State-wise Ranking based on Social Development Factors

Presented by, Dileep Bajaj Kapil Sharma Anoop Nambiath Arif Ehsan Anshul Jain Areeb Ahmad 10DM-045 10HR-016 10IB-016 10IB-020 10IT-005 10IT-009

Agenda
Introduction HDI methodology HDI rankings Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social Welfare Index methodology Section wise components Section wise rankings Social Welfare Index rankings Limitations Conclusion

Introduction
Comparison of states based on social indicators 2 indices used HDI Social Welfare Index (Our own) HDI calculated by us based on 2008 data Social Welfare Index 6 sections including Female well being Convenience of living Health Income Poverty incidence Education

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Computing HDI
HDI rankings

HDI

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology

HEALTH

EDUCATION ATTAINMENT

COMMAND OVER RESOURCES

Sections components

/3

/3
COMBINED ENROLLMENT RATIO

/3
Section rankings

INFANT SURVIVAL RATE

LITERACY RATE

PER CAPITA INCOME

.0

2/3

/3

.0

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

METHODOLOGY
I rankings Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

METHODOLGY (cont..)
I rankings Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

HDI rankings 2008

TOP 5
State Goa Puducherry Kerala Chandigarh Delhi Human Development Index 0.8821 4622 0.77716028 0.7627 627 HDI Rank 1 2

HDI methodology

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

Section rankings

3 4 5
Social welfare index rankings

0.758 24119 0.690020107

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

HDI rankings 2008

BOTTOM 5

HDI methodology

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology

St t j sth Oriss M hy Pr sh sh

v l

tI

k 28

Sections components

0.25 215022 0.246 08418 0.2 10545 9 0.140615105 0.08147 957

Section rankings

29 30 31 32
Conclusion Social welfare index rankings

Utt r Pr Bih r

Limitations

Introduction

2005 Rankings
TOP 5
Rank 1 2 State/UT Chandigarh Kerala HDI 0.86 0.814 Rank 31

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

BOTTOM 5
State/UT Jharkhand HDI 0.513

Social welfare index methodology Sections components

32

Uttar radesh

3 4 5

Lakshadweep Mizoram Delhi

0.796 0.79 0.789

33 34 35

Madhya radesh Orissa Bihar

0.49

0.488

Section rankings
0.452 0.449

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

COMPUTING SOCIAL INDEX

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008

SOCIAL INDEX Per capita NDP

1/6 1/6

Education

Health
1/6

APL
1/6

Female Welfare
1/6

Convenience
1/6

Sections components

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

HDI m t odology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008

Education
1

Social w lfar ind x m t odology

T ac r ratio

1/6

Gross Enrol ratio

1/6

Lit racy rat

S ction rankings

2/

Social w lfar ind x rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Education
One of the most important parameters of social welfare and development Components Teacher student ratio Teachers per 1000 children of age group 5-14 ross enrollment ratio Total no. of students enrolled in classes 1st through 8th Literacy rate Limitation Total students data not completely available

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Education rankings
TOP 5 Education Rank
1 2 4 5

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

State
Mizoram Kerala Goa Delhi Himachal Pradesh

EDU IN
0.918028017 0.752889 57 0.678771486 0.62 129225 0.611079 98

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Education rankings
BOTTOM 5
Education Rank
25 26 27 28 29

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

State
Andhra Pradesh Jammu & Kashmir Uttar Pradesh Jharkhand Bihar

EDU IN
0.254208249 0.206510442 0.1927 87 0.187 720 5 0.00554427

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Income
Income
1

Per Capita State NDP

1

Introduction

Income
Indicates purchasing power

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008

Components Per capita state net domestic product at current prices Limitation Income disparities not considered coeff.

Social welfare index methodology

Section rankings

INI

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Income rankings
TOP 5
State
Goa Delhi Haryana Maharashtra Punjab

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology

PCSNDP in Per Capita Income Rank

0.979 1456 1 2 4 5 0.851655108 0.726640574 0.62829 909 0.624911557

Sections components

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Income rankings
BOTTOM 5
State
Jharkhand Manipur Uttar Pradesh ihar

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

PCSNDP in Per Capita Income Rank

0.255171205 0.2519 625 25 26 27 28 29

Madhya Pradesh 0.2122067 4 0.16144862 0

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Health

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology

Health
1

ISR
1/2

Birth Control
1/6

AIDS awareness
1/6

Doc density
1/6

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Health
Indicates physical and mental well being of society Components Infant survival ratio Inverse of IMR AIDS awareness Low HIV as % of population Population control inverse of population natural growth rate Doctor density no. of doctors per lakh population Limitation Life expectancy data not available for all states No. of hospital beds data not available

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Health rankings
TOP 5
State
Goa Kerala Manipur Delhi Nagaland

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology

Health index Health Rank

0.9870178 0.868 05184 0.768776 86 0.6 2026144 0.58407048 1 2 4 5

Sections components

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Health rankings
BOTTOM 5
State
Meghalaya Orissa Rajasthan Uttar Pradesh Madhya Pradesh

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

Health index Health Rank

0.16 707 25 0.1 574122 0.1216 1865 0.06477925 0.06088716 25 26 27 28 29

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Poverty
Poverty
1

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology

Above Poverty Line Index

1

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Poverty incidence
Indicates level of poverty in society

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008

Components APL index = 1 - BPL Limitation BPL data taken is for 2004

Social welfare index methodology

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Poverty rankings
TOP 5

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008

State
Jammu & Kashmir Punjab Himachal Pradesh Mizoram Goa

APL in
1 0.926829268 0.887804878 0.824 90244 0.795121951

Poverty Eradication Rank

1 2 4 5

Social welfare index methodology Sections components

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Poverty rankings
BOTTOM 5
Poverty Eradication Rank
25 26 27 28 29

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

State
Uttarakhand Jharkhand Chhattisgarh Bihar Orissa

APL in
0.16585 659 0.148780488 0.1 4146 41 0.12195122 0

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Female Welfare
1

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology

Sex ratio
1/2

Female Literacy Rate

1/2

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Female welfare
Indicates well being women in society Components Female literacy rate Sex ratio Limitation Maternal mortality rate data not available Female infanticide could not be considered

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Female welfare rankings

TOP 5
Female Welfare index
1 0.76 46989

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology

State
Kerala Mizoram Tamil Nadu Himachal Pradesh Manipur

Female Welfare Rank

1 2

Sections components

0.666 575 8 0.62 804419 0.61 510267 4 5

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Female welfare rankings

BOTTOM 5
Female Welfare Female Welfare index Rank
0.297120 07 0.295787 05 0.282624752 0.26914794 0.2501195 6 25 26 27

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

State
Jammu & Kashmir Haryana Arunachal Pradesh Uttar Pradesh Bihar

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

28 29
Conclusion

Introduction

Convenience
Convenience
1.0

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology

LP
1/2

Electricity
1/2

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Convenience
Indicates standard of living

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008

Components Village electrification % villages electrified LP density LP connections per 1000 population Limitation Only 2 factors considered

Social welfare index methodology

Section rankings

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Convenience rankings
TOP 5
State
Goa Delhi Himachal Pradesh Sikkim Punjab

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

Convenience index Convenience Rank

1 0.99 176181 0.877924564 0.856061 77 0.851289292 4 5 1 2

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Convenience rankings
BOTTOM 5
State
Tripura Meghalaya Orissa Bihar Jharkhand

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

Convenience index Convenience Rank

0. 0 68 047 0.247026024 0.2075 708 0.157986 6 0.0264 01 5 25 26 27 28 29

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Social Welfare Index rankings

TOP 5
State
Goa Kerala Delhi Mizoram Himachal Pradesh

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

SOCIAL INDEX
0.840 5555 0.799 96505 0.70900 0 2 0.68 56518 0.65889111

RANKING
1 2 3 4 5

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Social Welfare Index rankings

BOTTOM 5 State
Madhya Pradesh Orissa Uttar Pradesh Jharkha d Bihar

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 200 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

SOCIAL INDEX RANKING

0. 00569 0.260565429 0.2465461 2 0.20555 924 0.125 47521 25 26 27 2 29

Section rankings

Limitations

Conclusion

Introduction

Limitations
Data for Union Territories viz. Lakshadweep, Daman & Diu and Dadra & Nagar Haveli not available for HDI and SWI calculations Data for other Union territories not available for some parameters considered for SWI IMR used instead of life expectancy in HDI Literacy rate data used of 2001 forecasting not done

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

Section rankings

Low HIV incidence taken as AIDS awareness indicator Law and order situation not considered Education doesn t consider higher education facilities All six sections under SWI are given equal weightage
Conclusion Social welfare index rankings

Introduction

Conclusion
SWI and section rankings in sync with HDI rankings Surprise J&K topping low poverty incidence Expected Bihar bottoming the rankings in almost all indicators HDI - oa ranked 6th in 2005 grabs top spot in 2008 Higher per capita income and improvement in IMR HDI - Kerala moved from

HDI methodology

HDI rankings

Comparison 2005 vs 2008 Social welfare index methodology Sections components

1st

state(2005) to

2nd(2008)

Section rankings

HDI Chandigarh loses overall 1st position to oa Increase in IMR

Social welfare index rankings

Limitations

Data sources
CMIE database State Analysis Services http://www.planningcommission.gov.in/ http://megplanning.gov.in/MHDR/Human_De.pdf India Yearbook 2009

Microsoft Office

THANK YOU AND GO GOA