In 2021, over 12 percent of India's population was living on less than 2.15 U.S. dollars per day. When the 3.65 U.S. dollars per day threshold is considered, the share increased to over 44 percent.

Looking back 45 years or so, progress against poverty in India has been highly uneven over time and space. It took 20 years for the national poverty rate to fall below—and stay below—its value in the early 1950s. And trend rates of poverty reduction have differed appreciably between states. This research project aimed to understand what influence economy-wide and sectoral factors have played in the evolution of poverty measures for India since the 1950s, and to draw lessons for the future. This database contains detailed statistics on a wide range of topics in India. The data are presented at the state level and at the all-India level separately. The database uses published information to construct comprehensive series in six subject blocks. Period coverage is roughly from 1950 to 1994. The database contains 30 spreadsheets and 89 text files (ASCII) that are grouped into the six subject blocks. The formats and sizes of the 30 spreadsheets vary considerably. The list of variables included: . Expenditures (distribution) . National Accounts . Prices Wages . Population . Rainfall

India: Poverty ratio, percent living on less than 5.50 USD a day: The latest value from 2021 is 81.8 percent, a decline from 83 percent in 2020. In comparison, the world average is 25.11 percent, based on data from 71 countries. Historically, the average for India from 1977 to 2021 is 89.86 percent. The minimum value, 80.7 percent, was reached in 2019 while the maximum of 97.8 percent was recorded in 1977.

In financial year 2023, Uttar Pradesh, India's most populated state had over ** percent people living under the poverty line of **** U.S. dollars per day. A decade ago the state had over ** percent of its population living under the threshold. The state of Bihar also witnessed a significant reduction in poverty rates from over ** percent in the financial year 2012 to over ** percent in the financial year 2023.

The dataset contains All India Yearly Number and Percentage of Population Below Poverty Line from Handbook of Statistics on Indian Economy.

During 2019 to 2021, almost ** percent of the Indian population were reportedly multidimensionally poor. This reflected a much lower percentage of multidimensionally poor population in India. India has made significant progress in multidimensional poverty over the years. The share of multidimensional poor is expected to decline to around ** percent during 2022 to 2023.

India: Poverty, percent of population: The latest value from 2011 is 21.9 percent, a decline from 29.8 percent in 2009. In comparison, the world average is 23.86 percent, based on data from 52 countries. Historically, the average for India from 2004 to 2011 is 29.63 percent. The minimum value, 21.9 percent, was reached in 2011 while the maximum of 37.2 percent was recorded in 2004.

As of 2022, over 13 million children between the ages of 10 to 14 years were affected by poverty. In general, age groups from 0 to 19 years were most impacted by extreme poverty.

India Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data was reported at 33.100 % in 2021. This records a decrease from the previous number of 34.800 % for 2020. India Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 38.450 % from Dec 1977 (Median) to 2021, with 14 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 63.500 % in 1977 and a record low of 32.400 % in 2018. India Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s India – Table IN.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. The poverty headcount ratio at societal poverty line is the percentage of a population living in poverty according to the World Bank's Societal Poverty Line. The Societal Poverty Line is expressed in purchasing power adjusted 2017 U.S. dollars and defined as max($2.15, $1.15 + 0.5*Median). This means that when the national median is sufficiently low, the Societal Poverty line is equivalent to the extreme poverty line, $2.15. For countries with a sufficiently high national median, the Societal Poverty Line grows as countries’ median income grows.;World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are mostly from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see http://pip.worldbank.org.;;The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than 2000 household surveys across 169 countries. See the Poverty and Inequality Platform (PIP) for details (www.pip.worldbank.org).

Of the total number of people living under extreme poverty in India in 2021, approximately ** million were females. Females were more affected by extreme poverty in India as opposed to their male counterparts during the same time period.

India IN: Poverty Headcount Ratio at $3.65 a Day: 2017 PPP: % of Population data was reported at 44.000 % in 2021. This records a decrease from the previous number of 48.200 % for 2020. India IN: Poverty Headcount Ratio at $3.65 a Day: 2017 PPP: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 62.000 % from Dec 1977 (Median) to 2021, with 14 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 89.100 % in 1977 and a record low of 44.000 % in 2021. India IN: Poverty Headcount Ratio at $3.65 a Day: 2017 PPP: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s India – Table IN.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65 a day is the percentage of the population living on less than $3.65 a day at 2017 international prices.;World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are mostly from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see http://pip.worldbank.org.;;The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than 2000 household surveys across 169 countries. See the Poverty and Inequality Platform (PIP) for details (www.pip.worldbank.org).

BackgroundThough the concept of multidimensional poverty has been acknowledged cutting across the disciplines (among economists, public health professionals, development thinkers, social scientists, policy makers and international organizations) and included in the development agenda, its measurement and application are still limited. Objectives and MethodologyUsing unit data from the National Family and Health Survey 3, India, this paper measures poverty in multidimensional space and examine the linkages of multidimensional poverty with child survival. The multidimensional poverty is measured in the dimension of knowledge, health and wealth and the child survival is measured with respect to infant mortality and under-five mortality. Descriptive statistics, principal component analyses and the life table methods are used in the analyses. ResultsThe estimates of multidimensional poverty are robust and the inter-state differentials are large. While infant mortality rate and under-five mortality rate are disproportionately higher among the abject poor compared to the non-poor, there are no significant differences in child survival among educationally, economically and health poor at the national level. State pattern in child survival among the education, economical and health poor are mixed. ConclusionUse of multidimensional poverty measures help to identify abject poor who are unlikely to come out of poverty trap. The child survival is significantly lower among abject poor compared to moderate poor and non-poor. We urge to popularize the concept of multiple deprivations in research and program so as to reduce poverty and inequality in the population.

In 2022, the total male population living in poverty in India was about ** million. By contrast, the number of females in poverty during the same time period was around ** million.

Graph and download economic data for Estimated Percent of Related Children Age 5-17 in Families in Poverty for Indian River County, FL (PP5T17FL12061A156NCEN) from 1989 to 2023 about Indian River County, FL; Sebastian; 5 to 17 years; family; FL; percent; child; poverty; and USA.

44.80 (%) in 2019. Population below $3.1 a day is the percentage of the population living on less than $3.1 a day at 2005 international prices. As a result of revisions in PPP exchange rates, poverty rates for individual countries cannot be compared with poverty rates reported in earlier editions.

Data on poverty & hunger in India - undernourishment, wasting and stunting in children, global hunger index, and more.

Agricultural Offtake: Bihar: Rice: TPDS: Below Poverty Line (BPL) data was reported at 0.102 Ton th in Jun 2014. This records a decrease from the previous number of 1.320 Ton th for May 2014. Agricultural Offtake: Bihar: Rice: TPDS: Below Poverty Line (BPL) data is updated monthly, averaging 87.533 Ton th from Oct 2011 (Median) to Jun 2014, with 33 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 144.946 Ton th in May 2013 and a record low of 0.102 Ton th in Jun 2014. Agricultural Offtake: Bihar: Rice: TPDS: Below Poverty Line (BPL) data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Department of Food & Public Distribution. The data is categorized under India Premium Database’s Agriculture Sector – Table IN.RII015: Agricultural Offtake under Targeted Public Distribution System (TPDS): Rice: by States .

These files contain all the data used in the publication "Poverty or Prosperity in Northern India? New Evidence on Real Wages, 1590s-1870s". This paper introduces a new dataset on wages in northern India (from Gujarat in the West to Bengal in the East) from the 1590s to the 1870s. It follows Allen’s subsistence basket methodology to compute internationally comparable real wages to shed light on developments in Indian living standards over time, as well as to test some of the assumptions underlying the comparative real wage methodology. It adjusts the comparative cost of living indices to take into account differences in caloric intake due to variances in heights. Furthermore, the paper discusses the male/female wage gap in northern India. We demonstrate that the Great Divergence started somewhere in the late seventeenth century. This gap widens further after the 1720s and especially after the 1800s. It is subsequently primarily England’s spurt and India’s stagnation in the first half of the nineteenth century which brought about most serious differences in the standard of living in Eurasia. If the British colonial state is to blame – as often happens in the literature on India’s persistent poverty – it is in their failure to improve the already deteriorated situation after they had become the near-undisputed masters of India since 1820.

The dataset contains Year and State wise Poverty Rate-Number of Persons and Percentage

Lakdawala Methodology: An older method to measure poverty in India based on minimum calorie intake (2,400 rural / 2,100 urban). It used a 30-day recall for all expenses but did not include health and education costs.

Tendulkar Methodology:A revised method that considers actual spending on food, health, education, etc. It uses a mixed recall period and provides a more realistic estimate of poverty.

Mixed Recall Period: Combines two recall periods: 30 days for regular items and 365 days for infrequent ones. This helps reduce errors and gives a better picture of total household spending.

30-Day Recall Period: Collects data based on what households spent in the last 30 days for all items. It may miss big or occasional expenses and can underestimate actual consumption.

Explore gender statistics data focusing on academic staff, employment, fertility rates, GDP, poverty, and more in the GCC region. Access comprehensive information on key indicators for Bahrain, China, India, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia.

academic staff, Access to anti-retroviral drugs, Adjusted net enrollment rate, Administration and Law programmes, Age at first marriage, Age dependency ratio, Cause of death, Children out of school, Completeness of birth registration, consumer prices, Cost of business start-up procedures, Employers, Employment in agriculture, Employment in industry, Employment in services, employment or training, Engineering and Mathematics programmes, Female headed households, Female migrants, Fertility planning status: mistimed pregnancy, Fertility planning status: planned pregnancy, Fertility rate, Firms with female participation in ownership, Fisheries and Veterinary programmes, Forestry, GDP, GDP growth, GDP per capita, gender parity index, Gini index, GNI, GNI per capita, Government expenditure on education, Government expenditure per student, Gross graduation ratio, Households with water on the premises, Inflation, Informal employment, Labor force, Labor force with advanced education, Labor force with basic education, Labor force with intermediate education, Learning poverty, Length of paid maternity leave, Life expectancy at birth, Mandatory retirement age, Manufacturing and Construction programmes, Mathematics and Statistics programmes, Number of under-five deaths, Part time employment, Population, Poverty headcount ratio at national poverty lines, PPP, Primary completion rate, Retirement age with full benefits, Retirement age with partial benefits, Rural population, Sex ratio at birth, Unemployment, Unemployment with advanced education, Urban population

Bahrain, China, India, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia

Follow data.kapsarc.org for timely data to advance energy economics research.