Multidimensional Poverty Index For The Poor in Guwahati City (Assam, India)

Journal of Social and Economic Development (2018) 20:43–
74 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40847-018-0057-3
RESEARCH PAPER
Multidimensional poverty index for the poor in

Guwahati city (Assam, India)
Nijara Deka1
Published online: 27 June 2018

© Institute for Social and Economic Change
2018
Abstract
The growth rate of population in Guwahati city had been continuously higher from 1971–
1981 to 1981–1991 periods. The city is the largest urban centre in Assam with 21.87% of
the total urban population of the state. The migration of population from outside the city
makes the city of Guwahati consists of some community centric settlements and fight over
urban land. In this article, a multidimensional poverty index (MPI) is developed for the
poor households in Guwahati city. The main objective of the study is to develop a multi-
dimensional poverty index for poor households in Guwahati city and to relate the same to
their income status and other variables. Two hypotheses have been formulated to under-
stand the quality of life of the poor city dwellers. Firstly, multidimensional poverty
of urban poor household in Guwahati city is related to their: (a) migration status; (b) work
status; (c) social Status; and (d) literacy status. Secondly, multidimensional poverty of
urban poor households in Guwahati city is not related to their income status. In the present
calculation of MPI, marginal deprivations of the slum dwellers are very high in assets,
housing, water, sanitation, occupation and adult education. Moreover, contribution of
occupation deprivation is highest to the total deprivation of the slum dwellers followed by
adult education and asset deprivation. Education has always been the most important
determinants of well-being of the people. The illiterate households are the most deprived
among all others.
Keywords Multidimensional poverty · Guwahati · Assam · Slum area and urban

deprivation
Introduction
Poverty in urban context has many dimensions. The complex and interlocked spatialities of
poverty in expanding cities in terms of eviction, demolition, gentrification, settlement and
resettlement create some classic difficulties in measuring poverty in urban context (Coe-
lho and Maringanti 2012). The proportion of urban dwellers living in poverty with poor
quality, overcrowded and often insecure housing, lacking adequate provision for
water,
* Nijara Deka
nijaradeka24@gmail.com
13 13
1
Centre for the Study of Regional Development, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India
13 13
4
Journal 20:43–of Social and Economic Development (2018) 20:43–4
of Social and Economic Development (2018)Journal
4
74 74 4
sanitation, drainage, and exposed to very high levels of environmental health risk is higher
than the proportion defined as poor by the official poverty line (Mitlin and Satterthwaite
2013).
The very promises of higher earnings and better living in urban areas draw millions
of migrants from rural hinterlands and other settlements to urban agglomerations. Poor
migrants join urban informal sector, which also adds another layer to the urbanization of
poverty. Urban poor are disproportionately concentrated in casual labour and among self-
employed in informal sector in India (Vakulabharanam and Motiram 2012). These people
sheltered themselves in existing settlements or squat in and around economic hubs within
the city limits or form new ones in the outer fringes of cities. Thus, slum forms in the cit-
ies. Inadequate housing and basic amenities and poor socio-economic outcomes are char-
acteristics of slum. However, these characteristics are not confined to slums only. But
the prevalence of these characteristics is found to be certainly accentuated within slums. In
India, not only the big metros, but also small cities contain slums and squatter settlements.
The deprivation characteristics of slums in metros are different from those of the small
cities.
In the literature, studies abound that focus on slums in big cities and metros, but there is
unfortunately dearth of small city studies on slums and urban poverty. Therefore, a study
focusing on the deprivation of poor in small cities may be useful in pointing out the basic
characteristics and deprivation in relation to urbanization in small cities, which may also
help policy makers to design more targeted and effective policy options.
In the present study, an attempt has been made to identify the deprivation character-
istics of the poor in Guwahati city of Assam, which is one of the prime cities in north-
east India. The city presents a good example to study the characteristics of deprivation
in relation to urbanization. As a prime city in north-east India and situating nearer to the
international borders,1 overlapping insurgency problems in the states of north-east, peculiar
physiography and geography of the city and the state and most importantly weak economic
base and underdeveloped characteristics of all the north-eastern states, make Guwahati a
different and complementary perspective to study deprivation suffered by the urban poor
households.
According to the Census 2011, in India 68% of urban households lived in houses with
good conditions, while the corresponding figure was 57% in slum areas and in Guwahati
only 55.09% of the households live in good condition houses in 2011. Moreover, the per-
centage of households having water from tap decreased from 31 to 28.49%, the figure for
river water and canal increased from 0.19 to 6% and drinking water from spring increased
from 3.28 to 7.54% during the period from 2001 to 2011 in Guwahati Metropolitan Area.
All these are the clear evidence of the deterioration of the living condition in the city.
Guwahati is a city of more than 9.5 lakh population2 and represents a social and politi-
cal environment as well as a different type of geography in which poverty is especially
complex and is defined by a number of interlocking deprivations. The annual population
growth rate of Guwahati city is analysed in Table 1.
The growth rate of population in Guwahati city had been continuously higher from
1971–1981 to 1981–1991 periods. In 1951–1961 also, the population growth rate was
1
North-east India shares only 2% of its border with the mainland of the country and the other 98% with the
international border of Bangladesh, China, Myanmar and Bhutan (Barua 2005).
2
According to Census of India 2011, the population of Guwahati city under the area of GMC jurisdiction
is 957,352.
Table 1 Population growth in Guwahati (annual population growth rate). Sources: (i) GMDA (2009:
12), and (ii) Census 2011 from files downloaded from
http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011census/population
_enumeration.aspx
Year GMCAa GMA excluding GMCA GMAb
Population CAGR (%) Population CAGR (%) Population CAGR
1951 43,615 – 53,774 – 97,389 –

1961 1,00,707 8.7 98,775 6.3 1,99,482 7.4
1971 1,23,783 2.1 1,68,436 5.5 2,93,219 3.9
1981 2,68,945 8.1 1,02,351 − 4.9 4,35,280 4.0
1991 5,84,342 8.1 61,827 − 4.9 6,46,169 4.0
2001 8,09,895 3.3 80,878 2.7 8,90,773 3.3
2011 9,63,429 1.8 85,998 0.6 9,68,549 0.8
Reprinted from “City Profile: Guwahati”, by Desai et al. (2014), CUE Working paper 24, Center for Urban
Equity. Ahmedabad
a
Guwahati Municipal Corporation Area (GMCA)
b
Guwahati Metropolitan Area (GMA)
high. The factor responsible for the higher rate of urbanization in the city was basically
due to the influx of Hindu refugee from Bangladesh,3 as the only developed city in the
state and also the shift of state capital from Shillong to Dispur in 1973 made people move
towards the city in search of better livelihood. The city is the largest urban centre in Assam
with 21.87% of the total urban population of the state.4 Nevertheless in 1971 Census,
59% of the city population has migrated from outside the city which decreased to 47% in
1991 census.5 The migration of population from outside the city makes the city of
Guwahati consists of some community centric settlements and fight over urban land.
In this article, a multidimensional poverty index (MPI) is developed for the poor house-
holds in Guwahati city. It also highlights the multidimensional poverty of different social
groups as well as of households with different characteristics. The main objective of the
study is to develop a multidimensional poverty index for poor households in Guwahati city
and to relate the same to their income status and other variables. Two hypotheses have
been formulated to understand the quality of life of the poor city dwellers. Firstly,
multidimensional poverty of urban poor household in Guwahati city is related to their:
(a) migration
3
Dass (1980) mentions that although it is not possible to establish it empirically, the rate of increase in
Assam’s population is far above India since 1901, during 1911–1921, when India’s population growth was
negative, population growth rate of Assam was 20.47 and during 1901–1941 Assam’s population as a per-
centage of India’s population increase from 1.38 to 2.10%.
4
According to Census 2011, urban population of the state of Assam is 4,398,542 and of Guwahati is
962,334.
5
Report of Rental Housing for the Urban Poor in Guwahati (Desai et al. 2012) mentioned that in 1971
census migration from within the Kamrup district (17%), indicating high rural–urban migration. Secondly,
migrant source was from outside Assam (16.9%). Of these interstate migrants, a large proportion were from
Bihar (41.9%), followed by West Bengal (12.6%), Rajasthan (10.4%), Meghalaya (10.2%) and Uttar
Pradesh (9.6%). Thirdly, intra-state migration from other districts of Assam (15%) and finally, a high
proportion of Guwahati’s migrants were from outside India (10.6%) due to the international borders
surrounding Assam. Of these international migrants, maximum were from what was East Pakistan at the
time (70%) followed by Nepal (15.5%) (Borgohain 2011).
status; (b) work status; (c) social status; and (d) literacy status. Secondly, multidimensional
poverty of urban poor households in Guwahati city is not related to their income status.
Conceptual and methodological background
The concept of poverty in general has two main uses, viz. in broader sense it describes the
well-being and in narrow sense it is the scarcity of income or consumption, which is
known as income poverty (Srivastava 2001). Yet in urban context, poverty is more
complex. Com- monly used indicators of poverty are the Monthly Per Capita Expenditure
(MPCE), which not only underestimates urban deprivation but also misleads the policy
makers by putting urban poverty line too low.6 Coelho and Maringanti (2012) have also
referred to the urban undercounting of poverty. According to them, the measurement of
urban poverty should include the tension resulted by the trade-off between the
advantages of residing in cities and the limited access to urban space and resources.
They also define the “urbanization without industrialization” which is a common feature
of the third world cities with increasing unemployment, falling real wages, increasing
prices, overcrowding and poor infrastructure, the migrants from rural area also
increasing which results in the spread of slum and
urbanization of poverty. Therefore, the multidimensional characteristics of urban poverty
include limited employment opportunities, inadequate residential condition, unhealthy
environments, limited social protection and limited health and education opportunities.7
All these characteristics are not static in nature. With the fast changes in urban living con-
ditions, the characteristic features of urban poverty also get altered. Moreover, each dimen-
sion of urban poverty also possesses some peculiar characteristics of their own.
Within the complex and multiple dimensions of urban deprivation, poverty becomes the
lack of people’s capabilities to function, which according to Amartya Sen (Robeyns 2003)
is the opportunities to undertake the action and activities that they want to engage in and
whom they want to be. Alkire (2002) explains the Sen’s capability approach and mentions
that equality should be in the space of capability rather than income space. She, however,
raises the question of how to measure the capabilities and refers to the need of
specification of valuation procedures and a framework for practical use of the capability
approach. But according to Alkire the issue of dimension of poverty also depends on the
availability of resource, data and cultural background.
Considering the multiple deprivations suffered by the poor and recognizing that the
development or deprivations are much more than just the expansion of income and wealth,
the Human Development Report of United Nation Development Programme (UNDP) also
introduced a new measure of development in 1990, i.e. Human Development Index (HDI).
Despite this shift, at the national level, most government defines poverty threshold lines by
household income.
The Rangarajan’s report on poverty in India (2014) itself mentioned that in terms
of the capability approach to the concept and measurement of poverty, some of the “capa-
bilities” or rather the lack thereof may not be tightly linked to the privately
purchased
6
See Mitlin and Satterthwaite (2013) Urban Poverty in the Global South Scale and Nature. London and
New York: Routledge Tylor & Francis Group.
7
See http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTURBANDEVELOPMENT/EXTUR
BANPOVERTY/0,,contentMDK:20227679~menuPK:7173704~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSi
tePK:341325,00.html [Accessed on 15/01/2014].
consumption basket in terms of which the poverty lines are currently drawn as “the worth
of a rupee in the hand of a households that has no literate person is a lot less than it is in
the hands of a household that has at least one literate” (Planning Commission 2014). In
India, till the Hashim Committee Report8 has been published in 2012, there is no standard
and separate methodology to identify the urban poor, and they are being identified on the
basis of the official poverty line of the Planning Commission. The main emphasize of the
Hashim Committee Report was on multidimensionality of urban deprivation and extent of
vulnerability.
In the present study also, an effort has also been made to construct a multidimensional
poverty index (MPI) for the households living in slum areas of Guwahati city following
the Alkire and Foster (2011) methodology (A/F) of poverty. Alkire and Santos (2010)
explained that the MPI developed by the A/F methodology combines two key pieces of
information to measure acute poverty: the incidence of poverty or the proportion of people
(within a given population) who experience multiple deprivations and the intensity of their
deprivation—the average proportion of (weighted) deprivations they experience.
Primary data and field survey
The present study is based on primary field survey in Guwahati city. The field study
includes detailed slum-specific information than what is available from the census and
other nationally representative surveys. According to Census of India 2001, the number of
household living in the slum areas of the city was 1863 which increased to 5883 in 2011
Census, which is more than three times within a decade. Yet, as mentioned by Bhan and
Jana (2013) the threshold for defining the slum area in Census of India makes only 14% of
the population of Assam reports to live in slum and even Manipur reports to have no slum
area. However, the GUW-RAY survey 20129 of Guwahati Municipal Corporation (GMC)
reports to have 26,090 slum households with slum population of 1.3 lakh in the city.
Selection of slum areas
The area of Guwahati city under the jurisdiction of GMC is divided into 60 municipal
wards, where, according to the Slum Profile of GMC, there are 217 slum areas, of which
101 are notified and 116 are non-notified slum. In 2001, there were 90 slums in the city,
and this number increased to 92 in 2009 according to the official record of GMC.
In Table 2, the characteristics of 13 most slum populated wards of Guwahati are ana-
lysed. Of these wards, ward numbers 3, 45, 41, 11 and 34 are selected for field survey.
The selections of wards are carried out to fulfil the two conditions, viz. geographical
coverage and wards containing most populated slum areas.
Ward number 3 contains the highest slum population, from which one notified, Pandu 6
Number Colony, and one non-notified, Dhakai Patty, slum areas are selected. The land
status of Dhakai Patty, according to Slum Profiling GUW-RAY of GMC, is encroached
public
8
To identify the below-the-poverty-line households in urban area in order to bring objectivity and trans-
parency in delivery of benefits to the target groups, the Planning Commission constituted an Expert Group
under the Chairmanship of Professor S.R. Hashim in 2010. The report submitted was The Report of the
Export Group to Recommend The Detail Methodology For Identification of Families Living Below Poverty
Line in the Urban Areas (Planning Commission 2012).
9
GUW-RAY survey 2012 is the latest slum area survey in Guwahati city done by GMC in 2012.
Table 2 Most slum populated wards in Guwahati city. Source: Slum profiling GUW-RAY of GMC 2012
Ward number Slum population Slum households Total number Notified slum Non-
of slum notified
slum
3 16,300 3260 6 4 2
23 15,000 3000 1 0 1
24 14,400 1950 2 2 0
12 12,539 2790 30 20 10
45 9300 1770 6 5 1
41 6500 1200 1 1 0
11 6050 1075 4 1 3
36 5040 505 5 3 2
5 4800 925 3 3 0
7 4082 707 9 2 7
6 3600 700 2 1 1
37 3050 460 4 4 0
34 2880 445 7 7 0
Bold values indicate the wards selected for the primary field survey
land, and land status of Pandu 6 Number Colony is 92.85% of households’ land status is
encroached public land and remaining households are on rent.
Next ward selected is ward number 41. It contains five notified and one non-notified
slum areas. One notified slum area, Bhaskar Nagar, is selected from this ward. Bhaskar
Nagar is one of the highly populated notified slum areas in the city, according to GMC
record. Bhaskar Nagar is also in public land. From ward number 45, Maila Tanky, which is
a non-notified slum area, is selected. Among non-notified slums, Maila Tanky is one of the
highly populated slums. It is also in public land.
From ward number 11, two non-notified slum areas were selected. This ward is one of a
very highly non-notified slum populated wards. Kalipur and Bhutnath Bagan were selected
from this ward. Most of the households in these two slum areas are on rented dwelling.
Ward number 34 contains the oldest slum areas of the city. From this ward, two notified
slum areas are selected. Uzanbazar Islampatty and Arikati Basti are the two slum areas
selected from this ward. Both these slums are reported to be in public land according to the
GMC record.
Survey design and sampling
A stratified multistage sampling design was adopted for the survey. In the first stage, five
wards were selected purposively in such a way that whole Guwahati city would be geo-
graphically covered and at the same time to make the sample more representative, wards
with maximum number of slum population were selected. Then in the second stage, eight
slums were selected randomly from each ward, in such a way that four notified and four
non-notified slums were selected in total. To select the slum areas from each respec-
tive ward, the latest slum profiling of the GMC was used. Finally, forty households were
selected from each selected slum according to stratified proportional-random sampling
method based on the religion groups in that slum area. In the absence of official record on
Table 3 Slum area surveyed in Guwahati city
Serial no. Slum area Ward no. Reason of selection
1 Dhakai Patty 3 Highest slum population in ward no. 3

2 Pandu 6 Number Colony 3 Highest slum population in ward no. 3
3 Uzanbazar Islampatty 34 Ward no 34 contains the oldest slum in Guwahati city
4 Arikati Basti 34 Ward no 34 contains the oldest slum in Guwahati city
5 Maila Tanky 45 Highly populated and very old (70 years) non-notified
slum
6 Bhaskar Nagar Basti 41 Highly populated notified slum
7 Kalipur 11 Known to be very dirty and highly populated non-notified
slum
8 Bhutnath Bagan 11 Known to be very congested non-notified slum
religion status of slum households in the city, the information on population who belongs
to different religions is collected from slum head man or any other senior person of the
respective slum areas.
The total number of households surveyed was 320. In Table 3, the selected 8 slums with
some of their important characteristics are mentioned. It was conducted in Guwahati city,
during the time period from October 2014 to January 2015. The survey used the interview
method using a detailed questionnaire for data collection.
Survey module
The survey questionnaires are designed to incorporate variables of importance for captur-
ing the deprivation characteristics of the urban poor. Here, the objective was to obtain rich
data on economic and non-economic behaviour of the urban poor to establish its links to
better measurement of urban poverty to fulfil the policy objective of reducing the poverty.
Hence, the questionnaires are used to collect information at two levels: the household level
and the individual level.
At household level, information was captured on religion, caste, ration card holding sta-
tus, type of housing and its ownership details, access to toilet of different types, drinking
water sources, electricity connection, migration status and government policies.
At individual level, information on detail of age, gender, occupation status, literacy sta-
tus, school detail and reason of school dropout. etc., is collected.
Alkire and Foster (AF) methodology of multidimensional poverty index (MPI)
In the present study, MPI is measured by using the AF methodology (Alkire 2011) double
cut-off method (Alkire 2011), viz. deprivation cut-offs and poverty cut-offs.
Deprivation cut-offs MPI first identifies those who are deprived in each indicator.
These deprivations are dichotomous: each person or household is identified as deprived
or non- deprived in each indicator with respect to a cut-off or threshold selected for each
indicator.
Poverty cut-off Once it has been identified who are deprived in each indicator,
the next step is to determine who is multidimensionally poor. This depends upon the
weighted sum of their deprivations. Having a single deprivation does not establish that
a person is multidimensionally poor. A deprivation might not necessarily indicate pov-
erty. So, a second cut-off has been set, which is called the “poverty cut-off” “k”.
The MPI is made up of two components, the multidimensionally deprived headcount,
H, and an adjusted measure, A, that represents the number of deprivations suffered, on
average, by the deprived section.
MPI = H × A
In the present study, MPI uses 12 indicators belonging to four dimensions (Table 4).
After determining the indicators and their respective cut-offs, the next step is to choose
weight for each of the indicators. In the present study, all the dimensions are equally
weighted, and within all dimensions all indicators are also equally weighted. So the
indicator i is weighted as wi
d
wi = 1
i=1
Next, each household is assigned a deprivation score according to the household’s

deprivation in the component indicators. The deprivation score of each household is
calculated by taking a weighted sum of the number of deprivations, so that the depriva-
tion score for each household lies between 0 and 1. The score increases as the number of
deprivations of the household increases and reaches its maximum of 1 when the house-
hold is deprived in all component indicators. If a household is not deprived in any indi-
cator, a score that receives is equal to 0.
Formally:
Ci = w1 I1 + w2 I2 + ⋯ wd Id
where Ii = 1 if the household is deprived in indicator i and Ii = 0, otherwise, and wi is the
∑
d
weight attached to indicator i with wi = 1
i=1
The second cut-off or threshold is used to identify the multidimensional deprivation,
which in the A/F methodology is called the poverty cut-off. So a household is consid-
ered multidimensionally deprived if the deprivation score of the household is equal to or
greater than the poverty cut-off “k”, i.e. a household is deprived if Ci ≥ k. In the present
study, a household is multidimensionally deprived if deprivation score is higher than
or equal to 30%. In other words, a household’s deprivation must be no less than 30% of
the (weighted) indicators to be considered multidimensionally poor. For those whose
deprivation score is below the poverty cut-off, even if it is nonzero, this is replaced by a
“0”; that is called censoring in poverty measurement. There are two important concepts
associated with the MPI measure, censored and uncensored headcount ratio (HCR). The
censored headcount ratio of an indicator is the percentage of the population who are
both multidimensionally poor and simultaneously deprived in an individual indicator.
On the other hand, the uncensored or raw headcount ratio of an indicator is defined as
the proportion of the population that are deprived in that particular indicator. It is the
aggregate of deprivations pertaining to the poor with deprivation among the non-poor.
To differentiate between the original deprivation score from the censored one, we use
for the censored deprivation score the notation Ci (k).
Here when Ci ≥ k, then Ci (k) = Ci, but if Ci < k, then Ci (k) =
0
Ci (k) is the deprivation score of the poor.
Table 4 Details of multidimensional poverty index for Guwahati city Jou
rna
Dimensions Indicators Deprived if Related to Relative weight l
of
Education Adult education A household is deprived if no member older than 14 years have completed 5 years SDG4 1/8 So
cia
of schooling MDG 2 l
Child school attendance Household is deprived if any school-aged child of age 6–14 is not attending school SDG4 1/8 an
MDG2 d
Ec
Health Child death Any child has died in the family SDG3 1/8 on
MDG4 om
BMI of women If less than 18.5 k/m2 and greater than 30 k/m2 SDG2 1/8 ic
SDG3 De
vel
MDG1 op
Work Child labour Any child of age 14 years or below, work outside home for pay or in home SDG4 1/8 me
UNICEF nt
ILO (20
18)
Occupational status Unemployed/bagger/rag picker/domestic worker/sweeper/sanitation worker/mali/ SDG 8 1/8 20
daily/or irregular wage labour Hashim Committee report :4
Standard of living Electricity The household has no electricity Smart City Mission 1/24 3–
74
Sanitation The household’s sanitation facility is not improved (according to MDG outlines) or MDG7 1/24
open defecation or it is improved but shared SDG7
JnNURM
Smart city Mission
Rajiv Awas Yojana
Drinking water Not safe water (according to MDG guidelines) or safe drinking water is outside MDG7 1/24
premise of the dwelling SDG7
JnNURM
Smart city Mission
Rajiv Awas Yojana
Housing Kutcha or overcrowded MDG7 1/24
Rajiv Awas Yojana
1 Cooking fuel The cooking fuel is dung, wood or charcoal MDG7 1/24
3 SDG7
Assets Less than 2 assets and no car (television, bike, motorbike or refrigerator) Global MPI 1/24
51
5
2
74 74 2
As mentioned above, MPI combines two informations: (1) the proportion or
incidence of people (within a given population) who experience multiple deprivations and
(2) the intensity of their deprivation: the average proportion of (weighted) deprivations
they experience. Formally, the first component is called the multidimensionally
deprived headcount ratio (H):
q
H =
n
Here q is the number of household multidimensionally deprived and n is the total num-
ber of household.
The second component is called the intensity (or breadth) of poverty (A). It is the aver-
age deprivation score of the multidimensionally deprived household and can be expressed
as:
∑n
i =1
A =
Ci(k )
q
where Ci (k) is the censored deprivation score of household i and q is the number of house-
hold multidimensionally deprived. Finally, the MPI is the product of the both H and A.
MPI = H × A.
The robustness tests and some other tests are done for determining the accuracy of the
measures, which are explained in the following section.
Robustness, association and redundancy of the MPI measure
The robustness test for the results of the MPI is important to complement the empirical
analysis. A spatial dominance of stochastic dominance test is considered in the present
study. The dominance test involves testing whether there is a robust ranking of poverty
between different regions. A given region is said to dominate another in the multidimen-
sional poverty or the multidimensional headcount ratio (H) if its poverty value appears
always lower whatever the value of “k”.
The next important task, to get an accurate measure of joint distribution of depriva-
tion,10 one has to go through a proper understanding of the association between the dep-
rivations before recognizing the selection of the indicators. Technically one has to drop or
modify the selection of indicators with high level of association unless there is no norma-
tive justification for the present construction of the MPI with different indicators. In the
present study, Cramer’s V measure is used which is same as the correlation coefficient
for
0–1 (dichotomous) variables. It is the most popular measure of association between nomi-
nal variables. In the 2 × 2 case, V ranges from 0 to ± 1, which takes extreme values
under (statistical) independence and “complete association”.
10
The concept of joint distribution of deprivation can be explained in contrast to the concept of marginal
distribution of deprivation. The marginal distribution of deprivation is the distribution in one specific
dimension without referring to any other dimension. Marginal distribution provides the information of the
proportion of the population deprived in that particular dimension, but it does provide the information of
13 13
5
Journal of Social
simultaneous and Economic
deprivation. On Development (2018)
the other hand, Journal
20:43–
joint of Social and
distribution Economic Development
of deprivation (2018)
is the multiple 20:43–5
deprivations
3
74 74 3
that are simultaneously experienced (Alkire et al. 2015a, b).
13 13
jj� jj� jj� jj�
p00 × p11 − p10 × p01
Cramer’s V = 1∕2
j� j� j�
p+1 × p1+ × p+0 × pJ 0+
Here
jj
p00: The percentage of people simultaneoulsy not deprived in any two indicators j and j′
jj
p11:The percentage of people simultaneoulsy deprived in any two indicators j and j′
It also shows two kinds of mismatches
jj
p10: The percentage of people deprived in indicator j but not in indicator j′
jj
p10: The percentage of people deprived in indicator j′ but not in indicator j
V would be viewed as the percentage of the maximum possible variation between two
variables.
The Cramer’s V uses entire cross-tab, but the association is affected by the extent to
which deprivation between variables match and values of the headcount ratios and their
differences.
The second measure used in the present study is the measure of redundancy R0. Here if
two deprivation/poverty indicators are not independent and if at least one of the marginal
distributions11 n1+ and n+1 is different from zero, R0 is defined as
jj�
p11
R0 = , 0 ≤ R0 ≤ 1.
j� j
min p +1 , p1+
Here
jj
p11 is the number of people who are deprived in both indicators, i.e. joint distribution of
deprivation,
j� j
p+1 , p1+ is the head count ratios, i.e. marginal deprivation.
Redundancy measure reflects the strength of the matches but not the direction.
The R0 counts the number of observation, which has the same status in both variables,
adjusted by level of deprivation. Strength of the relationship is defined as the proportion of
“poverty matches” in the lowest level of poverty. However, the R0 is sensitive to some dis-
tributional changes. Divergence reflects the different components of the cross-tab that they
draw upon. Measure of redundancy or overlap provides clear and precise information that
should be considered when evaluating indicators’ redundancy.
MPI of the people living in slum areas of Guwahati city
The sample size of the households used in construction of MPI for poor households in
Guwahati city slum area is 315 households and 1354 individuals. The unit of identification
for this purpose is household, and unit of analysis is individual. This represents that the
deprivation is experienced by all the individuals in the household simultaneously rather
than isolated individuals.
11
ibid.
For measuring MPI, four dimensions of poverty are chosen, which are further subdi-
vided into 12 indicators. The dimensions used here are the conceptual categories that are
explained in terms of some indicators. In MPI, poverty is identified first in each indica-
tor separately with respect to some cut-off. In the present study, cut-off of each indicator
is related to most of the Sustainable Development Goals12 and Millennium Development
Goals13 as well as some national policies of government as mentioned in Table 4. Here the
idea is to construct the MPI in a way that focuses the basic development issues to imple-
ment the policies and programmes for the underprivileged section of the society.
The deprivations in each indicator are similar to the poverty HCR, which divides the
whole population into two mutually exclusive groups of poor or non-poor in each indica-
tor of the MPI. The first dimension of MPI is education, which is explained in terms two
indicators, viz. adult education and child school attendance. The deprivation cut-off for the
indicator of adult education is that a household is deprived if no family member of age 15
or older than 15 years has completed 5 years of schooling. The deprivation cut-off for
child school attendance is that a household is deprived if any school-aged child of age 6–14
years is not attending school. Deprivation cut-offs for both the two education indicators are
related to the SDG4 and MDG2. The SDG4 is to “ensure inclusive and quality education
for all and promote lifelong learning”. Moreover, MDG2 is to “achieve universal primary
education”.
The second dimension of the MPI for Guwahati city is the health. Health is explained
in terms of child death and body mass index (BMI) of women. The deprivation cut-off of
child death is that a household is deprived if any child died in the family. The
deprivation cut-off for BMI of women is if it is less than 18.5 k/m2 and/or greater than
30 k/m2. The child death indicator is related to the SDG3 and MDG4. SDG3 is to “ensure
healthy life and well-being for all”. MDG4 is to “reduce child mortality.”. Moreover, the
deprivation cut-off for second indicator of health is related to SDG2, i.e. “zero
hunger”. It is also related to SDG3. The BMI of women is also related to the MDG1, i.e.
“eradicate extreme poverty and hunger”. Both underweight and overweight are related to
health and nutritional disorders. Blössner and de Onis (2005) mention underweight as the
outcome of malnutrition that is an important public health problem which is related to
mortality and morbidity. They also mention that 27–51% of women of reproductive age,
in Africa and south Asia, are underweight. On the other hand, overweight is also related
to some serious
lifestyle diseases. Pi-Sunyer (1991) mentions that overweight is the cause of hypertension,
insulin resistance and diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, cholesterol, etc.
The third dimension of MPI is work. In the present study, work is explained in terms
of child labour and occupation status of adult members of the household. Child labour
is related to SDG4 and child labour definition of United Nations International Children’s
Emergency Fund (UNICEF) and International Labour Organization (ILO). The deprivation
cut-off of child labour indicator is that the household is deprived if any child of age equal
to or less than 14 years works outside home for pay or in home. Child labour indicator is
also related to SDG4, which is to ensure inclusive education for all as child labour is one
of the important obstacles to achieve universal and inclusive education. However,
deprivation cut-off for occupation status is that whether any adult member of the
household is either unemployed, bagger, rag picker, domestic worker, sweeper, sanitation
worker, mali, daily or irregular labour. This is related to SDG8 and concept of
occupational deprivation of Hashim Committee report of Planning Commission. SDG8 is
to “promote inclusive and sustainable growth, employment and decent work for all”.
12
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org.
13
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/.
The last dimension of MPI is standard of living. Standard of living dimension is
explained in terms of electricity, sanitation, drinking water, housing condition, cooking
fuel and assets. The deprivation cut-off of electricity indicator is that whether the
household has no electricity connection for household use. It is related to the Smart City
Mission of Ministry of Urban Development introduced in 2015 by the Government of
India. One core infrastructure element of smart city is to assure supply of electricity. The
deprivation cut- off for sanitation is that whether the household’s sanitation facility is not
improved according to MDG outlines or open defecation or it is improved but shared.
The importance of sanitation indicator is emphasized by many national and international
bodies. MDG7 is to ensure environmental sustainability targeting to “halve the proportion
of population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation by
2015”. According to MDG, improved sanitation facility is that, which hygienically
separates human waste from human contact, it includes flush or pour flush toilets or
latrines connected to sewer, septic tank or pit, ventilated improved pit latrines, pit latrine
and composting toilets/latrines.
The drinking water deprivation is defined as, if the household has no safe drinking
water source or safe drinking water is outside the premise of the dwelling. According to
MDG, an improved drinking water source is defined as the water facility which “by
nature of its construction or through active intervention is protected from outside
contamination in particular from contamination with faecal matter”.14
Housing deprivation in the MPI is said to be there if the dwelling is kutcha and/or over-
crowded. Both these conditions are related to MDG and Rajiv Awas Yojana (RAY). Here
the overcrowding is defined following MDG. It is defined as “a house is considered to
provide a sufficient living area for the household members if not more than three people
share the same habitable room that is a minimum of four square metres in area”.
The cooking fuel deprivation is said to prevail if the household use dung, wood or char-
coal for cooking purpose. This is related to MDG7 and SDG7. SDG7 is to ensure afford-
able and clean energy, and MDG7 is also related to the environment sustainability.
Last indicator of standard of living is asset. A household is deprived in asset indicator,
if it possesses less than two assets of television, bike, motorbike or refrigerator and no car.
It is also related to the Global MPI (Alkire et al. 2014) deprivation cut-off of asset
indicator.
In the present construction of MPI, two measures used Cramer’s V for measuring the
association between nominal or categorical variables and redundancy R0 which counts
the number of observations which have the same status (both deprived/both poor) in both
variables, adjusted by the level of deprivation. The values of these two tests are given in
Tables 5 and 6. The stochastic dominance test is done to check the robustness of results of
MPI. Dominance test can prove whatever may be the poverty line or k cut-off, the
poverty rank of the regions will remain the same.
As the primary data were collected through a field survey in the slum areas of the
Guwa- hati city, most of the households had similar profiles of deprivation. For this
reason, most of the indicators are associated highly and also proved to be redundant. Yet,
the measure of joint distribution of deprivation15 for the slum households is only for
monitoring purpose.
14
MDG definition of improved drinking water source: piped water into dwelling, plot or yard; public tap/
standpipe; borehole/tube well; protected dug well; protected spring; rainwater collection and bottled water
(bottled water is included if a secondary available source is also improved). Uunprotected drinking water
sources: wells, unprotected springs, water provided by carts with small tanks/drums, tanker truck provided
water and bottled water (if a secondary source is not improved) or surface water taken directly from riv-
ers, ponds, streams, lakes, dams, or irrigation channels (for details see http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mi/wiki/7-8-
Proportion-of-population-using-an-improved-drinking-water-source.ashx).
15
Joint distribution of deprivation is the multiple deprivations that are simultaneously experienced.
1 56
3
Table 5 Calculation of Cramer’s V. Source: Primary survey

Child Asset Cooking fuel Housing Drinking Sanitation Electricity Occupation Child labour BMI Child death Adult educa-
school water (women) tion
attendance
Child school 0.11 0.24 0.07 − 0.05 0.24 0.13 0.00 0.64 − 0.03 0.08 0.29
attendance
Asset 0.11 0.10 0.17 0.10 0.17 0.15 0.15 0.08 0.00 0.04 0.19
Cooking fuel 0.24 0.10 0.12 0.15 0.19 0.47 0.19 0.34 − 0.11 0.08 0.21
Housing 0.07 0.17 0.12 0.27 0.24 0.20 0.22 0.07 − 0.01 − 0.01 0.17 Jou
Drinking rna
− 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.27 0.13 0.28 0.18 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.04 l
water
of
Sanitation 0.24 0.17 0.19 0.24 0.13 0.24 0.16 0.20 0.03 0.11 0.33 So
Electricity 0.13 0.15 0.47 0.20 0.28 0.24 0.33 0.20 0.00 − 0.01 0.30 cia
l
Occupation 0.00 0.15 0.19 0.22 0.18 0.16 0.33 0.11 0.00 − 0.01 0.31 an
Child labour 0.64 0.08 0.34 0.07 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.11 − 0.05 0.02 0.20 d
Ec
BMI − 0.03 0.00 − 0.11 − 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 − 0.05 0.04 − 0.04 on
(women) om
Child death 0.08 0.04 0.08 − 0.01 0.03 0.11 − 0.01 − 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.11 ic
De
Adult educa- 0.29 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.04 0.33 0.30 0.31 0.20 − 0.04 0.11 vel
tion op
me
nt
(20
18)
20
:4
3–
74
Jou
rna
l
of
So
cia
l
Table 6 Redundancy taste. Source: Primary survey an
d
Child Asset Cooking fuel Housing Drinking Sanitation Electricity Occupation Child labour BMI Child death Adult educa- Ec
school water (women) tion on
om
attendance ic
De
Child school 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.90 0.65 0.94 0.34 0.65 0.91 0.09 0.18 0.82 vel
attendance op
Asset 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.95 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.91 0.94 0.98 me
nt
Cooking fuel 0.33 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.93 0.88 0.75 0.93 0.51 0.02 0.17 0.72 (20
Housing 0.90 0.93 0.96 1.00 0.89 0.90 0.98 0.88 0.93 0.82 0.81 0.90 18)
20
Drinking 0.65 0.93 0.93 0.89 1.00 0.76 0.98 0.78 0.83 0.73 0.76 0.74 :4
water 3–
Sanitation 0.94 0.95 0.88 0.90 0.76 1.00 0.84 0.71 1.00 0.63 0.77 0.78 74
Electricity 0.34 1.00 0.75 0.98 0.98 0.84 1.00 0.98 0.51 0.18 0.17 0.71
Occupation 0.65 0.94 0.93 0.88 0.78 0.71 0.98 1.00 0.85 0.65 0.63 0.83
Child labour 0.91 1.00 0.51 0.93 0.83 1.00 0.51 0.85 1.00 0.05 0.11 0.81
BMI 0.09 0.91 0.02 0.82 0.73 0.63 0.18 0.65 0.05 1.00 0.17 0.36
(women)
Child death 0.18 0.94 0.17 0.81 0.76 0.77 0.17 0.63 0.11 0.17 1.00 0.58
Adult educa- 0.82 0.98 0.72 0.90 0.74 0.78 0.71 0.83 0.81 0.36 0.58 1.00
tion
1
3
57
5
8
74 74 8
1.20
1.00
H values
0.80 Bhutnath Bagan

Islampa y
0.60
Total
0.40
0.20
0.00
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
K values
Fig. 1 Dominance test for the results of MPI for Guwahati slum. Source: Primary Survey
Therefore, all the indicators are kept in the index. The indicators that are highly associated
according to redundancy tests are asset, housing, drinking water and sanitation. But the
Cramer’s V values are not high, and therefore, it does not prove any correlation among the
indicators.
The second tests to verify the robustness of the measure is the stochastic dominance
analyses. Alkire and Santos (2010) mention that stochastic dominance test is useful to
access the sensitivity of rankings generated by an indicator to changes in the indicator’s
key parameters. This is the extreme form of robustness. In the present study, the stochastic
dominance tests are carried out after fixing the weight and first cut-off for each indicator.
Here, the purpose is to check the sensitivity of ranking to changes in second cut-off or k
cut-off and also the weight. According to Alkire and Santos (2010), all weights and cut-
offs are also robust if stochastic dominance holds. But they also mention that stochastic
dominance condition may not hold for all the pairs compared (in the present case
different slum areas).
Here only two slum areas and total of the sample slums are taken for the ease of the
analysis. The slum areas taken are the poorest and strongest in terms of MPI at k cut-off
of 30% among all the slum areas surveyed. In Fig. 1, the dominance of the slum areas
over each other is drawn and no curve cut each other in any point which is the existence of
the clear dominance. However, if all the slum areas are included, then there might be some
overlapping among the slum areas. But at least, it is clear from Fig. 1 that the slum areas
with extreme values for MPI possess the dominance.
Comparison of individual deprivation and multidimensional

deprivation
Alkire (2007) explains how multidimensional poverty measures add value in tracking the
deprivation of poor households. MPI is a type of composite indicator. The most primary
characteristic of a composite indicator is that it measures the multidimensional concepts,
which is not possible to capture in a single indicator. The traditional measure of poverty
cannot define the deprivation the poor households suffer. Moreover, deprivation in
income or any other deprivation of only one indicator cannot forecast the level of
deprivation or
13 13
Individual Depriva on Mul dimensional Depriva on or
Joint Distribu on of Depriva on
Adult Education 40.10
Child 8.05 12 0
death 11 0
12.48
BMI(women 10 1.77
5.54
) Child 9 2.58
64.48
labour 8 6.06
18.83
Occupation
Electricity
sanitation 7 6.13
58.49
6 18.69
water 71.49
5
Houseing 82.20 18.83
4 16.77
Cooking 9.53 3 14.18
Fuel Asset 91.06 2 9.53
Child 10.41 1
school…
Fig. 2 Comparison of individual deprivation and multidimensional deprivation or joint distribution of dep-
rivation of urban poor household in Guwahati city. Source: Primary survey
the extent of deprivation suffered by a household. MPI and individual deprivation are com-
pared in Fig. 2.
In the left side of Fig. 2, the individual deprivation of the urban poor household is ana-
lysed. From the individual deprivation, it can be said that 10.41% of the households are
deprived in child school attendance. But it is not possible to say that those deprived in
child school attendance are also deprived in housing condition. This is possible only when
the analysis is done on the basis of joint distribution of deprivation or multidimensional
deprivation. In the right-hand side of Fig. 2, the analysis is done in terms of joint
distribution of deprivation or multidimensional deprivation. The horizontal axis of the
right-hand side of Fig. 2 represents the numbers of deprivation simultaneously suffered by
the households. The percentage of households deprived only in one indicator is 4.48;
percentage of households deprived in two indicators out of the twelve indicators is 9.53
and so on. Hence, it is necessary to identify people having simultaneous deprivation to get
the depth of the deprivation people suffer.
Results of MPI
For the poverty line or “k” cut-off at 30%, the MPI for the sample slum areas of the city is
0.22 with 48% of the people as multidimensionally poor (H) and intensity of their poverty
(A) is 45.67%. The interpretation of MPI at 0.22 for the sample slum areas is that 22% of
the deprivations poor people experience, as a share of the possible deprivations that would
be experienced if all people were deprived in all dimensions.
The uncensored headcount ratio or simply the headcount ratio in each indicator of MPI
of the sample slum population is highest in asset at 91.06%. Housing deprivation is also
very high at 82.20%. Moreover, water deprivation is 71.49%, which is also very high
look- ing at the importance of the indicator. Occupation, sanitation and adult education are
also some indicators where the percentage of headcount ratio is very high. The uncensored
headcount ratio is lowest in child labour at 5.54% followed by child death and cooking
fuel.
Adult Educaon 36.04
40.10
Child death 6.72

8.05
BMI(women) 8.71
12.48
Child labour 5.54

5.54
Occupaon 43.13
17.21 64.48
Electricity 18.83
38.48
Sanitaon 58.4
38.33 9
Drinking water
Houseing 4 4.53 71.49
9.01 82.20
Cooking Fuel 9.53
Asset 46.97
91.06
Child school a endance 10.12
10.41
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00
100.00
Censor HCR Uncensored
HCR
Fig. 3 Censored and uncensored HCR of the population of sample slum areas of Guwahati city. Source:
Primary survey
Fig. 4 Contribution of different Adult Educa on

indictors to total deprivation of 25.00 Child school
poor in Guwahati city. Source: Asset
a endance
20.00
15.00
Cooking Fuel Child death
10.00
5.00
Houseing 0.00 BMI(women)
Drinking water Child labour
Sanita on Occupa on
Electricity
The censored headcount ratio which not only represents deprivation in individual indi-
cator but also multidimensional deprivation is presented in Fig. 3. The censored head-
count ratio is also highest in asset at 47%, which means that 47% of the sample population
are deprived in asset as well as deprived multidimensionally. And 44.53% are deprived
in housing and deprived multidimensionally at the same time. Moreover, 43.13% of the
population are occupationally as well as multidimensionally deprived at the same time. In
drinking water, sanitation and adult education also, deprivations are high in terms of the
censored headcount ratio which also includes the deprivation in multidimensional term.
Slum Area Decomposi on
55.00
Average Intensity (A)
53.00
Kalipur
51.00
49.00
Bhutnath Bagan
47.00
PanTdout6alNo Colony
45.00 Bhaskar Nagar
Islampa y
43.00 Maila Tanky
Arika Bastee
41.00
Dhakai Pa y
39.00
5.00 15.00 25.00 35.00 45.00 55.00 65.00
Percentage of Popula on Considered as Mul dimensionally deprived
(H) Note: Size of the bubble represents size of the popula on
Fig. 5 Decomposition of MPI in terms of slum areas of Guwahati city. Source: Primary survey
In Fig. 4, contribution of each indicator to total deprivation is given. The contribution

of occupational deprivation is highest at 24.63% to the multidimensional deprivation. Dep-
rivation in adult education has contributed 20.58% to the total deprivation. These are the
two indicators highly contributing to the multidimensional deprivation of the poor in slum
areas of the city.
Moreover, the contribution of assets deprivation is also important at 8.94%. Housing,
water and sanitation also contribute more than 7%. Child education, child death, BMI
(women), child labour and electricity contribute moderately around 3%. However, the
contribution of cooking fuel is lowest at only 1.72%.
MPI and its decomposition in terms of sample slum areas of Guwahati city
As the selected slum areas have some peculiar characteristics, it is important to have a
close look to the deprivation characteristics of each slum area separately. In Fig. 5, the
multidimensional deprivation of the people of the sample slums is compared. In Fig. 5,
closer is the bubble to the upper right-hand corner of the figure, higher is the multidimen-
sional deprivation.
In Fig. 5, Kalipur is the most deprived slum area with 63.89% of the people as multi-
dimensionally poor and intensity of poverty at 51.81%. The MPI of Kalipur is 0.33. All
the three values of MPI analysis are highest in Kalipur. As a non-notified slum, the area
is deprived in almost all the indicators of basic civic amenities, occupation, health and
education.
The second most deprived slum is Bhutnath Bagan with 63.29% of people multidimen-
sionally deprived, intensity at 48.71% and MPI at 0.31. In Bhaskar Nagar also, 60.12% of
the people are multidimensionally deprived with 44.87% of intensity of poverty and MPI
at
0.27. Pandu 6 Number Colony has the multidimensional HCR at 50.38% with intensity at
45.96% and MPI at 0.23.
Arikati Basti possesses some peculiar characteristics. In Arikati Basti, 55.29% of the
people are multidimensionally poor, but the intensity of poverty is only 41.88% which is
the reason the bubble of the slum is towards right side of the chart and towards the lower
portion. The MPI of Arikati Basti is 0.23. Arikati Basti and Pandu 6 Number Colony has
same level of MPI value, but in Arikati Basti more numbers of people are multidimension-
ally poor than Pandu 6 Number Colony with less intensity in Arikati Basti than in Pandu 6
Number Colony. In Arikati Basti, most of the people have been staying there for long time.
As notified slum as well as an old slum, this area has some positive developments which
result in the lower level of intensity of poverty. The age of a slum area has positive relation
with the development of the slum area.
Yet, in Pandu 6 Number Colony, some people have better living condition and some
live with many deprivation. Most of the people are not living for long time in Pandu 6
Number Colony. The newly established families live in more deprived condition which
makes the intensity of poverty higher in Pandu 6 Number Colony.
Maila Tanky also has the multidimensional HCR lower than many other at 48.80% but
intensity is 43%, which is higher than Arikati Basti that is the reason the bubble of the
slum is above that of Arikati Basti, but it is in the left side of the later. The MPI of Maila
Tanky is 0.21.
Dhakai Patty has 29.34% of the MPI poor people, but the intensity of poverty is 40.14
with MPI at 0.12. However, Islampatty is one of a developed slum areas in the city with
only 10.65% of the people as multidimensionally poor and a high intensity of poverty at
44.68% with MPI at only 0.05. High intensity with lower HCR is the result of inequality
prevailing in the area. As a developed slum, most people have been living in good condi-
tion which makes the HCR lower than other slum areas. But still some meagre portions of
the population live in extreme deprivation in Islampatty, which results in the high percent-
age of intensity of poverty in this slum area.
In Table 7, uncensored and censored headcount ratio is analysed. From the earlier inter-
pretation, Kalipur is the most deprived slum area. In Kalipur, 100% of the population are
deprived in housing followed by asset deprivation at 85.56% uncensored headcount ratio.
Moreover, water and sanitation are two other indicators in which the people of Kalipur
are deprived highly with 73.33 and 77.22% uncensored HCR, respectively. Occupation
and adult education are two other indicators of deprivation. Child school attendance is also
an indicator in which the people of the Kalipur are greatly deprived. In child labour, the
deprivation of Kalipur is highest at 16.11% as well as in cooking fuel 23.89% of the
people are deprived which is highest among all the slums area. The censored HCR which
includes the MPI of the people has the same pattern as uncensored headcount ratio.
In Bhutnath Bagan, 100% of the people are deprived in assets. Housing, drinking water,
sanitation, occupation and adult education are some indicators where the deprivation is
very high in this slum area. However, the electricity deprivation and occupation depriva-
tion are high among sample slums in Bhutnath Bagan with 86.08 and 29.75%, respectively.
In Pandu 6 Number Colony also the asset deprivation is highest at 91% followed by
housing and occupation deprivation. In Pandu 6 Number Colony, there is no child labour.
The two indicators where the deprivation is higher are the BMI (women) and the
electricity at
14.29 and 31.58%, respectively.
In Arikati Basti also, 100% of the people are deprived in assets. Other deprivations
are the housing, drinking water, occupation and adult education. The BMI (women)
Table 7 Censored HCR and uncensored HCR slum area wise for all indicators. Source: Primary survey Jou
rna
Slum Adult educa- Child Child death BMI Child labour Occupation Electricity Sanitation Drinking Housing Cooking Asset l
tion school (women) water Fuel of
attendance So
cia
l
Uncensored HCR an
Arikati Basti 34.62 4.81 1.92 19.71 5.77 76.44 16.83 38.94 84.62 81.73 9.13 100.00 d
Ec
Bhaskar 52.60 17.34 7.51 10.98 9.83 66.47 16.18 87.28 75.72 89.60 7.51 97.69 on
Nagar om
Bhutnath 46.84 13.29 12.66 14.56 7.59 86.08 29.75 82.28 70.25 87.97 13.29 100.00 ic
Bagan De
vel
Dhakai Patty 19.16 0.00 14.97 5.99 0.00 56.89 3.59 28.74 64.07 67.66 7.19 79.64 op
Islampatty 14.20 0.00 0.00 17.16 0.00 34.91 8.88 41.42 45.56 60.36 0.00 78.11 me
nt
Maila Tanky 46.99 9.04 13.25 7.83 3.01 58.43 24.70 54.22 90.96 82.53 10.24 95.18 (20
Pandu 6 45.11 6.77 5.26 14.29 0.00 80.45 31.58 62.41 62.41 87.97 3.01 90.98 18)
Number 20
Colony :4
3–
Kalipur 62.22 31.11 10.00 8.33 16.11 58.33 22.78 77.22 73.33 100.00 23.89 85.56 74
Censored HCR
Arikati Basti 31.73 4.81 0.00 18.27 5.77 55.29 16.83 30.29 46.15 50.48 9.13 55.29
Bhaskar 42.20 17.34 6.36 7.51 9.83 51.45 16.18 56.65 45.09 57.80 7.51 60.12
Nagar
Bhutnath 46.84 13.29 12.66 14.56 7.59 60.76 29.75 61.39 43.67 61.39 13.29 63.29
Bagan
Dhakai Patty 19.16 0.00 11.38 0.00 0.00 27.54 3.59 20.96 29.34 23.35 5.39 25.75
Islampatty 10.65 0.00 0.00 6.51 0.00 10.65 2.37 4.73 4.14 10.65 0.00 8.88
Maila Tanky 35.54 9.04 9.64 7.83 3.01 38.55 18.07 33.73 45.78 37.35 7.83 48.80
Pandu 6 45.11 3.76 5.26 8.27 0.00 49.62 31.58 46.62 37.59 50.38 3.01 50.38
1 Number
Colony
3 Kalipur 58.89 31.11 10.00 5.00 16.11 50.00 22.78 56.67 52.22 63.89 23.89 61.67
63
6 Journal of Social and Economic Development (2018) 20:43–
4 74
deprivation is highest at 20% in Arikati Basti among all the sample slums. In Bhaskar
Nagar, 98% of the people are asset deprived. The deprivation in adult education is higher
in Bhaskar Nagar at 52.60%. Sanitation deprivation is highest in Bhaskar Nagar at
87.28%. However, in Dhakai Patty there is no child labour and deprivation in child school.
But in this slum area, child death deprivation is highest. The most considerable deprivation
is the asset deprivation followed by housing, water and occupation deprivation.
In Islampatty, there is no child deprivation. But the assets deprivation is highest fol-
lowed by housing, drinking water sanitation and occupation. However, the deprivation in
BMI (women) is higher compared to other areas at 17.16%. In cooking fuel, there is no
deprivation in Islampatty. Lastly, Maila Tanky with high deprivation in asset and water is
also deprived in occupation and adult education. Cooking fuel, child death and electricity
are indicators where the area is highly deprived.
From the above analysis, it has been noticed that in adult education indicator, the low-
est number of people is deprived in Dhakai Patty and Islampatty. These two slum areas
contain most of the regular salary/wage earning households, and standard of living of the
households is also better than other slum areas surveyed. In these two slum areas, there
are no child labourers and child school attendance deprivation. The educated parents not
only understand the value of their child’s education but also education make them capable
of joining the formal sector and financially strong enough to send their child to school.
Moreover in Kalipur, adult education, child school attendance and child labour are highest
among the sample slum areas.
Yet, in Arikati Basti and Islampatty, BMI (women) deprivation is highest despite the
fact that Islampatty contains better living condition. Occupation, electricity and sanitation
are also good in those where the adult education deprivations are lower. However in
indicators of water, housing and assets, deprivation is higher in almost all the sample
slum areas.
MPI and its decomposition in terms of social groups in slum areas of Guwahati city
Scheduled castes (SCs) and scheduled tribes (STs) are the most deprived social groups in
slums of the city (Fig. 6). With 56.67% of the SC people, multidimensionally deprived, the
48.00 Social Group Decomposition of Deprivation

47.50 SC
47.00 ST
46.50
46.00
Total
45.50
45.00 Other
44.50
OBC
44.00
43.50
30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 50.00 55.00 60.00 65.00
Percentage of Popula on Considered as Mul dimensionally Deprived (H)
Note: Size of the bubble represents size of the popula on
Fig. 6 Social group decomposition of deprivation. Source: Primary survey
13
Jou
rna
l
of
So
cia
l
an
d
Ec
on
Table 8 Uncensored HCR and censored HCR social group wise for different indicators. Source: Primary survey om
ic
Social group Adult educa- Child Child death BMI Child labour Occupation Electricity Sanitation Drinking Housing Cooking fuel Asset De
tion school (women) water vel
attendance op
me
nt
Uncensored HCR (20
SC 46.36 17.58 2.42 13.03 11.21 70.91 21.82 51.82 68.79 85.45 14.24 94.24 18)
20
ST 55.56 11.11 17.78 22.22 0.00 64.44 20.00 44.44 80.00 73.33 4.44 82.22 :4
OBC 35.80 7.40 4.44 14.50 3.25 54.44 9.17 61.24 59.47 79.88 1.78 91.12 3–
Other 38.07 8.27 12.17 10.45 4.21 66.46 22.31 61.47 78.63 82.37 11.54 90.02 74
Censored HCR
SC 43.94 17.58 2.42 9.39 11.21 51.52 21.82 43.03 46.97 56.06 14.24 55.45
ST 55.56 11.11 17.78 22.22 0.00 48.89 20.00 31.11 51.11 42.22 4.44 60.00
OBC 27.51 7.40 3.25 10.06 3.25 28.99 4.14 31.66 21.30 33.73 1.78 33.73
Other 35.10 7.64 9.98 6.71 4.21 45.87 21.53 40.25 41.97 44.46 10.45 48.67
1
3
65
6 Journal of Social and Economic Development (2018) 20:43–
6 74
intensity of deprivation is 47.48% and MPI is 0.27. STs have the multidimensional HCR
at
60% with intensity 47% and MPI at 0.28.
The percentage of deprived population is lower among OBCs at 34.62% with high
intensity at 44.27%. The MPI of the OBCs is 0.15. The multidimensional HCR of other
category of the people in sample slum areas is 49.61% and intensity at 45.01% with MPI
at
0.22.
The uncensored and censored HCR of each indicator for different social groups are ana-
lysed in Table 8. Asset, housing, water, sanitation, occupation and adult education are the
indicators where all the social groups are highly deprived. However in child school attend-
ance, child labour and cooking fuel of SCs have the highest level of deprivation among all
the other indictors. In child death and BMI (women), deprivation of the STs is highest. The
people belong to the other category have the highest level of deprivation in electricity.
From Table 8, it can be viewed that OBCs have lowest percentage of adult education
deprivation. Hence, the child school attendance, child death, child labour and electricity
deprivation are also lowest for OBC people.
BMI (women) and child death deprivation are highest among the ST households,
although both SCs and STs are MPI-deprived. But health deprivation of STs is higher and
standard of living and occupation deprivation of SCs are higher than other social groups.
Other category households are also deprived in all indicators of MPI than OBC households
in slums of the city.
MPI and its decomposition in terms of migration status in sample slum areas
of Guwahati city
The issue of migration is related to the urbanization process. Both are the cause and effect
of each other. In Fig. 7, the multidimensional poverty is decomposed in terms of the
migration status of the people living in slum areas of Guwahati city.
The interstate migrants are the most deprived among all others. The multidimensional
HCR for the interstate migrants is 62.83% with intensity of poverty at 49.38% and MPI
at
0.31. However the multidimensional HCR of the intrastate migrants is 57.65 with intensity
Migration Status Decomposition

52.00
50.00 Inter-State
Migrants
48.00
Intra-State
46.00
Total Migrants
44.00 Interna onal
Migrants
42.00 Non-Migrants
40.00
23.00 33.00 43.00 53.00 63.00
Percentage of Popula on considered to be Mul dimensionally Deprived (H)
Note: Size of the Bubble Represents the size of the popula on
13
6 7 Migration status decomposition. Source: Primary
Fig. Journal ofsurvey
Social and Economic Development (2018) 20:43–
7 74
13
Jou
rna
l
of
So
cia
l
an
d
Ec
Table 9 Uncensored HCR and censored HCR of different indicators migration status-wise in Guwahati slum. Source: Primary survey on
om
Migration Adult educa- Child Child death BMI Child labour Occupation Electricity Sanitation Drinking Housing Cooking fuel Asset ic
tion school (women) water De
attendance vel
op
Uncensored HCR me
nt
Non- 30.84 4.53 4.53 12.54 1.57 50.35 12.89 43.90 66.90 78.05 4.53 86.76 (20
migrants 18)
Intrastate 44.33 10.14 8.95 12.92 7.75 78.33 22.66 68.59 73.56 87.67 14.51 94.04 20
:4
International 35.29 0.00 27.45 0.00 0.00 66.67 17.65 78.43 64.71 76.47 9.80 88.24 3–
Interstate 55.31 28.32 10.62 14.16 11.95 69.03 25.66 68.58 80.09 81.86 11.06 96.02 74
Censored HCR
Non- 26.48 3.83 2.44 8.19 1.57 30.49 9.93 21.25 27.18 32.06 4.01 32.58
migrants
Intrastate 41.75 10.14 8.95 8.55 7.75 54.67 21.67 51.29 45.73 55.47 13.72 57.65
International 25.49 0.00 15.69 0.00 0.00 41.18 17.65 41.18 33.33 41.18 9.80 41.18
Interstate 50.00 28.32 10.62 12.39 11.95 50.00 25.66 53.10 51.33 52.65 11.06 61.06
1
3
67
6
8
74 74 8
at 46.32 and MPI at 0.27. Nevertheless the size of the population migrated from the other
country is less but the multidimensional HCR of the international migration is 41.18% with
an intensity at 43.65% and MPI at 0.18. The lowest level of deprivation is among the peo-
ple belonging to non-migrants group, the multidimensional HCR is 34.15 with intensity at
42.22% and MPI at only 0.14.
The uncensored HCR and censored HCR of people who belong to different migration
status are given in Table 9. The interstate migrants are most deprived migrants group.
These are the people coming from neighbouring states in search of employment. These
are basically unskilled labourers. These are the people who provide cheap labour to the
economy as they do not possess the bargaining capacity for wage or any other rights for a
dignified life. Deprivation in adult education is highest for the interstate migrants among
people belong to different migration status. Child school attendance, BMI (women) and
child labourer deprivation of interstate migrants are highest among all the migrants groups.
In standard of living dimension also, the interstate migrants are highly deprived.
The intrastate migrants are also deprived among the migrant groups. These are actually
the rural to urban migrants’ stream. They come to the urban centre in search of employ-
ment and better living condition. Occupation deprivation of intrastate migrants is high-
est among all the migrants groups. Among all others, housing deprivation of intrastate
migrants is also highest.
International migrants are the people migrated from neighbouring courtiers. These
people are also highly deprived in terms of education, health, occupation and standard of
living.
MPI and its decomposition in terms of education of the head of the household in
slum areas of Guwahati city
The people who belong to head of the household having secondary education and above
are not multidimensionally poor. However, only 18.14% of the people who belong to
head of the household having middle or high school education are multidimensionally poor
with intensity at 38.19% and MPI at 0.07. The size of the population deprived in middle or
high school educated head is meagre (Fig. 8). The primary school educated household
head have the multidimensional poverty at 54.22% with intensity at 42.59% and MPI at
0.23.
Education of the Head Decomposition

52.00
Illiterate
47.00
Total
42.00 Primary
middle-
37.00 high
school
10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00
Percentage of Popula on considered as Mul dimensionally deprived
(H) Note: Size of the bubble represents the size of the popula
on
13 13
6 8 Education
Journal
Fig. of Social and
of Economic Development
the head of (2018)
the household Journal
20:43–of Social
decomposition. and Economic
Source: PrimaryDevelopment
survey (2018) 20:43–6
9
74 74 9
13 13
Moreover, 70.16% of the people belong to illiterate household head are multidimensionally
poor with intensity 49.50 and MPI at 0.35.
The censored and uncensored HCR of the different levels of education of the head of
the household shows that those households having secondary education and above are not
multidimensionally poor (Table 10). However, the sample population living in slums of the
city have some deprivation other than adult education, child death, child labour and elec-
tricity. Child school attendance deprivation of the secondary or above educated household
heads is 7.14%; BMI (women) deprivation is 14.29, occupational deprivation at 34%,
sanitation deprivation at 23.21%, drinking water deprivation at 53.57%, housing
deprivation at
69.64%, cooking fuel deprivation at 5.36 and asset deprivation at
83.93%.
Moreover, the people belong to middle or high school educated household are also not
deprived in adult education and child labour. The BMI (women) deprivation is high for this
group of population, i.e. 15%. Occupation, electricity, sanitation, drinking water, housing
and assets are the other indicators where the middle or high school educated household
head are deprived. However, the people belong to primary educated head of the households
are highly deprived in each indicator of the multidimensional poverty. Moreover, the
people who belong to illiterate household head are also highly deprived in all the indicators
of the multidimensional poverty. The deprivation in the child school attendance is 18% for
illiterate household with 13% of the people deprived in child labour, 33% of the people
deprived in electricity and among other 21.40% of the people who belong to illiterate
household are deprived in cooking fuel. It can be viewed that education impacts positively
all the indicators of MPI. But the people living in the slums of the city are mostly the
weaker section of the city. So, some educated households are also deprived in some
indicators of MPI.
Determents of MPI in slums of Guwahati city
To find out the determinants of MPI in slums of Guwahati city, a logistic regression model
is used. The dependent variable for this regression is the multidimensional HCR. This is a
dichotomous variable of whether a household is multidimensionally deprived or not. This
is the censored HCR of MPI of slum areas of Guwahati city.
The first independent variable is religion of the household. In India, Muslims are
generally deprived in many indicators. So the Hindu, Muslims and other categorization
are made. The other religion includes Christian and Sikh households. Social groups are
historically defined deprived section in Indian society. Social groups are categorized
into SCs, STs, OBCs and general households. Education of the head of the household is
also taken as the independent variable as education is related to the overall development
of a family. Occupation status is also related to the income level and other development
of a family. Language in Assam plays an important role, particularly when the question
of migrants comes. It is difficult to know the actual language of the migrant households
in Assam. Due to political pressure on the migrants, the people afraid to disclose their
actual language used in the household conservation. However, to get an idea about the
poverty condition of the different language-speaking households, the variable of lan-
guage is also included as independent variable. Migration status in Assam is also impor-
tant from the point of view that different countries surround the state and migration
from these countries to Assam is a historical phenomenon.
1 70
3
Table 10 Uncensored HCR and censored HCR of each indicator to total deprivation education of the head of the household-wise in Guwahati slum. Source: Primary survey
Education of Adult educa- Child Child death BMI Child labour Occupation Electricity Sanitation Drinking Housing Cooking Asset
the head tion school (women) water Fuel
attendance
Uncensored HCR
Illiterate 69.14 17.90 8.64 11.32 12.76 74.07 32.72 72.43 75.10 89.09 21.40 99.18
Primary 47.23 9.88 13.01 11.33 3.13 70.36 12.53 57.11 69.16 78.31 4.58 91.33 Jou
Middle–high 0.00 2.27 3.27 14.86 0.00 50.88 11.08 47.86 72.04 79.60 0.76 81.86 rna
l
school of
Secondary 0.00 7.14 0.00 14.29 0.00 33.93 0.00 23.21 53.57 69.64 5.36 83.93 So
and above cia
l
Censored HCR an
Illiterate 61.73 17.90 8.64 10.08 12.76 65.23 30.86 59.47 56.17 66.46 21.40 70.16 d
Ec
Primary 42.65 8.92 10.12 9.16 3.13 45.54 12.53 38.80 41.20 48.43 3.61 51.08 on
Middle–high 0.00 2.27 1.76 7.56 0.00 18.14 7.81 16.12 17.13 17.13 0.76 18.14 om
school ic
De
Secondary 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 vel
and above op
me
nt
(20
18)
20
:4
3–
74
7
1
74 74 1
Table 11 Results of logistic
®
regression analysis for Religion: Hindu
determinants of multidimensional Muslims 1.97**
poverty of the urban poor in
Guwahati city. Source: Primary Others 1.07
survey Social groups: general®
Scheduled castes 1.59*
Scheduled tribes 1.70
Other backward classes 0.50**
General education: secondary and above®
Illiterate 4.83***
Primary 3.83***
Middle–high School 1.66
Occupation: self-employed®
Regular-salary earner 1.55*
Casual labour 7.84**
Others 2.27**
Language used for household conversation: Assamese®
Bengali 3.27 ***
Hindi 3.22***
Other 6.53**
Migration status: non-migrants®
Intrastate 1.45**
International 1.04
Interstate 2.62***
Income quintile group: richest 20%
Poorest 20% 3.81***
Lower middle 20% 1.63*
Middle 20% 3.14***
Upper middle 20% 1.61*
Household size: above 10®
Household member 1 6.87
Household member 2–4 0.78
Household member 5–10 1.07
®
Reference category, N = 1354
*p < 0.1, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001
The income status generally has a substantial impact on the quality of life of a house-
hold. Although it is difficult to get exact information about the income status of a house-
hold, to compare the income poverty with that of multidimensional poverty, income quin-
tile group is taken as another independent variable. The richest income quintile group is
the reference category for this analysis.
The last independent variable is the household size. Household size has an important
impact on the development as well as deprivation of the household. The reference cat-
egory for household size is more than 10 members of households. Other categories are
households of one member, which are basically migrant households. The second category
13 13
household is of members 2–4, which is basically nuclear family. The third category of
household size is 5–10 household members, which can be regarded as joint family.
From Table 11, Muslim households have 2 times more chances of being multidimen-
sionally poor as compared to the Hindu households in slum areas of Guwahati city. Among
the social groups, SC households have more chances of being multidimensional poor as
compared to the general households. OBCs have less chances of being MPI poor; this is
also related to the previous analysis (Fig. 6). Literacy is negatively related to the multidi-
mensional poverty. If the head of the household is literate, then the whole household gets
benefited in terms of better occupation, child schooling and also positive impact on the
health of the household members.
Occupation status is also negatively related to the multidimensional poverty. Casual
labourers have 7.84 times more chances of being multidimensionally poor as compared to
the self-employed households. The other category households also have 2.27 times more
chances of being multidimensionally poor as compared to the self-employed households.
The regular salary/wage earner households have 1.55 times more chances of being mul-
tidimensional poor as compared to the self-employed households. This is because most
of the regular salary/wage earner households in the slum areas of Guwahati city are the
fourth-grade railway employee living in deprived condition including the vulnerable, old
and broken dwelling in the slums of the city.
Among different language-speaking households, Bengali- and Hindi-speaking house-
holds have more chances of being multidimensionally poor as compared to the Assamese
language-speaking households. The non-Assamese people are generally the migrant house-
hold and hence they suffer deprivation.
Among the migrant households, intrastate migrants have 1.45 times more chances of
being multidimensionally poor as compared to non-migrants. Moreover, interstate migrants
(mostly from Bihar, West Bengal and other north-eastern states) have 2.45 times more
chances of being multidimensionally poor as compared to non-migrants.
The income status has a complex relationship with the multidimensional poverty in
slum areas of Guwahati city. The poorest income quintile group households have 3.81
times more chances of being multidimensionally poor in slum areas of Guwahati city as
compared to the richest income quintile group households. The lower-middle-class house-
holds have 1.63 times more chances of being multidimensionally poor. But the middle-
class households have 3.14 times more chances of being multidimensionally poor as com-
pared to the richest households. Again upper-middle-class households have 1.61 times
more chances of being multidimensionally poor as compared to the richest households in
Guwahati city. Therefore, the lowest income quintile group households have highest prob-
ability of being multidimensionally poor, and middle-class households also have substan-
tially high probability (although lower than poorest quintile group and higher than lower
middle quintile group household) of being multidimensionally poor. So there is no system-
atic relationship between income quintile group and multidimensional poverty although
poorest income group households have the highest probability of multidimensional
poverty.
Conclusion
The methodology used to measure poverty has tremendous importance not only from the
policy point of view but also to map the overall economic and other deprivation charac-
terization of the region. The logical evolution of economic prosperity is also done on the
criteria of how far the economy of a region affects the well-being and standard of living
of the masses. Therefore, taking note of some previous MPIs of different countries (OPHI
2015) as well as Global MPI of Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI)
and UNDP, an MPI is developed for the slum dwellers of Guwahati city with the
objective that no one is left out from the developmental programmes of the
Government. MPI of Guwahati Slum includes twelve indicators under four dimensions.
The structure of the MPI is similar to that of Global MPI of OPHI (Alkire et al. 2014)
and UNDP except that one more dimension of work has been added to include the
occupational deprivation of the slum dwellers. Moreover, the Sustainable Development
Goals introduced in 2015 has also stressed the importance of decent work and urgency to
end child labour, which is def- initely an improvement over the Millennium Development
Goals to be achieved by 2015 worldwide.
Although the MPI developed in this article is used to capture various deprivation char-
acteristics of the poor household in Guwahati city, it is not free from limitation. In fact,
no matter how good a measure is, it never captures the full breadth of a concept. Here an
effort has been made to develop an MPI with the help of some available theoretical base
for monitoring multidimensional deprivation of the poor household in Guwahati city.
According to the multidimensional analysis of deprivation that is prepared in the
present study, 48% are living below the poverty with the intensity of poverty 46%. The
MPI of the sample slum dwellers in the city is 0.22; this means 22% of the deprivations
poor people experience, as a share of the possible deprivations that would be experienced
if all people were deprived in all dimensions. MPI includes two informations: incidence
and intensity of deprivation or poverty. In other words, the average number of poor people
in a population and deprivation with which poor households struggle. Moreover, it
captures the multiple deprivations that each poor person faces at the same time with
respect to health, education, occupation and standard of living.
In the present calculation of MPI, marginal deprivations of the slum dwellers are very
high in assets, housing, water, sanitation, occupation and adult education. Moreover, con-
tribution of occupation deprivation is highest to the total deprivation of the slum dwellers
followed by adult education and asset deprivation.
Some deprivation characteristics are also drawn on the basis of the MPI, for different
social and economic groups in the city. The people living in the Kalipur, which is a newly
developed area, are the most deprived. The decomposed value of the MPI reveals that non-
notified slums are comparatively more deprived. Kalipur, Bhutnath Bagan, Maila Tanky
are the most deprived slum area among the sample slum areas, which are all non-notified.
Notified slum of Arikati Basti has higher number of poor population, but the intensity of
deprivation is not very high. Occupation and adult education are two indicators contribut-
ing mostly to the total deprivation in all the slum areas.
Although identification of migration status is a difficult task to do in the slums of the
city, still some migration status is identified depending upon the birth place of the head of
the households. Accordingly, people migrating from other parts of the country than Assam
are the most deprived followed by those migrating from other part of the state of Assam
and non-migrants are the least deprived in terms of the MPI in Guwahati city.
Education has always been the most important determinants of well-being of the people.
The illiterate household are the most deprived among all others. However, no multidimen-
sional deprivation has been reported by the household having education of secondary level
and above.
Last, but most importantly income status of the slum households has a complex
relationship with the multidimensional poverty in Guwahati city. Poorest income
quintile group
has highest chances of multidimensional poverty. But the middle class has also high prob-
ability and lower-middle-class and upper-middle-class households have lower probability
of suffering the brunt of multidimensional poverty in slum areas of Guwahati city. Keeping
note of the relationship between multidimensional poverty and income status of the poor
households, it can be said that MPI supplements the expenditure or monetary measurement
of poverty. Hence, it can also be said that mere increase in income alone cannot remove
the deprivation of the slum households. Initiatives are to be taken which are beyond
income.
References
Alkire S (2002) Valuing freedoms: Sen’s capability approach and poverty reduction. Oxford
University
Press, New York
Alkire S (2007) Choosing dimensions: the capability approach and multidimensional poverty. In: Kakwani
N, Silber J (eds) The many dimensions of poverty. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 89–119
Alkire S (2011) Multidimensional poverty and its discontents. OPHI working paper
Alkire S, Foster J (2011) Understandings and misunderstandings of multidimensional poverty measurement.
J Econ Inequal 9(2):289–314
Alkire S, Santos ME (2010) Acute multidimensional poverty: a new index for developing countries. United
Nations development programme human development report office background paper (2010/11)
Alkire S, Chatterjee M, Conconi A, Seth S, Vaz Ana (2014) Global multidimensional poverty index 2014,
vol 21. OPHI Briefing. University of Oxford, Oxford
Alkire S, Foster JE, Seth S, Santos ME, Roche JM, Ballon P (2015a) Multidimensional poverty measure-
ment and analysis: chapter 2—the framework. Oxford University Press, USA
Alkire S, Foster J, Seth S, Santos ME, Roche JM, Ballon P (2015b) Multidimensional poverty measurement
and analysis. Oxford University Press, USA
Barua A (ed) (2005) India’s north-east: developmental issues in a historical perspective. Manohar Publisher,
New Delhi
Bhan G, Jana A (2013) Of slums or poverty. Econ Political Wkl 48(13):13–16
Blössner M, de Onis M (2005) Malnutrition: quantifying the health impact at national and local levels.
Geneva, World Health Organization. (WHO Environmental Burden of Disease Series, No. 12)
Borgohain P (2011) Socio-economic disparities in Guwahati city, India. LAP Lambert Academic Publish-
ing, Saarbrücken
Coelho K, Maringanti A (2012) Urban poverty in India tools, treatment and politics at neo-liberal turn. Econ
Polit Wkl XLVII(47 & 48):39–43
Dass SK (1980) Immigration and demographic transformation of Assam, 1891–1981. Econ Polit Wkl
15:850–859
Desai R, Mahadevia D, Gogoi T, Datey A, Patel T, Mishra A et al. (2012) Rental housing for the urban poor
in Guwahati. Unpublished research report, Centre for Urban Equity, CEPT University Ahmedabad,
August
Desai R, Mahadevia D, Mishra A (2014) City profile: Guwahati. Working paper 24, CUE Working Paper
Series, Centre for Urban Equity, CEPT University, Ahmedabad
GMDA (2009) Master plan of Guwahati metropolitan area 2025. Guwahati Metropolitan Development
Authority, Guwahati
Mitlin D, Satterthwaite D (2013) Urban poverty in the global south: scale and nature. Routledge, Abingdon
OPHI (2015) Measuring multidimensional poverty: insights from around the world. Oxford poverty and
human development initiative. University of Oxford, Oxford
Pi-Sunyer FX (1991) Health implications of obesity. Am J Clin Nutr 53(6):1595S–1603S
Planning Commission (2012) Report for the expert group to recommend the detailed methodology for iden-
tification of families living below poverty line in the urban areas. Planning Commission, Government
of India, New Delhi
Planning Commission (2014) Report of the expert group to review the methodology for measurement of
poverty. Government of India, New Delhi
Robeyns I (2003) The capability approach: an interdisciplinary introduction
Srivastava RS (2001) Anti-poverty programmes in Uttar Pradesh: an evaluation. Planning Commission,
New Delhi
Vakulabharanam V, Motiram S (2012) Understanding poverty and inequality in urban India since reforms
bringing quantitative and qualitative approaches together. Econ Polit Wkl XLVII(47 & 48):44–52

Multidimensional Poverty Index For The Poor in Guwahati City (Assam, India)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Multidimensional Poverty Index For The Poor in Guwahati City (Assam, India)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Social and Economic Development (2018) 20:43–

Multidimensional poverty index for the poor in

Published online: 27 June 2018

Keywords Multidimensional poverty · Guwahati · Assam · Slum area and urban

Year GMCAa GMA excluding GMCA GMAb

Population CAGR (%) Population CAGR (%) Population CAGR

1951 43,615 – 53,774 – 97,389 –

Conceptual and methodological background

Primary data and field survey

Selection of slum areas

Survey design and sampling

1 Dhakai Patty 3 Highest slum population in ward no. 3

Alkire and Foster (AF) methodology of multidimensional poverty index (MPI)

Next, each household is assigned a deprivation score according to the household’s

Robustness, association and redundancy of the MPI measure

MPI of the people living in slum areas of Guwahati city

Table 5 Calculation of Cramer’s V. Source: Primary survey

0.80 Bhutnath Bagan

Comparison of individual deprivation and multidimensional

Child death 6.72

Child labour 5.54

Houseing 4 4.53 71.49

Fig. 4 Contribution of different Adult Educa on

Houseing 0.00 BMI(women)

Drinking water Child labour

In Fig. 4, contribution of each indicator to total deprivation is given. The contribution

48.00 Social Group Decomposition of Deprivation

Fig. 6 Social group decomposition of deprivation. Source: Primary survey

Migration Status Decomposition

Education of the Head Decomposition

Determents of MPI in slums of Guwahati city

You might also like