District wise Poverty

Estimates for
Madhya Pradesh

State Planning Commission, Madhya Pradesh

District wise Poverty Estimates for

Madhya Pradesh
S.P.Batra, Chitranjan Tyagi and Mangesh Tyagi 1
The scope of most of the studies on poverty is limited to states. The main source of data for
these studies is Consumer Expenditure Surveys undertaken by the National Sample
Survey Organization. In past years, the disparities are growing at both between and within
the states. This necessitate to do the analysis at disaggregated level say district for
identification of the critical areas/ districts for taking necessary steps in implementation of
programmes and framing new policy interventions. The sample design adopted for
National Sample Survey Organization's Consumer Expenditure Survey 2004-05, allows
estimating parameters such as percentage of population living below poverty line at district
level. It is because the sample design had taken districts as strata in both the rural and urban
sectors.
The paper Levels of Living and Poverty Pattern: A District-wise Analysis for India
published in Economic and political Weekly, Vol XLIV No 9, February 2009 by Siladitya
Choudhuri and Nivedita Gupta is appreciated attempt in this direction. On observing the
results area wise i.e. rural and urban, seems to be counter intuitive in the opinion of experts
knowing their state better. The main constraint is the number of observations at the district
level, which varies from 30 to 520 in rural areas and in urban area 10 to 1136 depending
upon the rural and urban population. Districts with low number of observations may not
provide desired estimates. The national sample survey cell in state (under Directorate of
Economic and Statistics) also collect data for equal sample size for each round of NSS, but
collected data is not used in estimation of poverty. Directorate of Economic
and Statistics,
st
Madhya Pradesh had validated/cleaned the data collected for NSS 61 round. Thus using
state sample along with national sample will increase the number of observation two times.
Combined sample may be in the position to provide better estimates of poverty at district
level for the state.
In present exercise an attempt is made to analyze the State and Central sample of Consumer
Expenditure Survey 2004-05 for the state of Madhya Pradesh to estimate the percentage of
population living below poverty line by districts. Comparative poverty ratios calculated
from Central, State and combined sample are presented separately for rural, urban and over
all. Details are given in tables 4-6.
In case of rural population below poverty line by district shows that from central sample,
Neemuch, East Nimar, Barwani, Rajgarh and West Nimar have lowest proportion (between
0.2 to 14.1%) of population living below poverty line while Seoni, Shahdol, Dindori,
Mandla and Umaria have highest proportion (between 59.9 to 76.4 %) of population living
below poverty line. Estimates obtained from state sample shows that Gwalior, Mandla,
Bhind, Indore, Morena and Seoni have lowest proportion (between 0.0 to 4.4%) of
1

S.P.Batra, Specialist (Statistics) and Mr. Chitranjan Tyagi (Team L eader) with Poverty Monitoring and
Policy Support Unit (PMPSU), Mr. Mangesh Tyagi, Advisor, State Planning Commission, Govern ment of
Madhya Pradesh.

population living below poverty line while districts of Bhopal, Harda, Panna, Shadol and
Barwani have highest proportion (between 43.8 to 64.0 %) of population living below
poverty line. This reveals that observed trend from two samples are divergent e.g Barwani is
district with low proportion of population below poverty line as per central sample while as
per state sample it is having high proportion of population below poverty line. Same is the
case with Seoni which has been ranked exactly opposite by two samples.
To study the relative positioning of districts, four categories are made depending on
proportion of population below poverty line as compare to state average. These categories
are
(a) District with more than 50 % less poverty than state average poverty
(b) District with 50 % less poverty than state average poverty
(c) District with 50 % more poverty than state average poverty and
Category

Central Sample

State Sample

Combined Sample

No. of common
district

District with
more than 50 %
less poverty than
State Average
Povert y

Neemuch,
East Nimar,
Barwani,
Rajgarh, West
Nimar, Datia,
Mandsaur,
Bhind, Guna,
Ratlam,
Dewas
Satna, Gwalior,
Morena, Indore,
Dhar, Ujjain,
Shajapur,
Chhindwara,
Jabalpur,
Bhopal.
Narsimhapur
Hoshangabad,
Harda, Sheopur,
Shivpuri, Sehore,
Rewa,
Tikamgarh,
Katni, Damoh,
Panna, Vidisha,
Chhatarpur,
Balaghat, Betul
Sagar, Jhabua,
Sidhi, Raisen,
Seoni, Shahdol,
Dindori,
Mandla, Umaria

Morena, Gwalior,
Mandla, Sehore,
Bhind, Indore,
Sheopur, Balaghat,
Seoni, Shajapur,
Dindori, Sagar,
Jhabua, Ratlam,
Shivpuri,
Hoshangabad, Guna
Neemuch, Umaria,
Dewas, Rajgarh,
Dhar, Narsimhapur,
Datia, Raisen,
Mandsaur, Damoh,
Chhindwara

Neemuch, Bhind,
Gwalior, Morena,
Rajgarh, Indore,
Guna, Ratlam, Datia

Dewas, Mandsaur,
East Nimar, Shajapur,
Dhar, Sheopur,
Sehore, Shivpuri,
West Nimar,
Narsimhapur, Ujjain,
Chhindwara,
Hoshangabad
Satna, Balaghat,
Jabalpur, Barwani,
Sagar, Rewa, Jhabua,
Tikamgarh, Vidisha,
Damoh, Seoni, Katni,
Raisen, Bhopal

Dindori, Sidhi, Harda,

Chhatarpur, Mandla,
Betul, Panna, Umaria,
Shahdol

District with 50
% less poverty
than State
Average Poverty

District with 50
% more poverty
than State
Average Poverty

District with
More than 50 %
higher poverty
than State
Average Poverty

Vidisha, Sidhi, Rewa,

Ujjain, Tikamgarh,
Jabalpur

Katni, East Nimar,

Chhatarpur, West
Nimar, Betul, Satna,
Panna, Bhopal,
Harda, Shahdol,
Barwani

(d) District with more than 50 % higher poverty than state average poverty
The relative positioning of district is not in line with general perception as revealed from
central, state and combined sample as shown in chart 1.
Chart 1: Rural Poverty:
To improve upon the estimates, there is need to probe further and to find available
alternatives. In this direction, examination of average per capita consumer expenditure per
person per month as estimated from both samples is shown below. It is found that there is
variation in average per capita consumer expenditure for both rural and urban areas. In rural
area
average MPCE is higher inRural
case of state sample than central
sample and reverse trend is
Sample
Urban
found in case of urban areas.
Estimated Average
Central Sample
439.06 MPCE- 2004-05
903.67
State Sample

521.06

728.06

Assuming that estimates as obtained from central sample are close to actual average MPCE,
than state sample is overestimating in case of rural area and under estimating in urban area.
To bring both the sample at same levels, than MPCE at household level has been neutralized
by the factor of extent of over estimation and under estimation for both rural and urban
areas in state sample. On revised data, estimates of population below poverty level have been
estimated for state sample and combined sample. The results are depicted in table 7 to 9.
The relative positioning of districts for central, state and combined sample is presented
below. It is observed that in each of four categories the number of common district has
increased. Overall the number of common districts has increased from eight to twelve. This
indicates an improvement over previous exercise. See Chart 2.

Chart 2: Rural Poverty:

MPCE Normalized at State Level:
Category

Central Sample

State Sample

Combined Sample

No. of common
district

District with More

than 50 % less
poverty than State
Average Poverty

Neemuch, East
Nimar, Barwani,
Rajgarh, West
Nimar, Datia,
Mandsaur, Bhind,
Guna, Ratlam,
Dewas

Mandla, Indore,
Gwalior, Morena,
Seoni, Bhind,
Balaghat, Shajapur,
Shivpuri, Guna,
Sheopur

Gwalior, Indore,
Morena, Bhind,
Guna, Neemuch

District with 50 %
less poverty than
State Average
Poverty

Satna, Gwalior,
Morena, Indore,
Dhar, Ujjain,
Shajapur,
Chhindwara,
Jabalpur, Bhopal.
Narsimhapur

Sehore,
Narsimhapur,
Dewas, Dhar,
Hoshangabad,
Sagar, Mandsaur,
Rajgarh, Dindori,
Datia, Raisen,
Jhabua, Neemuch,
Ujjain

Rajgarh, Dewas,
Mandsaur, Shajapur,
Datia, Dhar, East
Nimar, Shivpuri,
Sheopur, Ratlam,
Narsimhapur, Sehore,
Ujjain, Hoshangabad,
Balaghat, West
Nimar, Chhindwara

District with 50 %
more poverty than
State Average
Poverty

Hoshangabad,
Harda, Sheopur,
Shivpuri, Sehore,
Rewa, Tikamgarh,
Katni, Damoh,
Panna, Vidisha,
Chhatarpur,
Balaghat, Betul

Vidisha,
Chhindwara,
Damoh, Ratlam,
Rewa, Betul, Sidhi,
Tikamgarh, East
Nimar, Jabalpur,
Chhatarpur

Satna, Seoni, Sagar,

Jabalpur, Bhopal,
Vidisha, Rewa,
Damoh, Jhabua,
Mandla, Barwani,
Tikamgarh, Raisen,
Katni, Betul,
Chhatarpur, Dindori

District with More

than 50 % higher
poverty than State
Average Poverty

Sagar, Jhabua,
Sidhi, Raisen,
Seoni, Shahdol,
Dindori,
Mandla, Umaria

Bhopal, Katni,
West Nimar, Satna,
Shahdol, Umaria,
Panna, Harda,
Barwani

Sidhi, Panna, Harda,

Shahdol, Umaria

On comparison of average MPCE, at district level for rural and urban area for both central
and state sample, it is observed that the degree of variation differs for each district as show in
table below. Thus the variation in state sample has to be neutralized for each district to bring
it in line with central sample as done at state level in earlier exercise. The proportion of
population below poverty line has been calculated for state and combined sample. This
exercise revealed that the number of common district in each category has increase
substantially. In case of rural area overall the number of common districts has increased from
increased from 8 to 25. See Chart 3.

Comparison of Average MPCE District wise:

State Sample
Districts
Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

Rural
506
614
597
570
545
572
698
441
430
392
571
506
443
465
423
373
480
502
582
534
596
619
499
469
537
614
420
358
398
553
580
602
601
535
464
371
559
436
452
558
521
650
465
760
634
521

Urban
735
704
683
955
705
761
809
615
491
506
584
803
692
576
730
796
782
878
635
700
874
705
482
740
737
1075
513
601
721
610
507
1016
629
588
659
597
608
692
632
928
709
969
432
1026
844
728

Central Sample
Rural
481
469
567
502
542
361
444
358
354
376
377
378
508
405
289
333
366
668
566
416
566
483
749
350
589
535
475
438
504
599
416
421
373
327
350
469
470
375
459
394
278
312
462
349
368
439

Urban
790
645
596
941
698
479
665
653
496
589
551
486
646
773
973
961
1121
933
1043
565
1542
725
577
778
654
1648
708
627
701
893
817
856
632
626
960
1076
855
640
871
681
637
669
859
621
644
904

Difference in MPCE
Rural
-25
-145
-30
-68
-3
-210
-254
-82
-76
-16
-194
-127
65
-61
-134
-40
-113
166
-16
-118
-30
-136
250
-119
52
-79
55
81
106
46
-163
-182
-228
-208
-114
97
-88
-60
8
-164
-242
-338
-3
-412
-267
-82

Urban
55
-59
-87
-13
-7
-282
-143
38
5
83
-33
-317
-45
197
242
164
339
55
408
-135
668
21
95
37
-83
573
196
26
-20
283
310
-159
3
39
302
479
246
-53
238
-247
-72
-300
426
-405
-200
176

Variation in MPCE as compare to central

sample (in %)
Rural
-5.26
-31.00
-5.29
-13.47
-0.59
-58.18
-57.13
-22.99
-21.42
-4.26
-51.42
-33.65
12.80
-15.00
-46.45
-12.05
-30.96
24.88
-2.81
-28.49
-5.32
-28.18
33.42
-33.99
8.88
-14.77
11.55
18.38
21.05
7.64
-39.28
-43.13
-61.23
-63.74
-32.65
20.78
-18.75
-16.13
1.66
-41.67
-87.10
-108.24
-0.69
-118.10
-72.51
-18.68

Urban
6.92
-9.17
-14.59
-1.42
-1.00
-58.83
-21.57
5.82
1.02
14.13
-6.03
-65.25
-7.02
25.43
24.89
17.12
30.22
5.91
39.14
-23.96
43.33
2.84
16.43
4.81
-12.69
34.77
27.61
4.20
-2.85
31.68
37.97
-18.62
0.41
6.18
31.41
44.54
28.82
-8.25
27.36
-36.27
-11.24
-44.76
49.66
-65.13
-30.98
19.43

Chart 3: Rural Poverty:

Normalized at District Level State Level:
Category

Central Sample

State Sample

Combined Sample

No. of
common
district

District with More

than 50 % less
poverty than State
Average Poverty

Neemuch, East
Nimar, Barwani,
Rajgarh, West
Nimar, Datia,
Mandsaur,
Bhind, Guna,
Ratlam,
Dewas
(11)

Neemuch,
Gwalior, Dewas,
Dhar, Bhind,
Indore, Morena,
East Nimar,
Rajgarh, Satna,
Datia, Sheopur,
West Nimar
(13)

Neemuch, East
Nimar, Bhind,
Gwalior, Dewas,
Rajgarh, Indore,
Dhar, Barwani,
Datia, Morena,
West Nimar, Satna,
Mandsaur
(14)

District with 50 %
less poverty than
State Average
Poverty

Satna, Gwalior,
Morena, Indore,
Dhar, Ujjain,
Shajapur,
Chhindwara,
Jabalpur, Bhopal.
Narsimhapur
(11)

Mandsaur,
Chhindwara,
Barwani,
Hoshangabad,
Ujjain, Shajapur,
Jabalpur, Harda,
Guna
(9)

Sheopur, Guna,
Chhindwara, Ujjain,
Shajapur, Ratlam,
Jabalpur,
Hoshangabad,
Harda
(9)

District with 50 %
more poverty than
State Average
Poverty

Hoshangabad,
Harda, Sheopur,
Shivpuri, Sehore,
Rewa,
Tikamgarh,
Katni, Damoh,
Panna, Vidisha,
Chhatarpur,
Balaghat, Betul
(14)

Rewa, Ratlam,
Balaghat, Panna,
Shivpuri, Katni,
Narsimhapur,
Sagar, Tikamgarh
(9)

Shivpuri, Rewa,
Narsimhapur,
Panna, Sehore,
Tikamgarh, Katni,
Balaghat, Bhopal,
Vidisha,
Chhatarpur, Sagar
(12)

District with More

than 50 % higher
poverty than State
Average Poverty

Sagar, Jhabua,
Sidhi, Raisen,
Seoni, Shahdol,
Dindori,
Mandla, Umaria
(9)

Chhatarpur,
Jhabua, Vidisha,
Betul, Seoni,
Sehore, Raisen,
Shahdol, Sidhi,
Damoh, Bhopal,
Mandla, Dindori,
Umaria
(14)

Damoh, Jhabua,
Betul, Raisen, Sidhi,
Seoni, Shahdol,
Mandla, Dindori,
Umaria
(10)

The results of similar exercise for urban areas have revealed improvement in relative
positioning. See chart 4 to 6.

Chart 4: Urban Poverty:

Category

Central Sample

State Sample

District with More

than 50 % less
poverty than State
Average Poverty
District with 50 %
less poverty than
State Average
Poverty

Shahdol,
Mandsaur,
Sidhi, Indore,
Umaria

Seoni, Gwalior,
Indore, Mandla

Ujjain, Rajgarh,
Neemuch,
Jabalpur,
Bhopal, East
Nimar,
Hoshangabad,
Morena, Jhabua

Guna, Balaghat,
Ujjain, Neemuch,
Morena, Shivpuri,
Sidhi, Narsimhapur,
Jabalpur, Bhopal,
Damoh, Dindori,
Shahdol, Bhind,
Shajapur, Sheopur,
Betul, Sehore, Satna,
East Nimar

District with 50 %
more poverty than
State Average
Poverty

Dhar, Satna,
Rewa, Gwalior,
Shajapur, Panna,
Sehore, Sheopur,
Harda, Raisen,
Balaghat,
Mandla, Dewas,
Betul, West
Nimar, Dindori,
Vidisha, Katni,
Barwani,
Narsimhapur,
Tikamgarh,
Guna, Seoni,
Chhindwara,
Ratlam,
Chhatarpur,
Datia

District with More

than 50 % higher
poverty than State
Average Poverty

Sagar, Bhind,
Damoh,
Shivpuri

Ratlam, Jhabua,
Umaria, Tikamgarh,
Katni, Mandsaur,
Rajgarh, Harda,
Barwani, Dhar,
Rewa, Datia, Sagar,
Hoshangabad,
Vidisha

Panna, Raisen,
Dewas, West Nimar,
Chhatarpur,
Chhindwara

Combined Sample No. of common

district
Indore
1

Sidhi, Ujjain,
Neemuch, Gwalior,
Shahdol, Morena,
Balaghat, Jabalpur,
Mandla, Bhopal,
Seoni,
Narsimhapur,
Guna, Shajapur,
East Nimar,
Mandsaur, Umaria,
Dindori, Betul,
Satna
Sehore, Sheopur,
Jhabua, Damoh,
Rajgarh,
Tikamgarh,
Hoshangabad,
Harda, Katni,
Bhind, Rewa, Dhar,
Shivpuri, Ratlam,
Barwani, Vidisha,
Datia, Panna, Sagar

Dewas, Raisen,
West Nimar,
Chhindwara,
Chhatarpur

Chart 5: Urban Poverty:

Normalized at State Level:
Category

Central Sample

State Sample

Combined
Sample

District with More

than 50 % less
poverty than State
Average Poverty

Shahdol,
Mandsaur, Sidhi,
Indore, Umaria

Mandla, Seoni,
Ujjain, Morena,
Bhind, Shivpuri,
Guna, Gwalior,
Neemuch, Bhopal,
Sidhi

Ujjain

District with 50 %
less poverty than
State Average
Poverty

Ujjain, Rajgarh,
Neemuch,
Jabalpur, Bhopal,
East Nimar,
Hoshangabad,
Morena, Jhabua

Narsimhapur,
Indore, Damoh,
Ratlam, Shajapur,
Shahdol, Balaghat,
Dindori, Satna,
Dhar, Umaria

Sidhi, Neemuch,
Morena, Indore,
Shahdol, Mandla,
Bhopal, Shajapur,
Mandsaur, Umaria
, Narsimhapur,
Gwalior, Guna,
Dhar, Balaghat,
Jabalpur, Rajgarh

District with 50 %
more poverty than
State Average
Poverty

Dhar, Satna,
Rewa, Gwalior,
Shajapur, Panna,
Sehore, Sheopur,
Harda, Raisen,
Balaghat, Mandla,
Dewas, Betul,
West Nimar,
Dindori, Vidisha,
Katni, Barwani,
Narsimhapur,
Tikamgarh, Guna,
Seoni,
Chhindwara,
Ratlam,
Chhatarpur, Datia

Rewa, Sehore,
Katni, Jabalpur,
Mandsaur, Jhabua,
Betul, Sheopur,
Rajgarh, Sagar,
Tikamgarh, East
Nimar, Barwani

Rewa, Sehore,
Seoni, Jhabua,
Dindori, Satna,
Betul, Bhind,
Damoh, East
Nimar, Tikamgarh,
Katni, Sheopur,
Ratlam, Barwani,
Hoshangabad,
Raisen, Sagar,
Shivpuri, Harda,
Dewas

District with More

than 50 % higher
poverty than State
Average Poverty

Sagar, Bhind,
Damoh, Shivpuri

Raisen, Dewas,
Harda,
Hoshangabad,
Vidisha, Datia,
West Nimar,
Panna,
Chhatarpur,
Chhindwara

Panna, Vidisha,
West Nima r,
Datia, Chhatarpur,
Chhindwara

No. of
common
district
0

Chart 6: Urban Poverty:

Normalized at District Level:
Category

Central Sample

State Sample

Combined Sample

No. of common
district

District with
More than 50 %
less poverty than
State Average
Poverty
District with 50
% less poverty
than State
Average Poverty

Shahdol,
Mandsaur, Sidhi,
Indore, Umaria

Mandsaur, Ujjain,
Indore,
Chhindwara, Sidhi,
Betul, Gwalior

Mandsaur, Ujjain,
Indore, Sidhi,
Shahdol

Ujjain, Rajgarh,
Neemuch,
Jabalpur, Bhopal,
East Nimar,
Hoshangabad,
Morena, Jhabua

Rajgarh, Neemuch,
Jabalpur, Shahdol,
Rewa, Harda,
Vidisha, Umaria,
Morena, Sehore,
West Nimar

Rajgarh, Betul,
Neemuch,
Chhindwara,
Umaria, Jabalpur,
Rewa, Gwalior,
Harda,
Morena, Vidisha,
Sehore,
Hoshangabad

District with 50
% more poverty
than State
Average Poverty

Dhar, Satna,
Rewa, Gwalior,
Shajapur, Panna,
Sehore, Sheopur,
Harda, Raisen,
Balaghat, Mandla,
Dewas, Betul,
West Nimar,
Dindori, Vidisha,
Katni, Barwani,
Narsimhapur,
Tikamgarh, Guna,
Seoni,
Chhindwara,
Ratlam,
Chhatarpur, Datia

Shajapur,
Hoshangabad,
Sheopur, Jhabua,
Satna, Narsimhapur,
East Nimar, Guna,
Tikamgarh,
Dindori, Mandla,
Seoni, Balaghat,
Dewas, Panna,
Bhopal, Barwani

Shajapur, East
Nimar, West Nimar,
Jhabua, Satna,
Sheopur, Tikamgarh,
Narsimhapur,
Bhopal,
Balaghat, Mandla,
Dewas, Dindori,
Guna, Panna, Seoni,
Barwani, Dhar,
Katni, Raisen

13

District with
More than 50 %
higher poverty
than State
Average Poverty

Sagar, Bhind,
Damoh, Shivpuri

Dhar, Katni, Raisen,

Datia, Bhind,
Ratlam, Damoh,
Sagar, Shivpuri,
Chhatarpur

Datia, Ratlam,
Bhind, Damoh,
Sagar, Chhatarpur,
Shivpuri

Thus the improvement in relative positioning shows that the estimates obtained from
combined sample after neutralizing state sample at district level are much better as compare
to those obtained from without neutralizing state sample and neutralizing state sample at
state level with that of central sample. The results obtained are in line with general
perception of experts who are well versed with state situation though with few exceptions.
Thus using these results one has to be cautious.
The estimated proportion of population obtained from combined sample of State and
Central after neutralizing MPCE of state level with respect to central at district level is used
to revise the estimates of district wise poverty taking over all Rural and Urban poverty for the
state as given by Planning Commission Government of India, 2007. In addition to this
following assumption have been made:
Assumptions:
1. Distribution of Rural and urban Population among districts will be same as estimated
from combined sample.
2. Using District-wise, Rural and Urban Poverty ratio as calculated from above exercise.
The population below poverty line for each district has been calculated.
3. Number of BPL Households has been estimated on the basis of (i) assuming Average
Household size in the district (ii) assuming Average Household size of BPL families in
the district as calculated from combined sample.
On comparison of district wise rural poverty and per capita income from agriculture
(inclusive of animal husbandry) below and above state average 18 out of 22 are common
districts (above state average of rural poverty) and 9 out of 23 are common in case of state
below average of rural poverty. In case of urban poverty, comparison is done per capita
income from other than primary sector. It is found that24 out of 27 districts are common in
case of above state average of urban poverty and 10 out of 18 districts are common in case of
below state average of urban poverty. As poverty is the function of extent of equitable
distribution of income among population under consideration. In absence of income
distribution data to estimate Gini coefficients/ Lorenz curve etc., which are measures to
judge how equitable is income distribution. Thus it seems that estimates of poverty obtained
from combined central and state sample with normalization of monthly per capita
expenditure (uniform reference period) at district levels are better as compare to those
obtained from individual samples.
It is estimated that of the total population 65.20 million 25.03 million were below poverty
line in 2004-05. In rural Madhya Pradesh during 2004-05, there were 30, 19,221
households living below poverty line and in urban area the number of such households were
12, 95,423. The total number of households living below poverty line were 43, 14,644. It
has been calculated on the basis of average household size of BPL households. The district
wise estimates are presented for rural, urban and combined in Table 1 to 3.

10

Table 1: Estimates of Population and households living below poverty line in Rural MP
2004-05
Districts

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

Rural
Projected Population

Projected
Population
below poverty
line

% of Population
below poverty line

527744
1405864
1167312
777090
570136
1239552
1287108
1102876
1395381
858985
1574855
1021636
1651686
1739255
466281
1267929
1689850
528127
972088
1032674
1089695
1158221
979599
1534775
1593679
824066
1367278
920441
1334267
1129988
857088
365069
814420
938734
1265703
437446
757244
931159
1000311
834196
567580
765370
1392132
1198463
1300646
47634000

129445
209416
104008
75053
80744
532520
335284
542491
757202
409073
856959
578581
278020
757540
396787
812512
1024824
471
173277
308009
297692
319539
95523
877705
214574
100191
210441
124521
98191
137275
463690
195911
400152
566914
727253
151970
247552
460757
302944
367244
457291
593038
367012
740599
646057
17528263

24.5
14.9
8.9
9.7
14.2
43.0
26.0
49.2
54.3
47.6
54.4
56.6
16.8
43.6
85.1
64.1
60.6
0.1
17.8
29.8
27.3
27.6
9.8
57.2
13.5
12.2
15.4
13.5
7.4
12.1
54.1
53.7
49.1
60.4
57.5
34.7
32.7
49.5
30.3
44.0
80.6
77.5
26.4
61.8
49.7
36.8

11

Number of
Households
below poverty
line(based on
Avg. HHD size)
22956
33130
17019
10860
14772
98361
67375
98689
125721
87856
172606
116389
52067
151284
78294
165362
197029
97
33444
55382
55388
58033
17617
141881
38934
18477
38596
21462
17531
22728
97633
34910
71571
99156
126588
28038
45786
95236
66705
70781
97034
130927
77622
157537
148677
3377540

Number of
Households below
poverty line(based on
Avg. HHD size of
BPL hhd )
21489
30122
15559
11008
12129
98280
55562
80742
104024
71624
166346
97886
48524
158078
73058
166083
194365
121
27364
45661
44156
60885
17512
121932
28632
14044
26935
17148
12260
18663
69511
28658
63019
91220
107299
23766
43614
86818
63957
60333
87580
100816
72515
127172
152751
3019221

Table 2: Estimates of Population and households living below poverty line in urban MP
2004-05
Districts

Urban
Projected Population

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

78433
365987
467472
729441
146535
200601
388269
412029
389978
148045
795431
188452
388666
295404
106620
714404
259496
203711
208083
494512
797565
460089
363747
192028
228987
1378971
234855
193945
530933
485956
260298
1455781
213972
483275
403389
102620
520361
228720
870594
187966
10297
65382
596317
95223
224159
17567000

Projected
Population
below poverty
line

% of Population
below poverty line

37834
141630
327487
248007
96716
168872
213327
209442
324797
81579
589355
137362
184350
96048
29944
148135
44358
52636
17763
341169
103711
203009
197527
87602
139117
232401
106848
116461
234500
114898
102408
750199
86769
309263
100153
37242
220945
145341
250842
95621
5636
34513
163963
55542
117814
7503136

48.2
38.7
70.1
34.0
66.0
84.2
54.9
50.8
83.3
55.1
74.1
72.9
47.4
32.5
28.1
20.7
17.1
25.8
8.5
69.0
13.0
44.1
54.3
45.6
60.8
16.9
45.5
60.0
44.2
23.6
39.3
51.5
40.6
64.0
24.8
36.3
42.5
63.5
28.8
50.9
54.7
52.8
27.5
58.3
52.6
42.7

12

Number of
Households
below poverty
line(based on
Avg. HHD size)
6284
26708
61423
46261
19867
33983
45732
37721
64050
15421
106558
27929
32929
16719
7253
30748
8808
9760
3939
58941
19933
38992
35252
17464
26623
50663
19871
27687
44377
20633
19744
152999
15846
52198
17709
7010
41327
31394
49860
21183
1191
7208
33572
13464
27324
1454557

Number of
Households below
poverty line(based on
Avg. HHD size of
BPL hhd )
6124
24079
52707
39680
18832
29860
37885
39040
58887
14288
101467
26509
28630
15586
7206
28608
7976
9716
3679
53913
16978
37641
32768
15155
24150
35366
18595
26154
42119
19712
15992
116559
15694
41025
15628
6499
39443
26696
45953
19235
1035
6840
31450
11756
28305
1295423

Table 3: Estimates of Population and households living below poverty line in MP 200405
Districts

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

Rural and Urban Combined

Projected Population

Projected
Population below
poverty line

% of Population
below poverty line

606177
1771852
1634783
1506531
716671
1440152
1675377
1514906
1785360
1007030
2370285
1210088
2040351
2034659
572901
1982333
1949347
731838
1180171
1527186
1887260
1618310
1343346
1726803
1822666
2203037
1602133
1114386
1865199
1615944
1117386
1820849
1028392
1422009
1669091
540067
1277605
1159880
1870905
1022163
577877
830752
1988449
1293686
1524805
65201000

167279
351046
431495
323060
177460
701393
548610
751932
1082000
490652
1446314
715943
462370
853588
426732
960648
1069182
53108
191040
649178
401403
522548
293050
965306
353692
332592
317288
240982
332691
252173
566098
946110
486921
876176
827406
189212
468497
606098
553787
462865
462927
627551
530975
796141
763871
25031399

27.60
19.81
26.39
21.44
24.76
48.70
32.75
49.64
60.60
48.72
61.02
59.16
22.66
41.95
74.49
48.46
54.85
7.26
16.19
42.51
21.27
32.29
21.81
55.90
19.41
15.10
19.80
21.62
17.84
15.61
50.66
51.96
47.35
61.62
49.57
35.04
36.67
52.26
29.60
45.28
80.11
75.54
26.70
61.54
50.10
38.39

13

Number of
Households below
poverty line(based
on Avg. HHD
size)
29240
59838
78441
57121
34639
132344
113106
136410
189771
103276
279164
144318
84996
168002
85547
196110
205837
9857
37384
114324
75321
97025
52869
159345
65556
69140
58467
49148
61907
43361
117377
187909
87417
151354
144296
35048
87114
126630
116565
91964
98225
138135
111194
171001
176001
4832097

Number of
Households below
poverty line(based on
Avg. HHD size of BPL
hhd )
27613
54201
68267
50688
30961
128140
93448
119783
162911
85913
267813
124395
77154
173665
80264
194691
202341
9838
31043
99574
61134
98526
50279
137087
52782
49410
45531
43301
54379
38374
85503
145217
78713
132246
122927
30265
83057
113514
109909
79568
88615
107656
103965
138929
181056
4314644

Table 4: District wise Poverty Ratio Estimates based on Central, State and Combined
Sample: Rural
Districts

Central Sample
% of
Population
below poverty
line

State Sample
Rank

% of
Population
below poverty
line

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat

37.6
20.8
16.4
20.5
14.7
38.7
16.6
44.1
52.8
49.6
55.7
49.0
19.8
43.1
76.4
64.4
57.6
0.2
15.5
17.1
28.9
29.0
17.7
56.9
23.9
21.8
14.1
6.3
4.7
11.9
51.3
34.5
39.1
58.1
53.7
37.2
37.2
48.9
33.3
36.6
72.0
73.7
30.9
59.9
53.5

25
14
8
13
6
26
9
29
34
32
37
31
12
28
45
42
39
1
7
10
17
18
11
38
16
15
5
3
2
4
33
21
27
40
36
24
23
30
20
22
43
44
19
41
35

14.0
1.5
0.8
0.0
11.4
7.2
8.1
32.5
38.3
48.4
11.2
26.1
41.5
32.3
31.2
50.3
26.5
21.7
17.3
22.1
22.1
7.0
13.5
18.8
14.5
1.0
41.6
64.0
35.7
16.1
19.9
43.8
6.2
19.3
36.0
47.7
13.1
35.1
27.8
13.8
6.7
0.0
23.9
4.4
5.9

MP

36.8

25

21.9

14

Combined
Rank

17
4
2
1
13
10
11
33
37
42
12
28
38
32
31
43
29
24
20
26
25
9
15
21
18
3
39
44
35
19
23
40
7
22
36
41
14
34
30
16
8
1
27
5
6

% of Population
below poverty
line
18.0
10.0
8.2
8.9
13.1
20.8
11.7
32.6
40.8
43.3
29.1
34.5
26.4
31.0
48.4
55.3
39.8
4.5
14.4
11.8
23.3
16.9
14.0
32.3
17.2
11.2
21.7
29.0
16.6
11.2
33.0
37.5
20.6
37.0
42.9
40.4
24.0
36.5
28.0
23.3
39.5
42.9
23.5
34.9
27.0
26.3

Rank

15
4
2
3
9
17
7
30
40
43
27
32
23
28
44
45
38
1
11
8
20
13
10
29
14
6
18
26
12
5
31
36
16
35
42
39
22
34
25
19
37
41
21
33
24

Table 5: District wise Poverty Ratio Estimates based on Central, State and Combined
Sample: Urban
Districts
Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

Central Sample
% of Population
below poverty line
49.2
42.1
69.1
46.8
64.0
77.4
58.4
58.3
62.2
48.2
67.5
70.1
45.0
46.5
20.9
12.6
19.4
32.7
18.0
61.7
25.4
48.0
53.4
42.3
44.5
20.2
54.9
58.0
37.7
25.9
56.8
34.8
48.5
50.9
54.1
50.6
39.3
56.9
33.9
58.1
55.8
52.8
60.1
59.8
52.3
42.7

Rank
22
13
43
18
41
45
36
35
40
20
42
44
16
17
5
1
3
8
2
39
6
19
27
14
15
4
29
33
11
7
31
10
21
24
28
23
12
32
9
34
30
26
38
37
25

State Sample
% of Population
below poverty line
40.4
18.7
32.0
16.0
60.3
24.2
14.0
45.7
78.3
64.9
60.3
28.8
38.0
51.0
46.0
31.6
22.4
20.6
45.1
35.9
25.2
39.2
69.9
42.3
53.8
21.0
76.5
55.1
43.5
52.7
61.4
28.7
30.4
60.7
36.5
49.6
57.1
44.5
30.8
29.6
32.7
18.2
80.0
9.0
24.6
41.0

15

Rank
24
5
18
3
37
9
2
29
44
41
38
13
22
32
30
17
8
6
28
20
11
23
42
25
34
7
43
35
26
33
40
12
15
39
21
31
36
27
16
14
19
4
45
1
10

Combined
% of Population
below poverty line
44.7
30.8
53.0
30.6
61.2
54.3
38.2
50.8
77.2
62.2
63.5
48.3
44.0
53.3
42.5
30.8
23.3
27.9
42.4
54.5
25.7
40.9
67.0
45.5
53.5
20.9
70.6
55.7
41.0
49.0
61.1
34.6
44.1
67.5
43.9
52.7
50.8
52.9
32.6
36.8
43.4
33.2
76.4
36.1
31.7
44.0

Rank
23
7
31
5
38
34
14
27
45
39
40
25
21
32
18
6
2
4
17
35
3
15
41
24
33
1
43
36
16
26
37
11
22
42
20
29
28
30
9
13
19
10
44
12
8

Table 6: District wise Poverty Ratio Estimates based on Central, State and Combined
Sample: Total
Districts

Central Sample
% of
Population
below poverty
line

State Sample
Rank

% of
Population
below poverty
line

Combined
Rank

% of Population
below poverty
line

Rank

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla

39.5
23.9
33.1
34.7
20.9
46.1
26.0
45.4
53.9
49.4
59.1
51.7
25.1
43.4
71.6
51.0
51.7
7.3
15.9
33.7
27.5
31.9
27.2
55.8
25.0
20.7
18.8
11.1
14.2
13.5
52.4
34.7
40.5
57.1
53.8
39.5
38.1
50.4
33.5
39.2
71.8
72.5

24
9
16
19
8
29
12
28
38
30
41
33
11
27
43
32
34
1
5
18
14
15
13
39
10
7
6
2
4
3
35
20
26
40
37
25
22
31
17
23
44
45

7.8
8.0
13.1
8.6
27.0
9.1
12.1
33.4
47.1
44.4
29.5
19.6
35.8
26.8
22.1
41.7
18.1
14.8
23.1
20.3
22.2
19.5
32.9
13.5
20.4
14.3
40.6
50.5
34.0
32.5
30.4
35.3
13.7
43.1
35.6
46.0
33.6
30.4
27.9
15.8
5.3
3.0

4
5
10
7
25
8
9
32
44
41
27
18
37
24
21
39
16
14
23
19
22
17
31
11
20
13
38
4
5
10
7
25
8
9
32
44
41
27
18
37
24
21

22.0
14.9
22.6
20.3
24.3
26.1
18.6
38.1
49.9
46.5
42.0
37.0
30.2
34.8
47.1
45.5
37.2
11.8
20.0
27.2
24.4
24.5
30.2
34.0
22.5
17.7
29.9
34.3
24.4
23.9
40.4
35.1
26.2
48.5
43.1
43.0
36.0
40.2
30.3
26.1
39.6
42.0

7
2
9
6
11
16
4
32
45
42
37
30
22
26
43
41
31
1
5
18
13
14
21
24
8
3
20
25
12
10
35
28
17
44
40
39
29
34
23
15
33
38

Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

37.3
59.9
53.4
38.2

21
42
36

44.4
4.8
8.4
26.1

39
16
14

41.3
35.0
27.8
31.7

36
27
19

16

Table 7: District wise Poverty Ratio Estimates based on Central, State and Combined
Sample (After MPCE Neutralization using Average MPCE at State Level for State
Sample): Rural
Districts

Central Sample
Rank

% of
Population
below poverty
line

State Sample
Rank

% of
Population
below poverty
line

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat

37.6
20.8
16.4
20.5
14.7
38.7
16.6
44.1
52.8
49.6
55.7
49.0
19.8
43.1
76.4
64.4
57.6
0.2
15.5
17.1
28.9
29.0
17.7
56.9
23.9
21.8
14.1
6.3
4.7
11.9
51.3
34.5
39.1
58.1
53.7
37.2
37.2
48.9
33.3
36.6
72.0
73.7
30.9
59.9
53.5

25
14
8
13
6
26
9
29
34
32
37
31
12
28
45
42
39
1
7
10
17
18
11
38
16
15
5
3
2
4
33
21
27
40
36
24
23
30
20
22
43
44
19
41
35

14.0
2.6
7.7
2.1
26.9
12.2
13.1
42.5
44.3
60.7
21.7
32.7
52.9
39.4
60.2
58.6
42.3
27.5
21.8
36.7
29.5
10.4
19.6
27.3
19.9
1.0
49.4
75.4
43.3
24.4
31.3
45.3
17.1
27.3
41.3
75.1
21.0
45.4
44.2
19.4
25.1
0.0
32.1
6.2
10.0

MP

36.8

25

29.8

17

11
4
6
3
21
9
10
33
36
43
17
28
40
30
42
41
32
24
18
29
25
8
14
23
15
2
39
45
34
19
26
37
12
22
31
44
16
38
35
13
20
1
27
5
7

Combined
% of Population
below poverty
line

Rank

24.4
11.4
11.9
10.1
20.7
24.0
14.9
43.4
48.4
55.7
38.0
42.1
35.4
41.3
69.7
61.6
51.0
15.3
18.9
26.7
29.3
19.8
18.6
42.5
21.9
11.2
31.0
43.2
23.6
16.9
41.1
40.3
28.5
43.8
47.5
56.9
30.2
47.2
38.9
27.9
49.4
42.9
31.4
35.7
30.4

15
3
4
1
11
14
5
35
39
42
26
31
24
30
45
44
41
6
9
16
19
10
8
32
12
2
22
34
13
7
29
28
18
36
38
43
20
37
27
17
40
33
23
25
21

33.4

Table 8: District wise Poverty Ratio Estimates based on Central, State and Combined
Sample (After MPCE Neutralization using Average MPCE at State Level for State
Sample): Urban
Districts
Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

Central Sample
% of Population
below poverty line
49.2
42.1
69.1
46.8
64.0
77.4
58.4
58.3
62.2
48.2
67.5
70.1
45.0
46.5
20.9
12.6
19.4
32.7
18.0
61.7
25.4
48.0
53.4
42.3
44.5
20.2
54.9
58.0
37.7
25.9
56.8
34.8
48.5
50.9
54.1
50.6
39.3
56.9
33.9
58.1
55.8
52.8
60.1
59.8
52.3
42.7

Rank
22
13
43
18
41
45
36
35
40
20
42
44
16
17
5
1
3
8
2
39
6
19
27
14
15
4
29
33
11
7
31
10
21
24
28
23
12
32
9
34
30
26
38
37
25

State Sample
% of Population
Rank
below poverty line
32.1
30
9.3
4
9.8
5
11.4
8
49.4
41
10.0
6
10.4
7
37.2
33
54.8
44
52.2
35.6
18.1
25.9
27.8
27.4
21.7
13.2
12.0
29.1
19.2
7.6
20.2
43.4
30.8
26.8
16.5
51.0
39.8
39.5
34.0
48.9
12.4
27.9
42.4
31.4
44.6
47.6
28.7
28.8
15.9
23.3
1.7
66.6
4.2
22.4
27.7

18

43
32
14
20
23
22
17
11
9
27
15
3
16
37
28
21
13
42
35
34
31
40
10
24
36
29
38
39
25
26
12
19
1
45
2
18

Combined
% of Population
below poverty line
40.5
18.2
37.6
27.7
53.0
46.7
29.6
39.6
56.2
51.1
45.9
38.1
35.7
33.3
26.0
19.2
16.8
17.7
25.7
41.8
14.3
25.6
47.6
34.0
29.8
18.5
52.3
43.3
38.7
32.7
51.8
20.3
33.9
43.6
36.0
46.8
43.4
40.4
30.7
26.6
34.8
19.8
64.7
33.9
29.9
33.1

Rank
31
4
26
13
43
37
14
29
44
40
36
27
24
19
11
6
2
3
10
32
1
9
39
22
15
5
42
33
28
18
41
8
20
35
25
38
34
30
17
12
23
7
45
21
16

Table 9: District wise Poverty Ratio Estimates based on Central, State and Combined
Sample (After MPCE Neutralization using Average MPCE at State Level for State
Sample): Total
Districts

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

Central Sample

State Sample

Combined

% of
Population
below poverty
line

Rank

% of
Population
below poverty
line

Rank

% of Population
below poverty
line

Rank

39.5
23.9
33.1
34.7
20.9
46.1
26.0
45.4
53.9
49.4
59.1
51.7
25.1
43.4
71.6
51.0
51.7
7.3
15.9
33.7
27.5
31.9
27.2
55.8
25.0
20.7
18.8
11.1
14.2
13.5
52.4
34.7
40.5
57.1
53.8
39.5
38.1
50.4
33.5
39.2
71.8
72.5
37.3
59.9
53.4
38.2

24
9
16
19
8
29
12
28
38
30
41
33
11
27
43
32
34
1
5
18
14
15
13
39
10
7
6
2
4
3
35
20
26
40
37
25
22
31
17
23
44
45
21
42
36

16.5
4.6
8.4
6.9
34.1
11.9
12.3
40.2
47.9
58.9
27.7
29.2
46.8
36.8
49.0
40.2
37.8
21.7
23.6
30.6
18.6
14.7
27.7
28.0
21.5
10.8
49.8
65.7
42.0
29.4
36.8
17.4
20.5
35.3
37.6
67.4
33.8
41.1
35.7
18.4
25.0
0.2
46.9
6.0
12.7
29.1

11
2
5
4
27
7
8
34
40
43
21
23
38
31
41
35
33
17
18
25
14
10
20
22
16
6
42
44
37
24
30
12
15
28
32
45
26
36
29
13
19
1
39
3
9

26.8
13.0
20.1
19.4
28.2
27.6
18.7
42.2
50.3
54.9
40.9
41.4
35.4
40.0
60.4
44.7
45.7
16.0
20.3
32.2
22.3
21.7
27.4
41.4
23.1
16.1
34.6
43.3
28.4
22.2
43.9
23.8
29.8
43.7
44.3
54.7
36.1
45.7
34.8
27.6
49.1
40.8
42.6
35.5
30.3
33.3

13
1
6
5
17
16
4
32
42
44
29
30
24
27
45
38
40
2
7
21
10
8
14
31
11
3
22
34
18
9
36
12
19
35
37
43
26
39
23
15
41
28
33
25
20

19

Table 10: District wise Poverty Ratio Estimates based on Central, State and Combined
Sample (After MPCE Neutralization using Average MPCE at District Level for State
Sample): Rural
Districts

Central Sample
% of
Rank
Population
below poverty
line

State Sample
% of
Rank
Population
below poverty
line

Combined
% of Population
below poverty
line

Rank

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni

37.6
20.8
16.4
20.5
14.7
38.7
16.6
44.1
52.8
49.6
55.7
49.0
19.8
43.1
76.4
64.4
57.6
0.2
15.5
17.1
28.9
29.0
17.7
56.9
23.9
21.8
14.1
6.3
4.7
11.9
51.3
34.5
39.1
58.1
53.7
37.2
37.2
48.9

25
14
8
13
6
26
9
29
34
32
37
31
12
28
45
42
39
1
7
10
17
18
11
38
16
15
5
3
2
4
33
21
27
40
36
24
23
30

14.0
2.6
7.7
2.1
26.9
12.2
13.1
42.5
44.3
60.7
21.7
32.7
52.9
39.4
60.2
58.6
42.3
27.5
21.8
36.7
29.5
10.4
19.6
27.3
19.9
1.0
49.4
75.4
43.3
24.4
31.3
45.3
17.1
27.3
41.3
75.1
21.0
45.4

11
4
6
3
21
9
10
33
36
43
17
28
40
30
42
41
32
24
18
29
25
8
14
23
15
2
39
45
34
19
26
37
12
22
31
44
16
38

24.4
11.4
11.9
10.1
20.7
24.0
14.9
43.4
48.4
55.7
38.0
42.1
35.4
41.3
69.7
61.6
51.0
15.3
18.9
26.7
29.3
19.8
18.6
42.5
21.9
11.2
31.0
43.2
23.6
16.9
41.1
40.3
28.5
43.8
47.5
56.9
30.2
47.2

15
3
4
1
11
14
5
35
39
42
26
31
24
30
45
44
41
6
9
16
19
10
8
32
12
2
22
34
13
7
29
28
18
36
38
43
20
37

Jabalpur

33.3

20

44.2

35

38.9

27

Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla

36.6
72.0
73.7

22
43
44

19.4
25.1
0.0

13
20
1

27.9
49.4
42.9

17
40
33

Chhindwara

30.9

19

32.1

27

31.4

23

Seoni

59.9

41

6.2

35.7

25

Balaghat
MP

53.5
36.8

35
25

10.0
29.8

30.4
33.4

21

20

Table 11: District wise Poverty Ratio Estimates based on Central, State and Combined
Sample (After MPCE Neutralization using Average MPCE at District Level for State
Sample): Urban
Districts

Central Sample
% of
Rank
Population
below poverty
line

State Sample
% of
Rank
Population
below poverty
line

Combined
% of
Rank
Population
below poverty
line

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur

49.2
42.1
69.1
46.8
64.0
77.4
58.4
58.3
62.2

22
13
43
18
41
45
36
35
40

32.1
9.3
9.8
11.4
49.4
10.0
10.4
37.2
54.8

30
4
5
8
41
6
7
33
44

40.5
18.2
37.6
27.7
53.0
46.7
29.6
39.6
56.2

31
4
26
13
43
37
14
29
44

Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

48.2
67.5
70.1
45.0
46.5
20.9
12.6
19.4
32.7
18.0
61.7
25.4
48.0
53.4
42.3
44.5
20.2
54.9
58.0
37.7
25.9
56.8
34.8
48.5
50.9
54.1
50.6
39.3
56.9
33.9
58.1
55.8
52.8
60.1
59.8
52.3
42.7

20
42
44
16
17
5
1
3
8
2
39
6
19
27
14
15
4
29
33
11
7
31
10
21
24
28
23
12
32
9
34
30
26
38
37
25

52.2
35.6
18.1
25.9
27.8
27.4
21.7
13.2
12.0
29.1
19.2
7.6
20.2
43.4
30.8
26.8
16.5
51.0
39.8
39.5
34.0
48.9
12.4
27.9
42.4
31.4
44.6
47.6
28.7
28.8
15.9
23.3
1.7
66.6
4.2
22.4
27.7

43
32
14
20
23
22
17
11
9
27
15
3
16
37
28
21
13
42
35
34
31
40
10
24
36
29
38
39
25
26
12
19
1
45
2
18

51.1
45.9
38.1
35.7
33.3
26.0
19.2
16.8
17.7
25.7
41.8
14.3
25.6
47.6
34.0
29.8
18.5
52.3
43.3
38.7
32.7
51.8
20.3
33.9
43.6
36.0
46.8
43.4
40.4
30.7
26.6
34.8
19.8
64.7
33.9
29.9
33.1

40
36
27
24
19
11
6
2
3
10
32
1
9
39
22
15
5
42
33
28
18
41
8
20
35
25
38
34
30
17
12
23
7
45
21
16

21

Table 12: District wise Poverty Ratio Estimates based on Central, State and Combined
Sample (After MPCE Neutralization using Average MPCE at District Level for State
Sample): Total
Districts

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

Central Sample

State Sample

Combined

% of
Population
below poverty
line

Rank

% of
Population
below poverty
line

Rank

% of Population
below poverty
line

Rank

39.5
23.9
33.1
34.7
20.9
46.1
26.0
45.4
53.9
49.4
59.1
51.7
25.1
43.4
71.6
51.0
51.7
7.3
15.9
33.7
27.5
31.9
27.2
55.8
25.0
20.7
18.8
11.1
14.2
13.5
52.4
34.7
40.5
57.1
53.8
39.5
38.1
50.4
33.5
39.2
71.8
72.5
37.3
59.9
53.4
38.2

24
9
16
19
8
29
12
28
38
30
41
33
11
27
43
32
34
1
5
18
14
15
13
39
10
7
6
2
4
3
35
20
26
40
37
25
22
31
17
23
44
45
21
42
36

16.5
4.6
8.4
6.9
34.1
11.9
12.3
40.2
47.9
58.9
27.7
29.2
46.8
36.8
49.0
40.2
37.8
21.7
23.6
30.6
18.6
14.7
27.7
28.0
21.5
10.8
49.8
65.7
42.0
29.4
36.8
17.4
20.5
35.3
37.6
67.4
33.8
41.1
35.7
18.4
25.0
0.2
46.9
6.0
12.7
29.1

11
2
5
4
27
7
8
34
40
43
21
23
38
31
41
35
33
17
18
25
14
10
20
22
16
6
42
44
37
24
30
12
15
28
32
45
26
36
29
13
19
1
39
3
9

26.8
13.0
20.1
19.4
28.2
27.6
18.7
42.2
50.3
54.9
40.9
41.4
35.4
40.0
60.4
44.7
45.7
16.0
20.3
32.2
22.3
21.7
27.4
41.4
23.1
16.1
34.6
43.3
28.4
22.2
43.9
23.8
29.8
43.7
44.3
54.7
36.1
45.7
34.8
27.6
49.1
40.8
42.6
35.5
30.3
33.3

13
1
6
5
17
16
4
32
42
44
29
30
24
27
45
38
40
2
7
21
10
8
14
31
11
3
22
34
18
9
36
12
19
35
37
43
26
39
23
15
41
28
33
25
20

22

While estimating the population living below poverty line district wise distribution of
observations by monthly per capita expenditure classes (MPCE classes) were looked into.
MPCE class wise range is presented in Annexure 1
It is observed from the central sample that in rural areas, district wise number of observations
varies from 40 to 120 (Annexure 2). In some districts lower MPCE classes have no
observation for example Gwalior, Mandsaur and Ratlam are the districts where lowest
MPCE class does not have any observation. The districts of Datia, Guna, Satna, West
Nimar, Barwani and East Nimar do not have any observation in lowest two MPCE classes
and Neemuch is the district where three lowest categories of MPCE class have no
presentation. These three categories represent MPCE less than Rs.320 which is lower than
poverty line cut off point of Rs.327.18 paise as set by Planning Commission GOI. Thus
number of observation reveals that there is no poverty in district of Neemuch and other
districts mentioned above have less poverty which is not true especially in case of West
Nimar, Barwani and East Nimar. These observations leads to the conclusion that district
wise poverty estimates based on central sample needs to be used cautiously and may be
along with other parameters. It also necessitates finding out other alternative to estimate
district wise poverty.
The state sample also reveals similar type of observations as that of central sample as shown
in Annexure 3. In this case also the number of districts, with no observations in lowest
category, is 16 in number. In all there are 59 observations in lowest category. The districts
with no observations in first two lowest categories are 7 in number. Districts of Sheopur,
Morena and Mandla have no observation in first three lowest categories. These facts also
reveal that district wise poverty estimates based on state sample also need to be scrutinized
properly. The last alternative, to estimate poverty at district level is to use combined sample
i. e. central and state sample.
On combining central and state sample, the District wise Distribution of observations by
MPCE class is given in Annexure 4. This reveals that there are only five districts namely
Gwalior, Datia, Guna, Neemuch and West Nimar for which lowest MPCE class does not
have any observation. In combined sample all the districts have observation in second and
third lowest categories. Thus on combining sample the number of observations has doubled
in totality and improvised at category levels. The number of observations in first three
MPCE classes is sufficient (i.e. more than 5) in most of the districts except Gwalior and
Neemuch having 5 and 4 observations. Thus in case of poverty estimate for these two
districts should be used cautiously. Similar situation in respect of sample observation is
observed in case of urban area.
It reveals that sample size is not sufficient for estimating district wise poverty. Thus the
sample size has to be increased in case of NSSO rounds for central and state samples. In case
of urban area, the representation of different town classes has to be ensured to have better
estimates of urban poverty and sample size is also to be increased.
Keeping in view, the Report of Expert Group to Review the Methodology for Estimation of
Poverty under the chairmanship of Prof. Suresh Tendulkar to Planning Commission,

23

Government of India, It is necessary to re-estimate district wise poverty. The similar exercise
was undertaken as mentioned in this paper. The new cut-off points, as mentioned in the
report, are used to estimate the percentage of people living below poverty. These cut-off
points are Rs. 408.41 and Rs. 532.26 per capita per month for rural and urban area of the
state using mixed reference period instead of uniform reference period.
The estimated proportion of population obtained from combined sample of State and
Central after neutralizing MPCE of state level with respect to central at district level is used
to revise the estimates of district wise poverty taking over all Rural and Urban poverty for the
state as given by Planning Commission Government of India, November 2009. In addition
to this following assumption have been made:
Assumptions:
1.
Distribution of Rural and urban Population among districts will be same as estimated
from combined sample.
2.
Using District-wise, Rural and Urban Poverty ratio as calculated from above exercise.
The population below poverty line for each district has been calculated.
3.
Number of BPL Households has been estimated on the basis of (i) assuming Average
Household size in the district (ii) assuming Average Household size of BPL families in the
district as calculated from combined sample.
On comparison of district wise rural poverty and per capita income from agriculture
(inclusive of animal husbandry) below and above state average 15 out of 21 are common
districts (above the state average of rural poverty) and 17 out of 24 are common in case of
below state average of rural poverty. In case of urban poverty, comparison is done per capita
income from other than primary sector. It is found that 9 out of 20 districts are common in
case of above the state average of urban poverty and 22 out of 25 districts are common in case
of below the state average of urban poverty. As poverty is the function of extent of equitable
distribution of income among population under consideration. In absence of income
distribution data to estimate Gini coefficients/ Lorenz curve etc., which are measures to
judge how equitable is income distribution. Thus it seems that estimates of poverty obtained
from combined central and state sample with normalization of monthly per capita
expenditure at district levels are better as compare to those obtained from individual
samples.
It is estimated that of the total population 65.20 million 31.68 million were below poverty
line in 2004-05. In rural Madhya Pradesh during 2004-05, there were 43, 74,657
households living below poverty line and in urban area the number of such households were
10, 69,100. The total number of households living below poverty line were 54, 43,757. The
district wise estimates are presented for rural, urban and combined in Table 13 to 15.

24

Table 13: Estimates of Population and households living below poverty line in Rural MP
2004-05
Districts

Rural
Projected Population

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

527744
1405864
1167312
777090
570136
1239552
1287108
1102876
1395381
858985
1574855
1021636
1651686
1739255
466281
1267929
1689850
528127
972088
1032674
1089695
1158221
979599
1534775
1593679
824066
1367278
920441
1334267
1129988
857088
365069
814420
938734
1265703
437446
757244
931159
1000311
834196
567580
765370
1392132
1198463
1300646
47634000

Projected
Population
below poverty
line

% of Population
below poverty line

204794
346953
254735
94717
126756
592116
495370
757294
985173
675829
890447
610956
989089
1172474
420553
1089770
1275366
82518
312297
592196
470001
414688
310804
1037432
627326
217378
850779
694725
786981
379602
472260
238859
403189
601667
1000977
327271
399301
707360
457631
378776
341597
479796
734386
654898
567833
25524922

25

38.81
24.68
21.82
12.19
22.23
47.77
38.49
68.67
70.60
78.68
56.54
59.80
59.88
67.41
90.19
85.95
75.47
15.62
32.13
57.35
43.13
35.80
31.73
67.60
39.36
26.38
62.22
75.48
58.98
33.59
55.10
65.43
49.51
64.09
79.08
74.81
52.73
75.97
45.75
45.41
60.18
62.69
52.75
54.64
43.66
53.59

Number of
Households
below poverty
line(based on
Avg. HHD size)

36318
54889
41682
13705
23189
109368
99544
137766
163572
145146
179351
122902
185236
234148
82983
221790
245197
16945
60277
106481
87448
75314
57321
167701
113826
40088
156039
119739
140505
62850
99437
42563
72114
105234
174233
60381
73854
146207
100765
73004
72485
105926
155320
139307
130676
4852824

Number of
Households below
poverty line(based on
Avg. HHD size of
BPL hhd )

33830
51396
39479
14410
21202
107136
84546
114879
140462
115403
165063
107884
170631
225591
79977
222517
246640
16480
52568
92075
80448
78754
55781
150946
95069
33495
129309
105117
98600
53494
76259
32457
63379
101473
159000
56621
71176
130602
98853
63429
65831
84869
141206
116463
129858
4374657

Percent of Population below Poverty Line -Rural:2004-05

(Percent)

MP-53.59

Morena 24.68Bhind 21.82

Gwalior 12.19
Datia 22.23

Sheopur 38.81

Shivpuri 47.77

Tikamgarh 68.67
Chhatarpur 70.60
Neemuch 15.62

Guna 38.49

Rewa 67.41

Satna 59.88
Panna 78.68

Mandsaur 32.13

Sidhi 75.47
Rajgarh 33.59

Ratlam 57.35

Vidisha 55.10

Sagar 56.54Damoh 59.80

Katni 75.97

Shajapur 35.80

Umaria 90.19
Shahdol 85.95

Bhopal 65.43

Ujjain 43.13
Raisen 64.09
Sehore 49.51

Jabalpur 45.75

Narsimhapur 45.41

Dindori 60.18

Dewas 31.73
Indore 26.38

Jhabua 67.60
Dhar 39.36

Mandla 62.69

Hoshangabad 52.73
Seoni 54.64
Chhindwara 52.75

Harda 74.81
West Nimar 62.22
Barwani 75.48
East Nimar 58.98

Betul 79.08

Balaghat 43.66

Source :Estimates of District Poverty , PMPSU MP

26

Table 14: Estimates of Population and households living below poverty line in Urban MP
2004-05
Districts

Urban
Projected Population

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

78433
365987
467472
729441
146535
200601
388269
412029
389978
148045
795431
188452
388666
295404
106620
714404
259496
203711
208083
494512
797565
460089
363747
192028
228987
1378971
234855
193945
530933
485956
260298
1455781
213972
483275
403389
102620
520361
228720
870594
187966
10297
65382
596317
95223
224159
17567000

Projected
Population
below poverty
line

% of Population
below poverty line

29663
60027
202066
212030
71006
75965
119877
185353
247652
82685
376380
73361
127129
134857
33487
138677
53724
22838
54418
250501
167588
170507
174587
76469
78277
247180
147639
105883
208042
229597
125691
289030
71922
237042
135010
46335
214577
130693
217143
51598
3740
15167
375711
32753
54253
6158130

27

37.82
16.40
43.23
29.07
48.46
37.87
30.87
44.99
63.50
55.85
47.32
38.93
32.71
45.65
31.41
19.41
20.70
11.21
26.15
50.66
21.01
37.06
48.00
39.82
34.18
17.92
62.86
54.59
39.18
47.25
48.29
19.85
33.61
49.05
33.47
45.15
41.24
57.14
24.94
27.45
36.32
23.20
63.01
34.40
24.20
35.06

Number of
Households below
poverty line(based
on Avg. HHD
size)

4927
11320
37899
39551
14586
15287
25699
33382
48837
15630
68051
14916
22708
23474
8111
28785
10668
4235
12068
43277
32211
32749
31158
15245
14980
53885
27457
25172
39370
41229
24233
58946
13135
40008
23872
8721
40136
28230
43162
11431
790
3168
76929
7940
12583
1190148

Number of
Households below
poverty line(based on
Avg. HHD size of
BPL hhd )

4802
10206
32521
33924
13826
13432
21289
34550
44900
14482
64800
14158
19744
21884
8059
26781
9660
4216
11271
39585
27435
31615
28962
13229
13589
37615
25695
23778
37367
39389
19628
44907
13008
31445
21067
8085
38306
24006
39779
10380
687
3006
72066
6933
13034
1069100

Percent of Population below Poverty Line-Urban:2004-05

(Percent)
MP-35.06

Morena 16.40 Bhind 43.23

Gwalior 29.07
Datia 48.46

Sheopur 37.82

Shivpuri 37.87

Tikamgarh 44.99
Chhatarpur 63.50
Neemuch 11.21

Rewa 45.65

Guna 30.87
Satna 32.71
Panna 55.85

Mandsaur 26.15

Sidhi 20.70
Rajgarh 47.25

Ratlam 50.66

Vidisha 48.29

Sagar 47.32 Damoh 38.93

Katni 57.14

Shajapur 37.06

Umaria 31.41
Shahdol 19.41

Bhopal 19.85

Ujjain 21.01
Jabalpur 24.94

Raisen 49.05
Sehore 33.61

Narsimhapur 27.45

Dindori 36.32

Dewas 48.00
Indore 17.92

Jhabua 39.82
Dhar 34.18

Mandla 23.20

Hoshangabad 41.24
Seoni 34.40

Harda 45.15

Chhindwara 63.01
West Nimar 62.86
Barwani 54.59
East Nimar 39.18

Betul 33.47

Balaghat 24.20

Source :Estimates of District Poverty , PMPSU MP

28

Table 15: Estimates of Population and households living below poverty line in MP 200405
Rural and Urban Combined

Districts
Projected
Population

Projected
Population
below poverty
line

% of Population
below poverty line

Number of
Households
below poverty
line(based on
Avg. HHD size)

Number of
Households below
poverty line(based
on Avg. HHD size
of BPL hhd )

Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar

606177
1771852
1634783
1506531
716671
1440152
1675377
1514906
1785360
1007030
2370285

234457
406980
456800
306747
197763
668082
615247
942647
1232825
758514
1266827

38.68
22.97
27.94
20.36
27.59
46.39
36.72
62.22
69.05
75.32
53.45

41245
66209
79580
53255
37776
124655
125242
171148
212409
160776
247402

38632
61602
72000
48333
35028
120568
105836
149429
185362
129885
229863

Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua

1210088
2040351
2034659
572901
1982333
1949347
731838
1180171
1527186
1887260
1618310
1343346
1726803
1822666
2203037
1602133
1114386
1865199
1615944
1117386
1820849
1028392
1422009
1669091
540067
1277605
1159880
1870905
1022163
577877
830752
1988449
1293686
1524805
65201000

684317
1116219
1307331
454041
1228447
1329091
105356
366715
842697
637589
585195
485391
1113901
705603
464557
998417
800608
995023
609200
597951
527889
475110
838709
1135988
373606
613878
838053
674775
430373
345337
494963
1110097
687652
622087
31683052

56.55
54.71
64.25
79.25
61.97
68.18
14.40
31.07
55.18
33.78
36.16
36.13
64.51
38.71
21.09
62.32
71.84
53.35
37.70
53.51
28.99
46.20
58.98
68.06
69.18
48.05
72.25
36.07
42.10
59.76
59.58
55.83
53.15
40.80
48.59

137818
207944
257622
91095
250574
255866
21179
72345
149758
119658
108063
88479
182946

122042
190374
247475
88035
249298
256300
20696
63838
131660
107884
110369
84743
164175

128805
93973
183495
144911
179875
104079
123670
101509
85249
145243
198105
69102
113990
174437
143927
84434
73275
109094
232249
147247
143258
6042972

108657
71110
155003
128896
135967
92883
95887
77364
76388
132918
180067
64707
109483
154607
138632
73809
66518
87875
213272
123396
142892
5443757

Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

29

Percent of Population below Poverty Line-Total:2004-05

(Percent)
MP-48.59

Morena 22.97

Bhind 27.94

Gwalior 20.36
Datia 27.59

Sheopur 38.68

Shivpuri 46.39

Tikamgarh 62.22
Chhatarpur 69.05
Neemuch 14.40

Guna 36.72

Rewa 64.25

Satna 54.71
Panna 75.32

Mandsaur 31.07

Sidhi 68.18
Rajgarh 37.70

Ratlam 55.18

Vidisha 53.51

Sagar 53.45 Damoh 56.55

Katni 72.25

Shajapur 36.16

Umaria 79.25
Shahdol 61.97

Bhopal 28.99

Ujjain 33.78
Jabalpur 36.07

Raisen 58.98
Sehore 46.20
Jhabua 64.51
Dhar 38.71

Narsimhapur 42.10

Dindori 59.76

Indore 21.09Dewas 36.13

Mandla 59.58

Hoshangabad 48.05
Seoni 53.15

Harda 69.18

Chhindwara 55.83
West Nimar 62.32
Barwani 71.84
East Nimar 53.35

Betul 68.06

Balaghat 40.80

Source :Estimates of District Poverty , PMPSU MP

30

The problem of high proportion of population living below poverty line results in various
problems such as hunger, malnutrition, low level of education etc. Both central and state
governments have taken many direct and indirect initiatives to reduce poverty, some of these
initiatives are Mahatama Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, Better
irrigation facilities under Balram Talab, Percolation Tanks, minor, medium and major
irrigation projects, Deen Dyal Antodaya Upchar Yojana and many other. These schemes
have started showing the impact on income thus reducing poverty.
Conclusions:
For understanding of the level of living prevailing in any part of the state and country,
district-level estimates of poverty are necessary along with other socio economic indicators.
This paper may to cater to the need for generation of district-level estimates of poverty for
the state.
In the NSS 2004-05 survey, in a good number of cases, low sample size resulted in high RSE
of the district-level estimates especially in the urban sector and same is true in case of state
sample. To arrive at more reliable and conclusive district- level estimates, the number of
sample observations needs to be suitably augmented at district level for rural and urban
areas. In case of urban areas, the representation of different type of urban area (i.e. different
town classes) is to be ensured in future surveys for estimating poverty at district level.
Combined Central and State Sample may provide more robust and conclusive district- level
estimates.
References
Ahluwalia, Montek S (2000): Economic Performance of States in Post-Reform Period,
Economic & Political Weekly, 6 May.
Bhanumurthy, N R and A Mitra (2004): Economic Growth, Poverty and Reforms in
Indian States, DEG, Working Paper Series No E/247/2004.
Deaton, A and J Dreze (2002): Poverty and Inequality in India: A Re-examination,
Economic & Political Weekly, 3 September.
Ghosh, B, S Marjit and C Neogi (1998): Economic Growth and Regional Divergence in
India, 1960 to 1995, Economic & Political Weekly, Vol 33, No 26.
Himanshu (2007): Recent Trends in Poverty and Inequality: Some Preliminary Results,
Economic & Political Weekly, 10 February.
Krishna, K L (2004): Patterns and Determinants of Economic Growth in Indian States,
ICRIER, Discussion Paper No 144, New Delhi.
Report on Small Area Estimation of Socio-Economic Variables-November (2000): A Study
conducted by Indian Statistical Institute in Collaboration with National Sample Survey
Organization.

31

Sastry, N S (2003): District Level Poverty Estimates: Feasibility of Using NSS

Household Consumption Expenditure Survey Data, Economic & Political
Weekly, 25 January.
Sen, A and Himanshu (2004): Poverty and Inequality I and II, Widening
Disparities during the 1990s, Economic & Political Weekly, 18 and 25 September.
Sundaram, K and S D Tendulkar (2003): Poverty in India in the 1990s An
Analysis of Changes in 15 Major States, Economic & Political Weekly, 5 April.
Report of the Expert Group to Review the Methodology for Estimation of Poverty:
Planning Commission, Government of India, November 2009.

32

Annexure 1:
S. No.
1
2
3
4
5
6

Rural
0

235

235 270
270 320
320 365
365 410
410 455

MPCE classes in Rs.

Urban
S. No.
0 - 335
7
335- 395
8
395 - 485
9
485- 580
10
580 - 675
11
675 - 790
12

33

Rural
455 510
510 580
580 690
690 890
890 1155
1155+

Urban
790 930
930- 1100
1100- 1380
1380 1880
1880 2540
2540+

Annexure 2: District wise Distribution of observations by MPCE class for Central

Sample: Rural
MPCE Class
Districts

10

11

12

Sheopur

40

Morena

12

10

14

18

17

17

17

120

Bhind

11

10

13

14

80

Gwalior

40

Datia

14

40

Shivpuri

18

17

22

12

12

12

120

Guna

14

26

15

12

20

11

10

120

Tikamgarh

10

13

15

10

80

Chhatarpur

10

15

15

80

Panna

16

80

Sagar

14

12

15

11

10

14

120

Damoh

10

11

10

80

Satna

15

11

12

11

11

18

20

120

Rewa

10

12

14

14

12

15

120

Umaria

11

40

Shahdol

18

20

17

10

120

Sidhi

10

16

16

11

15

10

120

Neemuch

12

40

Mandsaur

10

12

11

11

79

Ratlam

14

10

10

80

Ujjain

20

80

Shajapur

10

11

11

80

Dewas

16

18

80

Jhabua

23

16

23

16

120

Dhar

11

12

17

13

12

21

119

Indore

11

13

80

West Nimar

11

11

13

13

28

15

11

120

Barwani

10

23

13

80

East Nimar

14

16

23

16

15

14

120

Rajgarh

14

10

21

80

Vidisha

12

11

11

80

Bhopal

40

Sehore

12

12

11

10

12

80

Raisen

10

12

80

Betul

18

11

80

Harda

40

Hoshangabad

12

10

80

Katni

12

12

13

12

80

Jabalpur

10

10

11

80

Narsimhapur

10

11

12

11

80

Dindori

12

40

Mandla

13

15

80

Chhindwara

13

14

17

15

10

13

12

12

120

Seoni

12

13

10

80

Balaghat

20

19

19

12

10

11

120

150

153

395

421

426

362

398

354

408

383

189

199

3838

MP

34

Total

Annexure 3: District wise Distribution of observations by MPCE class for State Sample:
Rural
MPCE Class
Districts

10

11

12

Total

Sheopur
Morena

0
0

0
0

0
0

5
3

3
4

3
10

3
13

8
19

12
32

5
28

1
9

0
2

40
120

Bhind

11

10

21

20

80

Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri

0
0
0

0
2
1

0
0
1

0
1
3

1
7
10

4
4
5

5
3
13

10
4
22

7
5
28

9
8
20

4
5
11

0
1
6

40
40
120

Guna

11

15

19

20

17

12

120

Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar

0
0
3
0

3
4
3
1

7
11
13
4

10
10
8
10

7
10
12
16

18
11
6
9

6
10
8
10

6
6
8
19

7
6
9
17

9
7
8
17

6
2
2
10

1
3
0
7

80
80
80
120

Damoh
Satna
Rewa

2
2
8

0
3
4

3
15
8

9
13
17

11
13
12

10
15
7

8
8
10

8
10
9

6
14
15

12
14
16

6
9
10

5
4
4

80
120
120

Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi

0
6
4

0
18
2

3
21
7

6
15
14

7
19
13

4
14
14

4
8
13

3
7
15

6
3
13

3
4
7

4
3
12

0
2
6

40
120
120

Neemuch

40

Mandsaur
Ratlam

0
0

2
1

4
4

5
11

5
7

7
9

8
8

15
8

4
12

19
10

7
7

4
3

80
80

Ujjain

16

80

Shajapur
Dewas

1
0

1
1

4
4

3
4

5
7

5
7

8
10

8
12

17
11

16
12

8
2

4
0

80
70

Jhabua

15

24

20

13

17

15

120

Dhar
Indore

0
0

0
1

9
2

6
0

11
5

20
4

22
13

19
11

9
13

12
22

3
6

9
3

120
80

West Nimar

13

19

19

15

14

13

14

120

Barwani
East Nimar

9
5

6
3

12
11

11
13

10
19

5
20

6
20

7
12

8
7

5
5

1
3

0
2

80
120

Rajgarh

11

15

12

13

80

Vidisha

10

13

80

Bhopal

40

Sehore

15

14

80

Raisen

12

10

11

80

Betul

10

14

13

80

Harda
Hoshangabad

4
0

3
1

4
2

5
9

8
9

2
7

2
4

3
10

1
18

4
10

4
8

0
2

40
80

Katni
Jabalpur

1
4

2
3

10
6

12
6

9
17

9
3

5
11

12
7

9
9

7
12

1
2

3
0

80
80

Narsimhapur
Dindori

0
0

1
0

5
1

1
4

7
6

11
2

8
5

10
4

13
5

12
8

6
5

6
0

80
40

Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni

0
5
0

0
7
1

0
5
1

0
12
0

1
11
1

3
17
0

8
12
2

17
16
10

16
14
8

17
18
26

13
3
18

5
0
13

80
120
80

Balaghat

11

10

24

24

23

120

MP

59

92

242

312

371

375

405

470

516

553

286

149

3830

35

Annexure 4: District wise Distribution of observations by MPCE class for Combined

(Central &State) Sample: Rural

Districts
Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

1
5
3
2
0
0
6
0
5
4
11
16
11
4
23
11
25
21
0
1
2
6
10
3
11
4
3
0
9
5
1
4
3
6
12
9
6
2
12
7
2
9
15
10
17
8
324

2
3
1
1
3
3
7
2
9
13
12
17
10
5
13
6
30
9
1
4
5
6
4
4
16
5
2
5
7
4
3
5
5
3
7
10
4
11
9
7
3
5
17
10
10
18
334

3
2
8
8
2
4
21
20
16
21
28
18
9
28
21
12
44
28
3
8
7
9
13
7
21
16
7
18
14
13
5
23
11
15
19
26
8
10
19
22
20
10
14
26
9
28
691

4
9
11
4
3
3
22
23
14
29
15
18
20
25
31
8
34
23
5
11
24
11
9
9
31
13
9
28
14
15
11
11
7
12
19
19
17
17
22
16
10
8
4
25
11
18
698

5
5
14
13
4
10
30
27
22
19
22
24
25
25
23
9
26
25
5
8
13
13
19
11
24
20
12
38
24
27
16
11
3
16
18
22
10
17
15
26
18
10
7
25
5
17
773

MPCE Class
7
8
7
13
28
39
17
22
10
16
7
10
23
30
21
35
14
12
18
10
12
16
21
25
12
12
21
23
16
25
7
3
17
12
16
25
6
8
16
28
18
24
8
13
16
15
14
19
27
16
32
32
21
16
32
26
24
22
48
25
17
23
13
16
13
6
21
17
15
14
14
15
4
4
11
16
14
21
24
11
18
19
8
6
12
20
26
26
4
18
19
20
762
824

6
7
25
14
7
7
18
21
32
17
13
18
15
28
11
6
22
24
11
10
17
14
10
11
39
29
8
24
19
44
10
15
11
22
11
13
4
12
14
6
23
5
8
24
3
11
713

36

9
15
49
34
16
10
39
31
14
12
14
28
14
26
23
8
8
26
12
17
20
20
22
17
19
19
24
30
16
30
20
18
5
14
14
8
6
27
18
18
15
6
22
21
13
29
867

10
12
44
36
14
17
26
27
12
8
12
25
14
30
27
3
10
13
17
31
19
32
21
26
20
24
30
25
10
17
30
22
10
18
16
16
4
15
10
15
16
8
21
34
33
34
904

11
1
15
6
4
7
12
20
9
6
2
21
10
14
16
4
8
16
6
13
7
13
12
11
13
20
14
9
1
8
11
12
5
10
10
3
6
13
2
5
8
5
14
9
23
28
462

12
1
3
3
1
2
6
13
1
3
3
9
8
11
11
3
4
14
6
12
4
15
9
18
3
25
14
5
0
4
13
10
1
6
5
5
7
9
4
3
8
0
6
4
14
10
316

Total
80
240
160
80
80
240
240
160
160
160
240
160
240
240
80
240
240
80
159
160
160
160
150
240
239
160
240
160
240
160
160
80
160
160
160
80
160
160
160
160
80
160
240
160
240
7668

Annexure 5: District wise Distribution of observations by MPCE class for Central Sample:
Urban
Districts
Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore

1
5

2
7

3
3

4
7

5
2

MPCE Class
6
7
8
2
2
1

9
3

10
7

11
1

12
0

Total
40

40

40

12

11

12

80

40

40

40

13

13

40

40

40

40

40

40

12

40

40

40

10

40

40

40

40

13

10

79

39

40

40

39

10

13

11

19

13

18

119

37

West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

40

11

40

11

10

40

39

40

11

12

15

15

11

12

12

120

40

10

40

40

40

12

40

40

10

13

10

12

80

40

40

40

11

40

40

40

169

185

295

272

186

172

150

138

175

157

106

70

2075

38

Annexure 6: District wise Distribution of observations by MPCE class for State Sample: Urban
Districts
Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

1
3
2
0
0
3
0
1
6
7
12
2
2
9
5
5
7
4
7
1
0
5
1
5
0
1
6
3
3
1
2
4
3
0
0
0
12
4
3
6
0
2
1
8
0
6
152

2
2
4
3
3
10
0
2
6
12
5
4
5
8
8
5
4
8
3
4
4
3
7
2
3
7
7
5
7
4
4
4
10
2
7
9
6
9
6
6
7
4
2
8
3
3
235

3
10
3
8
14
7
4
3
5
1
2
10
4
2
2
6
3
4
3
7
11
16
8
10
12
6
13
12
9
7
7
6
17
11
9
6
3
5
7
6
4
5
5
7
6
8
314

4
4
6
5
9
3
5
4
3
7
5
5
7
3
5
4
4
4
3
8
5
8
4
9
3
10
7
4
4
3
5
5
12
4
5
5
3
5
8
1
4
4
9
6
2
3
232

5
4
6
6
12
2
5
6
4
2
3
6
3
1
8
4
0
3
3
5
2
4
5
5
1
0
8
2
3
1
6
12
15
3
6
5
6
1
3
10
6
6
2
5
2
1
203

6
3
8
0
9
3
7
6
5
2
1
3
1
3
3
3
5
4
1
1
3
2
2
3
4
2
11
3
5
4
5
3
9
9
2
7
0
2
3
22
3
5
3
2
6
5
193

39

MPCE Class
7
8
1
4
3
4
4
1
3
10
2
1
9
7
3
7
3
1
0
1
2
2
1
2
4
5
4
5
0
2
1
4
4
5
1
3
1
2
3
1
3
1
11
7
2
0
1
1
2
3
2
2
12
13
2
3
1
2
4
2
5
3
3
1
6
4
3
2
4
2
1
3
2
3
4
4
2
2
19
7
3
7
3
3
5
3
2
1
2
4
1
3
154 153

9
7
0
9
7
1
3
4
2
6
2
3
6
2
0
3
4
3
5
5
5
5
5
2
3
4
13
6
6
2
1
2
4
5
2
1
2
2
3
1
0
3
3
1
7
5
165

10
0
1
3
5
5
0
2
4
1
2
2
2
2
6
3
2
3
8
3
2
13
6
1
6
6
20
0
0
2
1
0
8
1
2
3
0
4
2
1
3
4
5
0
6
2
152

11
2
2
1
6
3
0
1
0
1
4
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
1
2
4
0
1
2
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
1
0
3
0
1
1
3
0
2
0
0
2
77

12
0
1
0
2
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
2
2
0
0
1
0
4
0
0
0
1
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
1
30

Total
40
40
40
80
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
80
40
40
40
40
120
40
40
30
40
40
110
40
40
40
40
40
40
80
40
40
40
40
40
40
2060

Annexure 7: District wise Distribution of observations by MPCE class for

Combined (Central &State) Sample: Urban

Districts
Sheopur
Morena
Bhind
Gwalior
Datia
Shivpuri
Guna
Tikamgarh
Chhatarpur
Panna
Sagar
Damoh
Satna
Rewa
Umaria
Shahdol
Sidhi
Neemuch
Mandsaur
Ratlam
Ujjain
Shajapur
Dewas
Jhabua
Dhar
Indore
West Nimar
Barwani
East Nimar
Rajgarh
Vidisha
Bhopal
Sehore
Raisen
Betul
Harda
Hoshangabad
Katni
Jabalpur
Narsimhapur
Dindori
Mandla
Chhindwara
Seoni
Balaghat
MP

2
12
4
4
7
7
5
5
6
15
20
12
10
16
18
9
14
6
8
2
4
9
3
7
2
7
8
5
5
1
3
8
21
6
2
9
18
6
9
12
7
11
9
13
10
11
386

3
4
7
8
11
18
4
10
11
16
11
9
11
10
10
6
8
9
3
10
12
6
11
6
6
9
13
10
11
6
9
7
20
4
12
14
11
10
9
11
10
8
6
15
7
10
429

4
18
8
21
25
13
11
8
17
5
9
15
7
9
5
11
6
5
11
14
19
31
13
18
20
9
21
23
20
21
12
13
37
17
18
11
10
18
16
17
12
12
12
14
13
12
657

5
8
11
6
19
9
12
10
13
13
8
10
8
6
9
5
5
8
8
10
11
16
9
12
9
14
16
8
7
6
8
12
23
10
11
9
6
9
11
11
10
7
12
12
6
7
450

6
7
11
8
20
4
10
6
5
10
10
12
6
5
11
8
3
4
7
8
6
8
10
10
4
7
14
3
6
5
10
17
22
6
11
6
9
7
7
19
9
8
5
8
3
4
379

MPCE Class
7
8
9
4
2
6
14
9
5
4
8
3
12
9
16
4
3
4
10
10
11
9
4
11
6
5
7
6
2
4
4
2
3
3
4
5
4
8
6
5
7
11
5
2
5
7
5
8
8
8
14
7
3
9
8
2
6
3
7
2
6
5
3
8
16
11
7
5
2
8
8
4
7
3
7
3
7
2
20
25
23
5
4
8
6
5
6
7
10
3
8
6
10
5
4
2
14
14
13
12
6
6
5
6
4
8
3
6
1
5
8
4
4
8
5
3
6
30
24
14
4
5
8
10
4
6
5
9
5
2
2
4
6
4
7
6
5
10
293
317
329

40

10
9
4
12
11
4
4
9
5
7
2
3
9
5
5
8
8
9
6
9
6
10
7
4
7
6
26
11
12
6
4
6
17
12
5
3
4
5
8
10
4
5
3
6
13
7
336

11
6
3
3
11
7
2
4
4
1
5
3
9
4
7
7
3
11
12
10
4
26
9
1
10
11
34
1
0
5
6
2
17
1
5
7
4
6
4
8
7
7
7
2
8
2
306

12
3
3
2
8
6
1
1
0
1
6
3
1
2
3
4
3
6
6
4
2
10
2
2
4
2
16
2
2
0
0
1
25
0
1
2
3
2
2
3
4
0
6
0
1
3
158

Total
1
1
1
11
1
0
3
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
2
0
3
3
1
2
8
1
0
1
2
23
0
0
0
3
3
7
0
0
2
1
1
0
1
0
2
1
2
2
3
95

80
80
80
160
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
159
79
80
80
79
239
80
80
70
79
80
230
80
80
80
80
80
80
160
80
80
80
80
80
80
4135

S. P. Batra
Specialist (Statistics)
PMPSU

Mangesh Tyagi
Advisor
State Planning Commission
Madhya Pradesh Govt.

Chitranjan Tyagi
Team Leader
PMPSU