The Rangarajan Committee methodology for determining the poverty line incorporated which of the following? 1. A food component 2. A normative level of expenditure for essential non-food items 3. A behaviourally determined expenditure for other non-food items Select the answer using the code given below:
- (a)1 and 2 only
- (b)2 and 3 only
- (c)1, 2 and 3
- (d)1 and 3 only
Correct — C, 1, 2 and 3. The expert group under C. Rangarajan, appointed in 2012 and reporting in 2014, deliberately broke with the single-anchor calorie approach and built its poverty line in three parts. The food component was fixed to meet simultaneously the norms for calories, protein and fat, drawing on Indian Council of Medical Research recommendations. On top of that came a normative level of expenditure on essential non-food items — clothing, rent, conveyance and education — set at what households near the food-adequacy level actually needed rather than merely happened to spend. The third part was behaviourally determined: for all other non-food spending the group used observed expenditure of households around the relevant point in the distribution. Adding the three gave monthly per capita lines of about ₹972 in rural areas and ₹1,407 in urban areas for 2011-12, which put the poverty ratio at roughly 29.5 per cent against the Tendulkar estimate of about 21.9 per cent.
- (a)1 and 2 only — Leaves out the behaviourally determined residual, which is how the group treated non-food spending outside the essential list.
- (b)2 and 3 only — Drops the food component, which remained the anchor and was tied to calorie, protein and fat norms together.
- (d)1 and 3 only — Drops the normative treatment of essential non-food items, the very element that distinguished this methodology from a purely behavioural line.
India's official poverty line has been revised by a series of expert groups. The Lakdawala committee of 1993 kept the old calorie-based lines and updated them with price indices. The Tendulkar committee of 2009 moved to a mixed reference period, dropped the calorie anchor and adopted an all-India urban line applied across States. The Rangarajan expert group of 2014 restored an explicit food component tied to calorie, protein and fat norms, added a normative allowance for essential non-food items and a behavioural residual for the rest, and raised the resulting poverty ratio.
The item rewards knowing what changed between committees rather than just who chaired them. The three statements are each a piece of the Rangarajan design, and the composite structure — normative for food and essentials, behavioural for the rest — is the design's signature. The trap is a vague memory that Rangarajan simply raised the Tendulkar line; the substantive point is that it was built differently. As of the September 2024 exam no later official poverty line had replaced it, and consumption survey results published from 2023-24 onwards have been debated precisely because the comparable line remains unsettled.
- The Rangarajan expert group was appointed in 2012 and submitted its report in 2014.
- Its line combines a food component meeting calorie, protein and fat norms, a normative allowance for clothing, rent, conveyance and education, and a behavioural residual for other non-food items.
- Monthly per capita lines for 2011-12 were about ₹972 rural and ₹1,407 urban.
- It put the 2011-12 poverty ratio at about 29.5 per cent, against roughly 21.9 per cent on the Tendulkar line.
- Assuming Rangarajan simply inflated the Tendulkar line rather than rebuilding it.
- Attributing the mixed reference period to Rangarajan; that is Tendulkar's change.
- Treating the poverty line as a measure of income when it is defined on consumption expenditure.
As a select-the-components item on a named committee's methodology, or as a match between committees and the changes they introduced.
Persons below the poverty line in India are classified as such based on whether
- (a) they are entitled to a minimum prescribed food basket
- (b) they get work for a prescribed minimum number of days in a year
- (c) they belong to agricultural labourer household and the scheduled caste/tribe social group
- (d) their daily wages fall below the prescribed minimum wages
Answer(a) they are entitled to a minimum prescribed food basket
The older, purely food-anchored idea of the poverty line. Reading the two together shows the direction of travel — from a line built on a prescribed food basket alone to one that adds a normative allowance for essential non-food needs and a behavioural residual for the rest.
- practice — not a real PYQ
Which expert group moved India's official poverty line to a mixed reference period and dropped the calorie anchor?
- (a)Lakdawala committee
- (b)Tendulkar committee
- (c)Rangarajan expert group
- (d)Saxena committee
Answer(b) Tendulkar committee — its 2009 report adopted the mixed reference period and an all-India urban poverty line basket.
- practice — not a real PYQ
India's official poverty line is defined in terms of
- (a)household income
- (b)monthly per capita consumption expenditure
- (c)daily wage rates
- (d)land holding size
Answer(b) monthly per capita consumption expenditure — poverty is measured from consumption surveys, not income data.