent in Indonesia, 17 percent in Sri Lanka, 16 percent in Philippines and Samoa and 14 percent in Timor-Leste. 

• The HDR 2014 argues that full employment yields social dividends that surpass private benefits, such as fostering social stability and cohesion.

• The Report advocates for the universal provision of basic social services to enhance resilience, refuting the notion that only wealthy countries can afford to do this.

**page**


The [inside]2013 Human Development Report–"The Rise of the South: Human Progress in a Diverse World"[/inside]–was launched on 14 March in Mexico City. The HDI in the 2013 Report covers 187 countries and territories. Among other things, the report finds that China has already overtaken Japan as the world’s second biggest economy while lifting hundreds of millions of its people out of poverty. India is reshaping its future with new entrepreneurial creativity and social policy innovation. Brazil is lifting its living standards through expanding international relationships and antipoverty programs that are emulated worldwide.

The 2013 Human Development Report identifies more than 40 countries in the developing world that have done better than had been expected in human development terms in recent decades, with their progress accelerating markedly over the past ten years. The Report analyzes the causes and consequences of these countries achievements and the challenges that they face today and in the coming decades.

Key findings of the HDR 2013 are:

http://hdr.undp.org/hdr4press/press/outreach/figures/HDI_Trends_2013.pdf

 

http://hdr.undp.org/hdr4press/press/outreach/figures/GII_Trends_2013.pdf

 

http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/PR1-main-2013HDR-ENG.pdf

 

http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/PR5-RBAPregional-SouthAsia-2013HDR-ENG.pdf


• During 2012 India ranked 136th (HDI value 0.554) among 187 countries in terms of HDI, whereas Pakistan ranked 146th (HDI value 0.515), China ranked 101st (HDI value 0.699), Sri Lanka ranked 92nd (HDI value 0.715) and Bangladesh ranked 146th (HDI value 0.515). India fares worse than the average global value of 0.694.

• Despite India’s progress, its HDI of 0.554 is below the average of 0.64 for countries in the medium human development group, and of 0.558 for countries in South Asia.

• India's ranking in terms of Gender Inequality Index was 132nd (GII value 0.610) in 2012, whereas in the same area Pakistan ranked 123rd (GII value 0.567), China ranked 35th (GII value 0.213), Sri Lanka ranked 75th (GII value 0.402) and Bangladesh ranked 111th (GII value 0.518). 

• The HDI’s Multidimensional Poverty Index, an alternative to income-based poverty estimates, shows the proportion of the population living in multidimensional poverty is high throughout South Asia, with the highest rates in Bangladesh (58 percent), India (54 percent), Pakistan (49 percent) and Nepal (44 percent).

• China and India doubled per capita economic output in less than 20 years—a rate twice as fast as that during the Industrial Revolution in Europe and North America.

• By 2020, the Report projects, the combined output of the three leading South economies—China, India, Brazil—will surpass the aggregate production of the United States, Germany, United Kingdom, France, Italy and Canada.

• Although South Asia has reduced the proportion of the population living on less than $1.25 a day from 61 percent in 1981 to 36 percent in 2008, more than half a billion people there remained extremely poor.

• India has averaged nearly five percent income growth a year over 1990–2012. But per capita income is still low, around $3,400 in 2012. To improve living standards, it will need further growth. And India’s performance in accelerating human development is less impressive than its growth performance.

• Brazil, China, India, Indonesia and Mexico now have more daily social media traffic than any country except the United States.

• In 2010, India’s trade to output ratio was 46.3 percent, up from only 15.7 percent in 1990. Foreign direct investment also reached a peak of 3.6 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2008, up from less than 0.1 percent in 1990. In 2011, eight of the world’s biggest corporations on the Fortune 500 list were Indian.

• By 2030, more than 80 percent of the world’s middle class will live in the South and account for 70 percent of total consumption expenditure. The Asia-Pacific region alone will host about two-thirds of that middle class.

• Child labour is relatively high in Nepal, where more than one-third of children of ages five to 14 years are economically active. The lowest is observed in India (12 percent).

 

Please click here to access the article entitled Human Development Index Trends, 1980-2012 prepared by the Economic and Political Weekly, April 20, 2013 VolXxlviii, No 16,

**page**

 

According to the [inside]India Human Development Report 2011: Towards Social Inclusion[/inside], which has been prepared by Institute of Applied Manpower Research, Planning Commission, GoI, http://www.im4change.org/docs/340IHDR_Summary.pdf:  

The top 5 states in terms of HDI during 2007-08 are: Kerala (0.790), Delhi (0.750), Himachal Pradesh (0.652), Goa (0.617) and Punjab (0.605).  

The top 5 states in terms of HDI during 1999-2000 were: Delhi (0.783), Kerala (0.677), Goa (0.595), Himachal Pradesh (0.581) and Punjab (0.543). 

The bottom 5 states in terms of HDI during 2007-08 are: Chhattisgarh (0.358), Orissa (0.362), Bihar (0.367), Madhya Pradesh (0.375) and Jharkhand (0.376).

The seven north eastern states (excluding Assam) have done remarkably well in human development outcomes to climb up three rungs from 1999-2000 and 2007-8.

States that perform better on health and education outcomes are also the states with higher HDI and thus higher per capita income.

Over the eight year period, HDI has risen by 21 per cent compared to a rise of 18 per cent in India’s HDI over 2000-2010 as reported by the global HDR 2010. China’s increase in HDI respectively has been 17 per cent.

The eight poorer states – Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, are home to nearly 48 per cent of all SCs, 52 per cent of the STs and 44 per cent of all Muslims in the country.

When comparing SCs and STs with Muslims in terms of human development input and outcome indicators, Muslims consistently perform better than SCs and STs. This is primarily due to their urban concentration. For most indicators, the ladder of performance on human development indicators goes like–STs, SCs and Muslims (in ascending order of absolute levels).

**page**  

According to the [inside]Human Development Report 2011-Sustainability and Equity: A Better Future for All[/inside], UNDP, 

http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_2011_EN_Summary.pdf   

http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/PR1-main-2011HDR-English.pdf  

http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/PR2-HDI-2011HDR-English.pdf  

http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/PR5-Asia-2011HDR-English.pdf:  

During 2011 India positions 134 (HDI value 0.547) among 187 countries in terms of HDI ranking, whereas Pakistan ranks 145 (HDI value 0.504), China ranks 101 (HDI value 0.687), Sri Lanka ranks 97 (HDI value 0.691) and Bangladesh ranks 146 (HDI value 0.500). India fares worse than the average global value of 0.682.

India's ranking in terms of Gender Inequality Index is 129 (GII value 0.617) whereas in the same area Pakistan ranks 115 (GII value 0.573), China ranks 35 (GII value 0.209), Sri Lanka ranks 74 (GII value 0.419) and Bangladesh ranks 112 (GII value 0.550).  

India, Pakistan and Bangladesh have some of the highest absolute numbers of Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) poor.

India has by far the largest number of multidimensionally poor–612 million, more than half the country’s population, and larger than the total number of people measured according to the same criteria in all sub-Saharan countries.

In South Asia, 97 percent of the multidimensionally poor lack access to clean drinking water, toilets, or modern cooking fuels—and 18 percent lack all three. More than 85 percent of the multidimensionally poor that in South Asia also lack access to modern sanitation facilities.

The top four countries with high HDI are: Norway (0.943), Australia (0.929), Netherlands (0.910) and United States (0.910). The top four countries with low HDI are: Democratic Republic of Congo (0.286), Niger (0.295), Burundi (0.316) and Mozambique (0.322).

Between 1970 and 2010 the countries in the lowest 25 percent of the HDI rankings improved their overall HDI achievement by a remarkable 82 percent, twice the global average. If the pace of improvement over the past 40 years were to be continued for the next 40, the great majority of countries would achieve HDI levels by 2050 equal to or better than those now enjoyed only by the top 25 percent in today’s HDI rankings.

When the Human Development Index is adjusted for internal inequalities in health, education and income, some of the wealthiest nations drop out of the HDI’s top 20: the United States falls from #4 to #23, the Republic of Korea from #15 to #32, and Israel from #17 to #25. 

The Gender Inequality Index (GII) shows that Sweden leads the world in gender equality, as measured by this composite index of reproductive health, years of schooling, parliamentary representation, and participation in the labour market. Sweden is followed in the gender inequality rankings by the Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, Finland, Norway, Germany, Singapore, Iceland and France. Yemen ranks as the least equitable of the 146 countries in the GII, followed by Chad, Niger, Mali, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Afghanistan, Papua New Guinea, Liberia, Central African Republic and Sierra Leone.

The 2011 Human Development Report shows how sustainability is inextricably linked to basic questions of equity—that is, of fairness and social justice and of greater access to a better quality of life.

Sustainable human development is the expansion of the substantive freedoms of people today while making reasonable efforts to avoid seriously compromising those of future generations.

New analysis shows how power imbalances and gender inequalities at the national level are linked to reduced access to clean water and improved sanitation, land degradation and deaths due to indoor and outdoor air pollution, amplifying the effects associated with income disparities. Gender inequalities also interact with environmental outcomes and make them worse.

Reproductive rights can further reduce environmental pressures by slowing global demographic growth, with the world population now projected to rise from 7 billion today to 9.3 billion within 40 years.

While three-quarters of the growth in emissions since 1970 comes from low, medium and high HDI countries, overall levels of greenhouse gases remain much greater in very high HDI countries.

The average person in a very high HDI country accounts for more than four times the carbon dioxide emissions and about twice the methane and nitrous oxide emissions of a person in a low, medium or high HDI country—and about 30 times the carbon dioxide emissions of a person in a low HDI country

Globally, nearly 40 percent of land is degraded due to soil erosion, reduced fertility and overgrazing. Land productivity is declining, with estimated yield loss as high as 50 percent in the most adverse scenarios.

Agriculture accounts for 70–85 percent of water use, and an estimated 20 percent of global grain production uses water unsustainably, imperilling future agricultural growth.

Deforestation is a major challenge. Between 1990 and 2010 Latin America and the Caribbean and Sub-Saharan Africa experienced the greatest forest losses, followed by the Arab States.

Today, around 350 million people, many of them poor, live in or near forests on which they rely for subsistence and incomes. Both deforestation and restrictions on access to natural resources can hurt the poor.

Around 45 million people—at least 6 million of them women—fish for a living and are threatened by overfishing and climate change.

Some 120 national Constitutions guarantee environmental protections, but in many countries there is little enforcement of these provisions.

Environmental deprivations in the present report include access to modern cooking fuel, clean water and basic sanitation. In developing countries at least 6 people in 10 experience one of these environmental deprivations, and 4 in 10 experience two or more. Environmental deprivations disproportionately contribute to multidimensional poverty, accounting for 20 percent of the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI).

South Asia has among the world’s highest levels of urban air pollution, with cities in Bangladesh and Pakistan suffering from especially acute air contamination

Energy is central to human development, yet some 1.5 billion people worldwide—more than one in five—lack electricity. Global energy supply reached a tipping point in 2010, with renewables accounting for 25 percent of global power capacity and delivering more than 18 percent of global electricity.

A tax of just 0.005 percent on foreign exchange trading could raise $40 billion yearly or more, thus, significantly boosting aid flows to poor countries—amounting to $130 billion in 2010. 

India’s Rural Employment Guarantee Act cost about 0.5 percent of GDP in 2009 and benefited 45 million households—one-tenth of the labour force; Brazil’s Bolsa Familia and Mexico’s Oportunidades programmes cost about 0.4 percent of GDP and provide safety nets for about one-fifth of their populations.

Nearly 3 in 10 children of primary school age in low HDI countries are not even enrolled in primary school, and multiple constraints, some environmental, persist even for enrolled children.

 

**page** 

According to the [inside]2010 Human Development Report[/inside], which has been produced by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP),

http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2010/summary/#top:

• The 2010 Human Development Index (HDI), which is a composite national measure of health, education and income for 169 countries, shows that Norway, Australia and New Zealand are leading the world in HDI achievement with Niger, Democratic Republic of the Congo and Zimbabwe at the bottom of the annual rankings.

• The next seven among the top 10 countries in the 2010 HDI are: the United States, Ireland, Lichtenstein, the Netherlands, Canada, Sweden and Germany. The other seven among the bottom 10 countries are: Mali, Burkina Faso, Liberia, Chad, Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique and Burundi.

• For the 20th anniversary of the Report, The Real Wealth of Nations: Pathways to Human Development, the 2010 HDI uses data and methodologies that were not available in most countries in 1990 for the dimensions of income, education and health. Gross National Income per capita replaces Gross Domestic Product per capita, to include income from remittances and international development assistance, for example. The upper ‘cap’ on income for index weighting purposes was removed to give countries that had surpassed the previous US$40,000 limit an HDI, better reflecting real incomes levels.

• In education, expected years schooling for school-age children replaces gross enrolment, and average years of schooling in the adult population replaces adult literacy rates, to provide a fuller picture of education levels. Life expectancy remains the main indicator for health.

• 2010's HDI should not be compared to the HDI that appeared in previous editions of the Human Development Report due to the use of different indicators and calculations.

• In addition to the 2010 HDI, the Report includes three new indices: the Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index, the Gender Inequality Index and the Multidimensional Poverty Index.

• Significant progress in human development was also found for most of the nine South Asian countries in the trends analysis—Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Iran, Nepal and Pakistan. Over the past 40 years life expectancy increased by 23 years in Bangladesh, 18 years in Iran, 16 years in India, and 10 years in Afghanistan.

• Eight Indian states, with poverty as acute as the 26 poorest African countries measured, are home to 421 million multidimensionally poor people, more than the 410 million multidimensional poor people living in those African countries combined.

• About 1.75 billion people in the 104 countries covered by the MPI—a third of their population— live in multidimensional poverty— that is, with at least 30 percent of the indicators reflecting acute deprivation in health, education and standard of living. This exceeds the estimated 1.44 billion people in those countries who live on $1.25 a day or less (though it is below the share who live on $2 or less). The patterns of deprivation also differ from those of income poverty in important ways: in many countries—including Ethiopia and Guatemala—the number of people who are multidimensionally poor is higher. However, in about a fourth of the countries for which both estimates are available—including China, Tanzania and Uzbekistan— rates of income poverty are higher.

• Sub-Saharan Africa has the highest incidence of multidimensional poverty. The level ranges from a low of 3 percent in South Africa to a massive 93 percent in Niger; the average share of deprivations ranges from about 45 percent (in Gabon, Lesotho and Swaziland) to 69 percent (in Niger). Yet half the world’s multidimensionally poor live in South Asia (51 percent, or 844 million people), and more than a quarter live in Africa (28 percent, or 458 million).

• Gender inequality varies tremendously across countries—the losses in achievement due to gender inequality (not directly comparable to total inequality losses because different variables are used) range from 17 percent to 85 percent. The Netherlands tops the list of the most gender-equal countries, followed by Denmark, Sweden and Switzerland.

• Countries with unequal distribution of human development also experience high inequality between women and men, and countries with high gender inequality also experience unequal distribution of human development. Among the countries doing very badly on both fronts are Central African Republic, Haiti and Mozambique.
 
According to the [inside]Human Development Report 2007-08[/inside], United Nations Development Programme (UNDP):

  • The HDI (human development index) for India is 0.619, which gives the country a rank of 128th out of 177 countries. The HDI provides a composite measure of three dimensions of human development: living a long and healthy life (measured by life expectancy), being educated (measured by adult literacy and enrolment at the primary, secondary and tertiary level) and having a decent standard of living (measured by purchasing power parity, PPP, income).

 

  • The HPI-1 (human poverty index) value for India is 31.3, which gives the country a rank of 62nd out of 108 countries. The Human Poverty Index for developing countries (HPI-1), focuses on the proportion of people below a threshold level in the same dimensions of human development as the human development index - living a long and healthy life, having access to education, and a decent standard of living.   

 

According to the [inside]National Human Development Report (2001)[/inside], which has been prepared by the Planning Commission (GoI):

Kerala (0.638) topped the ranking in terms of the Human Development Index (HDI), followed by Punjab (0.537), Tamil Nadu (0.531), Maharastra (0.523) and Haryana (0.509), during 2001. The worst performer in terms of HDI was Bihar (0.367), followed by Assam (0.386), Uttar Pradesh (0.388) and Madhya Pradesh (0.394).