A REPORT ON MEASUREMENT OF UNEMPLOYMENT IN INDIA

PRESENTED BY: Sandeep Kumar Baranwal MA (Economics) Session 2009-11 Gokhale Institute Of Politics and Economics

Contents
Serial no Name of the topic 1 2 3 Reasons for the measurement of unemployment in India 4 5 Guidelines for the measurement of unemployment in India Types of unemployment in India Objective of the study Introduction to the measurement of unemployment

6 7 8 9

Measurement of unemployment in India: an Introduction General measurement of unemployment in India Concepts and definitions adopted in various important data sources Approaches to measurement of unemployment in India

10

Three approaches to measurement of unemployment in India: in a nutshell

11

The detailed activity categories under each of the three broad activity statuses used in the survey

12

Sources of Data on Unemployment

13

Analysis of Approaches to Measurement of Unemployment in India

14 15

Recommendations for the measurement of unemployment in India Bibliography

Objectives of study
1. To gain insight of measurement of unemployment practices in India 2. To understand the procedure for estimation of unemployed population under different types of unemployment 3. To understand the difference between different types of measurement of unemployment in India 4. To identify the target population that needs immediate government attention 5. To gain insight about difficulties faced in estimation of unemployment in India 6. To gain insight in the areas of unemployed population 7. To suggest an appropriate change in the measurement of unemployment in India in context of globalization.

Reasons of measurement of unemployment in India
1. To address the problem of unemployment 2. To identify the causes of unemployment in India 3. To undertake appraisal of government policy vis-à-vis employment generation in the economy 4. To identify the sectors with labor-intensive technology 5. To decide on pattern of investment expenditure on education 6. To identify the trends and pattern of unemployment in India during the planning era 7. To identify the scope for promotion of various sectors through state support such that they contribute to the employment growth of the country 8. To identify the manners in which fiscal expansionary policy is framed such that short term employment generation and opportunities be created to immediately address the problem of unemployment 9. To foster planning for balanced regional development 10. To discover the structure of unemployment and their implications on various socio-economic parameters 11. For designing poverty alleviation programs that target the unemployed, the daily status measure would seem to provide the best estimate of unemployment, since it is the poor who are likely to experience short spells of unemployment rather than the nonpoor who can afford to stay unemployed longer.

Guidelines for the Measurement of Unemployment India
1. In measuring unemployment in a country like India, certain specific features of the workforce need to be taken into account. They are: 2. The sample size of the unemployed should be such that the characteristics exhibited by them should be representative of the entire population. 3. The field workers should be efficient. 4. A time for the survey should be selected such that there exists less of mobility of the people in that time period. 5. Use of information technology and satellite pictures shall be used to get the information about the density of the population in a given region. 6. While recording information about the unemployment, the interviewee should be also asked about their highest educational qualification and areas of interest. 7. The unemployed people should be asked to report about their unemployment in the office of Employment Exchange.

Types of unemployment in India
India as a nation is faced with massive problem of unemployment. Unemployment can be defined as a state of worklessness for a man fit and willing to work. It is a condition of involuntary and not voluntary idleness. Some features of unemployment have been identified as follows: 1. The incidence of unemployment is much higher in urban areas than in rural areas. 2. Unemployment rates for women are higher than those for men. 3. The incidence of unemployment among the educated is much higher than the overall unemployment. There is greater unemployment in agricultural sector than in industrial and other major sectors. Economists and social thinkers have classified unemployment into various types. Generally unemployment can be classified in two types: (1) Voluntary unemployment In this type of unemployment a person is out of job of his own desire doesn't work on the prevalent or prescribed wages. Either he wants higher wages or doesn't want to work at all. It is in fact social problem leading to social disorganization. Social problems and forces such as a revolution, a social upheaval, a class struggle, a financial or economic crisis a war between nations, mental illness, political corruption mounting unemployment and crime etc. threaten the smooth working of society. Social values are often regarded as the sustaining forces of society. They contribute to the strength and stability of social order. But due to rapid social change new values come

up and some of the old values decline. At the same time, people are not is a position to reject the old completely and accept the new altogether. Here, conflict between the old and the new is the inevitable result which leads to the social disorganization in imposed situation. In economic terminology this situation is voluntary unemployment. (2) Involuntary unemployment In this type of situation the person who is unemployed has no say in the matter. It means that a person is separated from remunerative work and devoid of wages although he is capable of earning his wages and is also anxious to earn them. Forms and types of unemployment according to Hock are: 1. Cyclical unemployment - This is the result of the trade cycle which is a part of the capitalist system. In such a system, there is greater unemployment and when there is depression a large number of people are rendered unemployed. Since such an economic crisis is the result of trade cycle, the unemployment is a part of it. 2. Sudden unemployment - When at the place where workers have been employed there is some change, a large number of persons are unemployed. It all happens in the industries, trades and business where people are employed for a job and suddenly when the job has ended they are asked to go. 3. Unemployment caused by failure of Industries - In many cases, a business a factory or an industry has to close down. There may be various factors responsible for it there may be dispute amongst the partners, the business may give huge loss or the business may not turn out to be useful and so on.

4. Unemployment caused by deterioration in Industry and business In various industries, trades or business, sometimes, there is deterioration. This deterioration may be due to various factors. In efficiency of the employers, keen competitions less profit etc. are some of the factors responsible for deterioration in the industry and the business. 5. Seasonal unemployment - Certain industries and traders engage workers for a particular season. When the season has ended the workers are rendered unemployed. Sugar industry is an example of this type of seasonal unemployment. The problem of unemployment has becoming a colossal. Various problems have caused this problem. There are individual factors like age, vocational unfitness and physical disabilities which restrict the people. External factors include technological and economic factors. There is enormous increase in the population. Every year India adds to her population afresh. More than this every year about 5 million people become eligible for securing jobs. Business field is subject to ups and downs of trade cycle and globalization. Economic depression or sick industries are often close down compelling their employees to become unemployed. Technological advancement contributes to economic development .But unplanned and uncontrolled growth of technology is causing havoc on job opportunities. The computerization and automation has led to technological unemployment. Strikes and lockouts have become inseparable aspect of the industrial world today. Due to these industries often face economic loses and production comes down. Since workers do not get any salary or wages during the strike period they suffer from economic hardships. They become permanently or temporarily unemployed. Today young people

are not ready to take jobs which are considered to be socially degrading or lowly. Our educational system has its own irreparable defects and its contribution to the unemployment is an open truth. Our education does not prepare the minds of young generation to become self-employed on the contrary it makes them dependent on government vacancies which are hard to come. Our State right from the beginning of Five year plans has introduced several employment generating schemes and programmes over the years but in the absence of proper implementation and monitoring have failed to achieve the required targets. Recently UPA Government has come up with Rural Employment Guarantee program which aims to provide minimum days of employment to people living in the villages. This is a laudable programme if implemented sincerely because it will provide employment to people during natural calamities like drought, floods etc. The remedial measures for reducing unemployment may lay greater emphasis on creation of opportunities for self employment, augmentation of productivity and income levels of the working poor, shift in emphasis from creation of relief type of employment to the building up of durable productive assets in the rural areas and instead of attempting to revert somewhat to protectionist policies the pace of privatization may be accelerated.

Measurement of unemployment in India: an Introduction
The National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO), which provides estimates of the rates of unemployment on the basis of its quinquennial surveys, uses three different concepts. A person is considered unemployed on Usual Status (US) basis, if he/she was not working, but was either seeking or was available for work for the major part of the reference year. On the basis of a week as the reference period, a person is considered unemployed by Current Weekly Status (CWS), if he/she had not worked even for one hour during the week, but was seeking or was available for work. The third concept of unemployment is the Current Daily Status (CDS), which is in terms of total person days of unemployment, and is the aggregate of all the unemployment days of all persons in the labor force during the reference week. Thus, unemployment is measured through labor force surveys which elicit the `activity¶ status of the respondent for a given reference period. First, the respondent is identified as not working. Second, for those not working, the typical question is of the form: are you available for work, and have you made some effort to find work during the last x days. Those who answer in the affirmative are the unemployed while those who answer in the negative are the people who have opted out of the labor force. The labor force is the sum of the employed and the unemployed and the rate of unemployment is the proportion of labor force that is unemployed. The reference period could vary from a week, to four weeks to a year. Such an approach works well when the activity status is invariant within the reference period, i.e., either the person is employed, unemployed or out of the labor force.

Beginning with the 27th round in 1972/73, labor force surveys have been conducted every five years using standardized concepts and procedures based on the recommendations of the Committee of Experts (Planning Commission, 1970). The usual status unemployment measure is defined with respect to a reference period of a year. The multiple activity status issue, which is more acute longer the reference period, is resolved on the basis of majority time. This criterion is used first to classify a person as either belonging to the labor force (i.e., employed or unemployed) or not belonging to the labor force. If the person belongs to the labor force, then whether the person is to be classified as employed or unemployed is decided once again on majority time. The survey also uses a reference period of a week to compute a `weekly¶ status unemployment measure. Here a person is regarded as employed if she or he worked for at least one hour during the reference week. It follows that a person is unemployed if she or he did not work for even one hour during the reference week and sought work or was available for work during the reference week. Clearly, the usual status measure reflects only long unemployment spells. For instance, a male in the working age group (who is never out of the labor force) would be unemployed on the usual status measure only if the unemployed spell during the year is longer than the employed period. While, the weekly status measure captures short unemployment periods, it ignores unemployment for less than a week. A third approach is to abandon the effort to assign every individual a unique activity status over the reference period. The NSS employment survey elicits an individual¶s time disposition during each day of the reference week. A day is split into two half-units and an individual is assigned a unique activity status for that period (rather than the reference week). This information can be used to compute person days of unemployment in the economy. As households are surveyed uniformly throughout the year, the aggregates derived

from weekly data are representative of annual aggregates. The `daily¶ status rate of unemployment is the proportion of labor force (measured in person days) that is unemployed (also in person days). For most of the labor force work is seasonal, short-term and without tenure. Consequently, an individual¶s activity status can vary even within as short of a reference period as a week. The daily status unemployment rate would therefore seem the appropriate one for capturing their unemployment.

General Measurement of Unemployment in India
There are basically two categories of measurement of unemployment. They are:
Claimant Count

This method of calculating unemployment was widely used in the 1980s as well as the 1990s. This method, basically takes account of the number of heads unemployed and receiving unemployment benefits. Computation should be done with care since there may be double counting of people who have registered themselves in employment exchanges and those who are receiving the unemployment benefits. The method has two advantages of calculating unemployment by using administrative records. Firstly, this method takes a complete count of the unemployed and so it is free from any sampling error. Secondly, obtaining such data is also very cost effective and is available on a regular basis. However, this method of computation is fraught with certain limitations. The collection of data follows administrative rules and regulations, which may not be in line with statistical principles. Again, since different countries follow different computational rules, it is difficult to compare the unemployment statistics across different countries. Another difficulty is that the rules tend to change over time and so the unemployment data cannot be compared across different time horizons. Another disadvantage of using the claimant count as a measure of unemployment is that it takes into account only that portion of the population, which has registered themselves in the employment exchanges or has claimed unemployment benefit. The individuals who have not registered in both but are unemployed are left out of

the unemployment count of the administrative records. Hence, the administrative records give a lower estimate of the actual employment scenario. The above-mentioned limitations of administrative records gave rise to the most current computation method, that of Labor Force Survey.
Labor Force Survey

The Labor Force Survey is done by taking household samples. A standard questionnaire is prepared. All individuals in the workable age are asked about their employment status and the relevant data is taken. Individuals are next classified into employed, unemployed or economic active. The sample data is then utilized to estimate the number of individuals employed, unemployed or underemployed. The labor force survey also has many disadvantages. The use of standard questionnaire is itself faulty. The respondents may provide subjective answers, which in some case may be misleading. Next, the sampling method has many statistical errors, which gets magnified with smaller size of the sample. Again a well-equipped statistical infrastructure is mandatory for a more accurate collection of data. Experienced supervisors and interviewers are required. The greatest advantage of this computational method is that they meet international standards. Unemployment statistics obtained hence can be used to compare data across countries and across different periods of time.

Concepts and Definitions adopted in Various Important Data Sources
One of the serious problems in this field is the use of different concepts and definitions and employment and unemployment in different sources such as NSSO and census and in the same source also it has changed over time. This makes the comparison of data among various sources quite difficult. However, efforts have been made by various sources to standardize the definitions, particularly NSS, to ensure comparability of data over time. Brief description of changes in the concepts and definitions in two main sources, namely census and NSSO, are discussed below. (i) Population Census The data on economic activity of the people collected up to the 1951 census were based on income and dependency concepts. From the 1961 census onward, the concept of work measured in terms of time or the labor force concept has been followed. In 1961 census, in case of seasonal work, a person was considered as a worker if he/she had some work of more than one hour a day throughout the greater part of the working season. In the case of regular work, the person should have been employed during any of the fifteen days preceding the day on which the enumerator had visited the household. In 1971 census, every person was asked what his main activity was, i.e. how he/she engaged himself mostly. On the basis of this question the population was divided into two main activities as ³workers´ and µnonworkers¶. The reference period adopted was one week prior to the date of enumeration in the case of regular work. If a person had participated in any such regular work on any one of the days during

this reference period and this has been returned as his main activity, the person was categorized accordingly. In the case of seasonal workers, a person¶s main activity was ascertained with reference to such work in the last one year even if the person was not economically active in the week prior to the enumeration because it may be likely that even when a person is engaged in some work during the period of one week prior to the date of enumeration, the main activity of the person may be cultivation, agricultural labor or some other work attended to normally by the person in the course of the year. Every person whether he or she had returned himself or herself in any of the basically non-working category was required to state his or her secondary work. Each person was asked if besides the main activity, the person had participated in any secondary work. The economic question of the 1981 census were formulated so as to first divide the population into those who had worked any time at all during the year preceding the census and those who had not worked at all during the year. The latter were termed as non-workers. Having classified the population into these broad groups, an attempt was made to sub-divide those who had worked any time into two groups: (I) main workers- those who had worked in some economic activity for the major part of the year, i.e. for a period of six months (183 days) or more; and (ii) marginal workers- those who had worked for some time during the last year, but not for the major part. An attempt was also made to find out whether those who were non-workers or those who were marginal workers seeking or available for work. Thus, a trichotomy of persons into mutually exclusive groups of main workers, marginal workers and non-workers was introduced in the 1981 census. A uniform reference period of one-year preceding the enumeration was adopted for recording activity status in the 1981 census irrespective of whether the activity was seasonal or regular. In the 1991 census, a uniform reference period of

one year for both seasonal and regular activities was adopted as in 1981 census. With a view to net persons engaged in unpaid work on farm or in family enterprise, the word ³Including unpaid work on farm or in family enterprise´ was inserted in the schedule itself. The question of seeking/available for work was asked only for non-workers. In case of non-workers seeking/available for work, information whether they are seeking/available for work for the first time or not was also ascertained so as to know the number of entrants to the labor force for the first time. In order to ensure that the economic activity of unpaid workers on farm or in family enterprise (women, children are the predominant constituent of this force) properly enumerated in the 1991 census, the instructions to census enumerators were expanded and emphasis was laid on the need to ask probing questions regarding the work done at any time at all last year or any of the seasons in the reference period specially in the case of women. Though the questionnaire of 2001 Population Census is not yet finalized, the economic questions to be asked are likely to be same as asked in 1991 census. (ii) National Sample Survey Organization Concept of work: The NSSO has defined µwork¶ or µgainful activity¶ as the activity pursued for pay, profit or family gain or in other words, the activity which adds value to the national product. Normally, it is an activity, which results in production of goods and services for exchange. However, all activities in µagricultural sector¶ in which a part or whole of the agricultural production is used for own consumption and does not go for sale are also considered as gainful.

Approaches to Measurement of Unemployment in India
The NSSO survey has adopted three different approaches to measure employment and unemployment. The three approaches are: (1) Usual status approach with a reference period of 365 days preceding the date of survey. (2) Current weekly status approach with a reference period of seven days preceding the date of survey. (3) Current daily status approach with each day of the seven days preceding date of survey as the reference period. This approach attempts classification of persondays and not persons. The NSS classifications of economic activity are based on the recommendations of Expert Committee on Unemployment Estimates (1970) set up by the Planning Commission. The estimates are generated separately for four quarters of year. These quarters are almost co-terminus with four µseasons¶. This helps to study the seasonal pattern of employment and unemployment. (a) Classification according to Usual Status Approach The status of activity on which a person has spent relatively longer time of the preceding 365 days prior to the date of survey is considered to be the usual principal activity status of the person. Accordingly, a person¶s principal usual status was considered as working or employed if he or she is engaged relatively for a longer time during the reference period of last 365 days, in any one or more of the work activities. A person was treated as Seeking or Available for Work or unemployed if he or she was not working but was either seeking or available for work for a relatively longer time of the specified reference period. Similarly, one was classified as µnot in labor force¶, if he or she was engaged in relatively longer

period in any one of the non-gainful activities. Within the two broad activity categories ³working´ and ³not in labor force´, the detailed activity category was determined on the basis of time spent criterion. A person categorized as µworker¶ on the basis of his/her principal status is referred to as µprincipal status worker¶. A non-worker who pursued some gainful activity in a subsidiary capacity is referred to as µsubsidiary status worker¶. Principal status workers and subsidiary status workers together constitute µall workers¶ according to the usual status classification. The usual status concept covering the principal and subsidiary workers is the closest to the concept used in the Census to enumerate workers. By including even those who are not principal workers but work in a subsidiary capacity, e.g., students, pensioners, etc., the usual status concept comprehensively covers all those engaged in or seeking economic activities. In a situation where social security in the form of a reasonable and assured support as allowance for unemployment is not guaranteed, those who take to work in a subsidiary capacity do so generally out of economic compulsion. Hence both the Principal and the Subsidiary workers need to be considered in estimating both the labor force and employment. Moreover the usual status concept; with one year as the reference period over which disposition of time to activities is seen in classifying an individual as being in or out of labor force, and those in labor force as being employed or seeking work, yields more stable estimates of employment in contrast to the other two concepts which have shorter reference periods of a week or an average day of the week respectively. Taking the usual status concept as the reference, it is possible to study the nature and characteristics of those employed, using the information available from the data compiled on current weekly and current daily status concepts bases

(b) Classification according to current weekly status approach For classification of the population under current weekly status approach, a priority-cum-major time rule has been adopted. According to the criteria, status of µworking¶ gets priority over status of µnot working¶ or µbeing available for work¶. Status of µseeking or being available for work¶ in turn gets priority over nongainful activities pursued. When a person is found to be possessing more than one gainful activity, the unique activity is decided as that activity on which relatively more time has been spent. A person is considered to be employed if he or she pursues any one or more of the gainful activities for at least one-hour on any day of the reference week. On the other hand, if a person does not pursue any gainful activity, but has been seeking or available for work, the person is considered as unemployed. (c) Classification according to current daily status approach Under this approach, all the activities of a person are listed on each day of the preceding week. Up to two statuses were recorded for each day of the reference week for persons pursuing more than one activity during the seven days of the reference week. The unit of classification is µhalf day¶. Under this concept, a person is considered as µworking¶ (employed) for the entire day if he had worked four hours or more during the day. If he had worked for one hour or more, but less than four hours, he is considered as working for half day and µseeking/available for work¶ (unemployed) and not in labor force for other half of the day, depending on whether he was seeking or available for work or not. If a person is not engaged in any work, even for one hour on the day, but was seeking/available for work for four hours or more, he is considered unemployed for the entire day. If he is available for work for less than four hours only, he is considered as unemployed for half day and not in labor force for other half day. A person who neither had any work to do nor was µavailable for work even for half of the day¶ is considered µ not

in labor force¶ for the entire day. The aggregate of µ day units¶, either half or full, under the different activity categories during the reference week divided by seven provides the estimates of average number of person days by activity category during an average week over the survey period on one year.

Three approaches to measurement of unemployment in India: in a nutshell
(1) 'Usual Status' approaches: This is based on the status of the activity on which a person spent the majority of the 365 days preceding the date of the survey. A person is considered to be 'working or employed' if he/she was engaged for a relatively longer time during the past year in any one or more work-related (economic) activities. A person is considered to be 'seeking or available' for work or 'unemployed' if the person was not working but was either seeking or available for work for a relatively longer period of time during the past year. (2) 'Current Weekly Status' approaches: A person is considered to be working or employed if the person was engaged for at least one hour on any one day of the previous week on any work related (economic) activity. A person who has not worked for even one hour on any one day of the week, but has been seeking or has been available for work at any time for at least one hour during the week, is considered to be 'seeking/available for work' (unemployed). Others are considered to be 'not available for work' (not in the labor force). (3) 'Current Daily Status' approach: This approach attempts to classify employment by person-days, rather than by persons. A person is considered to be 'working' (employed) for the entire day if he/she has worked 4 hours or more during the day. If a person has worked one hour or more, but less than 4 hours, he/she is considered to be 'employed' for half the day, and 'seeking/available for work' (unemployed) or 'not available for work' (not in the labour force) for the other half of the day depending on whether he/she is seeking or available for work. The data are obtained through sample surveys conducted by the National Sample

Survey Organisation (NSSO). Every fifth year, the sample size is of the order of 120,000 households. In intervening years, the sample size is of the order of 40,000 households. Each survey is divided into four sub-rounds, with each sub-round of three months duration. (The results of each sub-round are not presently compiled separately.) The survey covers the whole of the rural and urban areas of India, except for a few inaccessible and difficult pockets. The activity status of each person in the household is collected with reference to the previous 365 days, the previous 7 days and daily for 7 days. Note: Labor market data do not have the same macroeconomic implications for India as they do for highly industrialized countries in the sense that they are not considered to be useful indicators of short-run pressures on the economy, particularly in view of the substantial proportion of value-added generated by the agricultural sector and the structure of that sector.

The detailed activity categories under each of the three broad activity statuses used in the survey
WORKING (OR EMPLOYED) 1. worked in a household enterprise (self-employed) as an own-account worker; 2. worked in a household enterprise (self-employed) as an employer; 3. worked in a household enterprise (self-employed) as µhelper¶; 4. worked as a regular salaried/wage employee; 5. worked as a casual wage labor in public of works; 6. worked as a casual wage labor in other types of works; 7. Did not work due to sickness though there was work in household enterprise; 8. Did not work due to other reasons though there was work in household enterprise; 9. Did not work due to sickness but had regular salaried/wage employment; 10. did not work due to other reasons but had regular salaried/wage employment, NOT WORKING BUT AVAILABLE FOR WORK (OR

UNEMPLOYED) 11. sought work, 12. Did not seek but was available for work. NEITHER WORKING NOR AVAILABLE FOR WORK (OR NOT IN LABOUR FORCE) 13. attended educational institutions; 14. attended domestic duties only;

15. Attended domestic duties and was also engaged in free collection of goods (vegetables, roots, fire-wood, cattle feed, etc.,) tailoring, weaving etc., for household use. 16. rentiers, pensioners, remittance recipients, etc., 17. not able to work due to disability; 18. beggars, prostitutes etc; 19. others; 20. did not work due to sickness (for casual workers only) 21. Children of age 0 ± 4 years. (Sl.no. 7,8,9,10,12 and 20) are applicable only in the case of current weekly and current daily status approaches.) Further, the population as belonging to different economic activity categories was classified independently by adopting three different approaches, namely: (i) (ii) (iii) the usual status approach the current daily approach and the current weekly status approach

Sources of Data on Unemployment
The statistics on unemployment can be collected either through censuses of population and economic establishments and national level sample surveys, or through returns under various Acts relating to regulation of economic establishments regarding workers, etc. Employment Exchanges recording job seekers, etc., can be another source. A brief description of various sources is given below. (i) Population Census It has been the tradition in the population census of India to collect information on the economic activity of the people. The Census data provide an inventory of human resources of the country showing their number, characteristics, occupation and distribution among various branches of economy. The measurement of economic activity has been attempted in every census of the country even though there has been variation in the concepts adopted from time to time. (ii) National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO) The NSSO collects data through sample surveys based on scientific technique of random sampling through household enquiry both in rural and urban areas. In a number of earlier rounds, the NSSO has experimented with various concepts and methodologies in trying out and standardizing a proper framework to estimate, in quantitative terms, the characteristics of labor force, employment, unemployment and under-employment. The experimental surveys were followed by regular annual sample surveys till late sixties. Afterwards, the quinquennial surveys started in 27t h round (1972-73), with the follow up surveys in 32nd round (1977-78), 38t h round (1983) and 43rd round (1987-88) and 50t h Round (1993-94). The NSSO

now also gives annual estimate of employment and unemployment on the basis of a thin sample. (iii) Employment Market Information Programme The Directorate General of Employment and Training (DGET) has been implementing the Employment Market Information (EMI) scheme over the last 30 years through a net-work of Employment Exchanges spread over the country. This programme covers the organized sector, which includes all establishments in the public sector and non-agricultural establishments employing ten or more persons in the private sector. While data on employment in the public sector and those nonagricultural establishments in the private sector employing more than 25 persons are collected under the provisions of Employment Exchanges (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1959, the same from the nonagricultural Establishments in the private sector employing ten to 24 persons are being collected on a voluntary basis. The EMI is one of the important sources of information on employment in the organized sector of the economy. It also provides information about the structure of employment, occupational compositions and educational profile of employees, assessment of manpower shortages in the organized sector, etc. one of the major limitations of EMI is that it does not cover the vast unorganized sector with enough employment avenues. (iv) Employment Exchange Statistics

The day-to-day registration at Employment Exchanges and notification of vacancies by the employers generate comprehensive information, which facilitates the appraisal of organized labor market. The statistical returns from Employment Exchanges relating to various characteristics of job seekers fresh or otherwise, and the demand pattern of employment in industry and service sectors provide only a broad indication of the unemployment situation in the organized labor market.

However, as registration is voluntary and they are located in urban areas, they cannot be deemed to cover all job seekers. Further there are known deficiencies arising from the fact that not all the registrants would be really without a job. Moreover, the number of job seekers is not necessarily the number of unemployed persons. (v) Economic Census Under the scheme of Economic Census and Surveys, a country-wide census of all non-agricultural economic activities was carried out during 1977 to provide basic information on the number of establishments, number of persons usually working, the nature of activities and other characteristics such as type of ownership, social group of owner, etc., of the establishments. The census did not cover own-account and agricultural enterprises. An establishment for the purpose of economic census has been defined as one engaged in production and/or distribution of goods and/or services not for the sole purpose of own consumption and employing at least one hired worker on a fairly regular basis. The economic census of 1980 was dovetailed with the house listing operations of the population census of 1981 covering all types of enterprises, viz., establishments and own account enterprises. Four follow-up surveys have also been conducted till now. The economic census of 1990 was conducted along with the house listing operations of 1991 population census. The last economic census was conducted during 1998. The economic census gives employment by type of enterprise, distribution of employment by major activity group, distribution or persons usually working in non-agricultural own account enterprises by States and rural-urban break-up, percentage distribution of hired workers and females employed to persons usually working in non-agricultural establishments, etc.

Analysis of Approaches to Measurement of Unemployment in India
Although, the approaches to measurement of unemployment in India such as usual status, weekly status and daily status of recording and estimating the level of unemployment on scientific lines , yet such approaches do not estimate the level of unemployment appropriately. Keeping in the objectives of estimating unemployment level in the country, the level of unemployment figures generated with the use of such approaches serves little of a purpose. The unemployment problem in India is related to the poverty problem and the problem of human capital formation which has significant repercussions on the rate of growth of economy, saving rate, investment rate, extent of inequalities in distribution of income and wealth prevailing in the society. Weekly and daily approaches are not without faults. It states that even if the person is gainfully employed for an hour, he/she would be said to be employed. However, an appropriate concept of unemployment should consider not only the fact that the person was gainfully employed or not but also, whether their earnings for the hours employed fetched enough to support themselves and their families on reasonable standards. Given the context of globalization, which India entered into, there is appearing a shift in the trends and pattern of unemployment in favor of unemployed and educated youths. The unemployment record agencies are required to come up with an appropriate machinery to track such kind of unemployment on different lines. This is because they are different to the traditional form of unemployment. They are human

capitals; however in absence of general support for entrepreneurship and skill development and inadequacy of physical capital they could not significantly make contribution to the economic growth and development of the country.

Recommendations on Measurement of Unemployment in India
1. Revision of approach for estimating unemployment rate in the economy should be given an importance. 2. Different machinery should be set up to estimate the open unemployment among educated youths. 3. The concept of current weekly status approach to estimating unemployment should be given up. 4. The unemployment details should be broadened up to facilitate the target population specific programmes for solving unemployment problems. 5. The unemployment details should be related to the poverty estimates of the country. 6. A separate estimate of different categories of unemployed should be made for example an estimate of unemployment among street dwellers of a metropolitan city is made.

Bibliography
1. www.economywatch.com 2. www.isid.ac.in 3. ideas.repec.org 4. www.legco.gov.hk/ 5. www.jstor.org/stable/1818137 6. www.informaworld.com 7. www.cdedse.org/pdf/work174.pdf 8. www.icai.org/resource_file/16789ppui.pdf

Bibliography

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful