Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

NSSO 2005 Household Assets and Liabilities in India

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all
  • Be the first to comment

NSSO 2005 Household Assets and Liabilities in India

  1. 1. Report No. 500 (59/18.2/1)Household Assets and Liabilities in India (as on 30.06.2002) NSS 59th Round (January–December 2003) National Sample Survey OrganisationMinistry of Statistics and Programme Implementation Government of India November 2005
  2. 2. PREFACE The National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) has been conducting All-India surveyson Debt and Investment decennially since its 26th round (1971-72) in both rural and urban areas.These surveys generate basic quantitative information on assets, liabilities and capitalexpenditure in the household sector of the economy. The All-India Debt and Investment Survey(AIDIS), which was carried out as part of the 59th round of the National Sample Survey (NSS)during the period January to December 2003, was the sixth such survey conducted at the all-India level. Prior to 1971-72, two surveys namely ‘All-India Rural Credit Survey’ and ‘All-IndiaRural Debt and Investment Survey’ had been completed in 1951-52 and in 1961-62 respectivelyby the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for rural areas only. The present report is the first in the series of five reports planned to be brought out on thebasis of data collected in the NSS 59th round (January to December 2003). Some basicestimates on assets and liabilities (cash loans) of rural and urban households as on 30th June2002 are presented in this report. The report consists of three Chapters and three Appendices.Chapter one deals with the introduction and chapter two with concepts and definitions that havebeen used in the survey. Chapter three deals with summary results of the survey and theircomparison with the results of the previous surveys. The Survey Design and Research Division of NSSO developed the survey methodology anddrafted the report. The fieldwork for the survey was handled by the Field Operations Division ofNSSO. While the data processing and tabulation work was handled by the Data ProcessingDivision of NSSO, the Coordination and Publication Division of NSSO coordinated variousactivities pertaining to the survey. I am thankful to the Chairman and the Members of the Working Group for the NSS 59thround as well as to the Chairman and the Members of the Governing Council of NSSO for theiroverall guidance at various stages of survey work. The report, I hope, will be useful to theplanners and policy makers. Comments and suggestions from readers will be most welcome.New Delhi P.S. RanaNovember 2005 Secretary Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation
  3. 3. HIGHLIGHTSHousehold AssetsAccording to the survey estimates, about 73% of the households in India were located in therural areas and, among them, nearly 60% were cultivator households. Among the urbanhouseholds about 36% were self-employed households.Almost all the households in India owned some physical and financial assets as on 30.06.02.Average value of assets (AVA) owned by a household was Rs. 2.66 lakh for the rural areasand Rs. 4.17 lakh for the urban areas.A rural cultivator household, on an average, owned assets of Rs. 3.73 lakh, which was three-and-half time that owned by a non-cultivator household (Rs. 1.07 lakh). In urban areas, aself-employed household, on an average, owned assets of Rs. 5.55 lakh while other categoryof households owned assets of Rs. 3.39 lakh.Among the rural households, AVA was the highest in Punjab (Rs. 9.04 lakh), followed byHaryana (Rs. 7.16 lakh ), Jammu & Kashmir (Rs.6.15 lakh) and Kerala (Rs. 5.10 lakh) whileOrissa had the lowest AVA with Rs. 0.98 lakh per household and close to it were AndhraPradesh (Rs. 1.35 lakh), Assam (Rs. 1.46 lakh), West Bengal and Jharkhand (each Rs. 1.52lakh).Among the urban households, AVA was the highest for Jammu & Kashmir (Rs. 10.67 lakh),followed by Kerala (Rs. 7.62 lakh), Haryana (Rs. 6.73 lakh ) and Delhi (Rs. 5.74 lakh).Jharkhand reported lowest ownership of assets amounting to Rs. 2.44 lakh preceded byOrissa (Rs. 2.50 lakh), Assam (2.77 lakh), Chhatishgarh (Rs. 2.80 lakh), Bihar, West Bengaland Tamil Nadu (each of Rs. 3.22 lakh).Composition of household AssetsLand and building were found to be the two major components of household assets. In therural areas, land and buildings together, accounted for 87% share in the total value of assetsat the national level - with land 63 percentage points and buildings 24 percentage points. Inthe urban areas, land and buildings together, accounted for about 76% share in the total valueof assets - with land and buildings each holding about 38 percentage points.Size distribution of AssetsIn 2002, in the rural areas, about 7.6% of the households owned assets as low as Rs. 15000or even less, while about 23% of the households owned assets amounting to rupees 3 lakhand more. In the urban areas, corresponding percentages of households were 17 and 34,respectively. i
  4. 4. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 500Household IndebtednessAbout 27% of the rural households and 18% of the urban households reported debt (cashloan) outstanding as on 30.6.02. The average amount of debt (AOD) for a rural householdwas Rs. 7,539 and that for an urban household was Rs. 11,771.Both incidence of indebtedness (IOI) and average amount of debt (AOD) are seen to haveincreased steadily with the increase of asset holdings. The AOD of a household belonging tothe lowest asset holding class (less than Rs. 0.15 lakh) was lower by 23 times that of ahousehold in the top asset holding class (Rs. 8 lakh and above) in the rural areas. This ratiowas nearly one-twenty eighth in the case of urban areas.Among the major states in rural India, in 2002, the highest IOI is noticed in Andhra Pradesh(42%) closely followed by Kerala (39%), Rajasthan (34%) and Tamil Nadu and Karnataka(each with 31%). On the other hand, states like Jammu & Kashmir (4%), Uttaranchal (6%)and Assam (8%) are found to report very low IOI. As regards AOD, among the major statesin rural India, Kerala is found to top the list with cash loan of Rs. 19,663 per householdfollowed by Punjab (Rs. 16,502), Haryana (Rs. 12,359) and Rajasthan (Rs. 12,031). On theother hand, the lower values of AOD are observed in many of the states like Assam (Rs.643), Uttaranchal, Jharkhand and Jammu & Kashmir (each with around Rs. 1100).Among the major states in urban India, the extent of indebtedness was to be found thehighest in Kerala (37%) followed by Andhra Pradesh (30%), Tamil Nadu (26%) and Gujarat(21%). On the other hand, Delhi (2%) is at the bottom rung, being closely accompanied byJammu & Kashmir (5%), Assam (6%), Jharkhand and Uttaranchal (each with 7%). Amongthe major states, Kerala showed the highest value of AOD (Rs.28,446) in the urban sector.The other states, in that order, are Himachal Pradesh (Rs. 25,951), Andhra Pradesh (Rs.19,901) and Gujarat (Rs. 15,715). At the other end, Delhi, Assam and Bihar are at the bottomleague with average values of Rs. 1,441, Rs.2,126 and Rs. 2,616, respectively.In the rural areas, the incidence of indebtedness (IOI) at the all-India level has somewhatincreased steadily since 1981 - from 20% in 1981 to 23% in 1991 and then, to 27% in 2002.The increase in the AOD among the rural households during 1971 to 1981 appears to havebeen negligible - the increase being from Rs 500 to Rs. 661 in a period of ten years, but itincreased at a faster rate during 1981 to 1991 and then accelerated further during 1991 to2002 – reached Rs. 7,539 per household. The AOD among the urban households increasedfrom Rs. 1,030 to Rs. 3,618 during 1981 to 1991 and then, increased to Rs. 11,771 in 2002.As on 30.6.02, the debt-asset ratio at the all-India level was 2.82% for urban areas and2.84% for rural areas. The ratio was 4.65% for the non-cultivator households and 2.49% forthe cultivator households in the rural areas. In the urban areas, the ratio was 2.19% for selfemployed households and 3.42% for other households. ii
  5. 5. Contents Page Highlights i – ii Contents iii – ivChapter One Introduction 1–4Chapter Two Concepts and Definitions 5–9Chapter Three Summary of Findings 10 – 41Appendix A Detailed Tables A1 – A389Appendix B Sample Design and Estimation Procedure B1 – B10Appendix C Schedule on Debt and Investment (Sch. 18.2) C1 – C28 Appendix ATable No. Title PageTable 1 Number of villages/blocks and households surveyed for each A1 state/u.t.Table 2 Estimated number of households and total value of assets as on A2 – A3 30.06.02, estimated number of households reporting cash loans and amount of cash loans as on 30.06.02 by household asset holding class and major household typeTable 3R Average value of assets per household and average amount of cash A4 – A11 loans per household as on 30.06.02 by household type in rural areasTable 3U Average value of assets per household and average amount of cash A12 – A23 loans per household as on 30.06.02 by household type in urban areasTable 4 Average value of assets per household and average amount of cash A24 – A59 loans per household as on 30.06.02 by household asset holding classTable 5R Per thousand distribution of households by household asset holding A60 – A71 class for each household type in rural areas iii
  6. 6. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 500Table No. Title PageTable 5U Per thousand distribution of households by household asset holding A72 – A89 class for each household type in urban areasTable 6R Per thousand distribution of assets by household asset holding class A90 – A101 for each household type in rural areasTable 6U Per thousand distribution of assets by household asset holding class A102 – A119 for each household type in urban areasTable 7 Per thousand distribution of households and average value (Rs.) of A120 – A155 assets per household by monthly per capita consumer expenditure (mpce) for each major household typeTable 8R Per thousand distribution of households and average value (Rs.) of A156 – A173 assets per household by broad size classes of land owned as on 30.6.02 for each major household type in urban areasTable 9 Number per 1000 households reporting specified items of assets and A174 – A281 cash loans outstanding as on 30.6.02 by household asset holding classTable 10 Average value of different items of assets as on 30.6.02 and average A282 – A389 value of cash loans outstanding as on 30.6.02 per household by household asset holding class iv
  7. 7. Chapter One Introduction1.1 The Report in Perspective1.1.1 The All-India Debt and Investment Survey (AIDIS) was carried out as a part of the 59th roundsurvey of the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) during January to December 2003. Thiswas the sixth such survey conducted at the all-India level. The main objective of the AIDIS is togenerate reliable estimates on assets, liabilities and capital expenditure of the household sector. Atpresent, the decennially conducted AIDIS is the only nation-wide enquiry providing data onhousehold assets, indebtedness and capital expenditure. In the 59th round, information on assets andliabilities of the households as on 30.6.02, amount of capital expenditure incurred by the householdduring the agricultural year 2002 – 03 (July 2002 – June 2003), cash borrowings and repaymentsmade by the household, sale and loss of assets of the household during the agricultural year 2002 –03 was collected through the Debt and Investment Schedule (Schedule 18.2). The present reportcontains the survey results of the 59th round on value and composition of the household assets as alsoextent of indebtedness and average amount of cash loans as on 30th June 2002.1.2 Background1.2.1 In order to study both the demand and supply sides of credit in the household sector, theReserve Bank of India (RBI) had conducted the "All-India Rural Credit Survey" in 1951-52.Information on assets, economic activities, particulars of credit operations and the incidence ofindebtedness in the rural areas was collected in the survey to assess the demand for rural credit.Further, data on the extent and mode of operations of different credit agencies were also collected toexamine the supply side of the credit.1.2.2 The first Rural Credit Survey was followed by a similar survey in 1961-62 by the RBI. Thescope of the survey was extended to include capital expenditure in the household sector and otherassociated indicators of the rural economy. The second survey was thus called the "All-India RuralDebt and Investment Survey".1.2.3 The responsibility of conducting the third such survey was given to the National Sample SurveyOrganisation (NSSO). This organisation undertook the All-India Debt and Investment Survey(AIDIS), after integrating it with the Land and Livestock Holding Survey (LHS), in its 26th roundsurvey during July 1971-September 1972. During this survey, for the first time since its inception,the scope of the Debt and Investment Survey was extended by including urban areas as well. Sincethen, the NSSO has been regularly conducting AIDIS once in ten years along with LHS. The fourthdecennial survey on Debt and Investment was conducted in the NSS 37th round during the calendaryear 1982 and the fifth one was conducted in the NSS 48th round during the calendar year 1992.1.2.4 The present AIDIS was also carried out along with the LHS in the NSS 59th round (2003).Although the objectives of the survey remained the same as those of the earlier surveys, somechanges were made in the sampling design. For the first time in the AIDIS of NSSO, samplehouseholds in this round were selected separately for LHS and AIDIS for both the rural and urbansectors. 1
  8. 8. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 5001.3 Scope1.3.1 Items of enquiry: In the present AIDIS (2003), information on the assets and liabilities of thehouseholds was collected as on 30.6.2002. Along with the liabilities of the households, the details ofall financial transactions, particularly cash borrowings and repayments, made by the householdduring the agricultural year 2002-03 (AY 02-03) were also collected. Besides, the survey gatheredinformation on the amount of capital expenditure incurred by the households during the AY 02-03,under different heads, like residential plots, houses and buildings, farm business and non-farmbusiness. Data on sale and loss of assets during this period were also collected in this survey.1.3.2 Geographical coverage: The 59th round survey covered the whole of Indian Union except (i)Leh (Ladakh) and Kargil districts of Jammu & Kashmir, (ii) interior villages of Nagaland locatedbeyond five kilometres of any bus route, and (iii) villages in Andaman & Nicobar Islands whichremain inaccessible throughout the year.1.4. Method of data collection1.4.1 The Debt and Investment Schedule (Schedule 18.2) was canvassed in a sample of 14households selected randomly in each village/block. The field workers paid two visits to each samplehousehold during the period of survey with a gap ranging 4 to 8 months. Two separate and slightlydifferent schedules of enquiry were used for collection of data in the two visits.1.4.2 The survey period for the 59th round was the calendar year 2003. In order to reduce recall error,particulars relating to the entire agricultural year 2002 - 03 were collected by visiting each samplehousehold twice during the survey period. The first visit to the sample households was made duringthe first 8 months of the survey period, i.e., from January 2003 to August 2003, while the secondvisit was made during the next 4 months, i.e, between September 2003 and December 2003.1.4.3 During the first visit to a sample household, the investigator collected information on assetsowned on the date of survey as well as acquisition and disposal of assets during the period from 1stJuly 2002 to the date of survey. These data were used to get assets owned by the households as on30.6.2002. The survey used the same procedure for assessing the indebtedness of households as on30.6.2002. The estimates of cash loan outstanding as on 30.6.02 presented in this report are based onthe first-visit data on dues outstanding on the date of survey and repayments made and amountswritten off between 1st July 2002 and the date of survey, both days inclusive.1.4.4 In addition, the schedule canvassed during the first-visit provided for collection of data on theamount and other particulars of borrowings and repayments made during the first half of the AY 02-03, i.e., during 1.7.2002 to 31.12.2002. The data on capital expenditure and acquisition, sale and lossof assets of the households during 1.7.2002 to 31.12.2002 were also collected in the first visit.1.4.5 During the second visit to the sample households, data were collected to assess the borrowingand repayments made and loans written off during the second half of the AY 02-03, i.e., during1.1.2003 to 30.6.2003. Similarly, data on capital expenditure and acquisition, sale and loss of assetsduring 1.1.2003 to 30.6.2003 were collected in the second visit. No provision was kept for thecollection of information on physical assets, except durable assets, in the schedule of the second visit. 2
  9. 9. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 5001.5 Reference Period for the Estimates1.5.1 All the estimates of assets and liabilities presented in this report are for a fixed reference date,viz. 30.6.2002. These are entirely based on the data collected during the first visit to the samplehouseholds. The position of assets and liabilities of sample households as on 30.6.2002 was derivedfrom the stock data on the date of survey and the data on transactions during the period 1.7.2002 tothe date of survey.1.5.2 The estimates of number of households presented in this report are based on data with amoving reference point, from 1.1.2003 to 31.8.2003, which spans a period of eight months. Theseestimates, therefore, may be taken to represent the number of households existing as on 30.4.2003,the mid-point of the eight-month period. The estimates for assets and liabilities for the 59th round areobtained as on 30.6.02 and the average value of assets and liabilities are obtained by considering thenumber of households obtained from visit 1 data. Following the convention of the earlier rounds, inthe summary tables of Chapter Three of the report, the reference period for the estimated number ofhouseholds of the 59th round has also been stated as 2002.1.6 Sample Design1.6.1 The sample design adopted for the survey was essentially a stratified two-stage one for bothrural and urban areas. The census villages and urban blocks were the first stage units (FSUs) for therural and urban sectors, respectively, while households were the second stage sampling units (SSUs)in both the sectors. The selection of villages was done with probability proportional to size withreplacement (PPSWR), size being the population as per the population census 1991 in all the stratafor rural sector except stratum 1 (see Appendix - B for details of stratification). In stratum 1 of ruralsector and in all the strata of urban sector, selection was done using simple random sampling withoutreplacement (SRSWOR). For the AIDIS, 14 households - 2 from each second stage stratum (SSS) -were planned to be surveyed in every sample village/ urban block. Selection of SSUs in each SSS ofa FSU was done by SRSWOR. The details of the sample design and estimation procedure adopted forthe survey are given in Appendix - B of this report. In the 59th Round, 10,309 FSUs (6,552 in ruralsector and 3,757 in urban sector) and 1,43,285 SSUs (91,192 in rural sector and 52,093 in urbansector) were surveyed in the country for the AIDIS.1.7. Contents of the Report1.7.1 This report contains three chapters and three appendices. Chapter One gives an introduction tothe report, and Chapter Two describes the concepts and definitions used for the survey. Chapter 3discusses the main findings on household assets and liabilities obtained from the survey data. Thediscussions in Chapter 3 have been confined to the major states and all India while the detailedresults, on which this report is based, are presented for all the states and union territories in AppendixA. The sample design and estimation procedure followed in the survey are presented in Appendix Band a facsimile of the Debt and Investment schedule is given in Appendix C. 3
  10. 10. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 5001.7.2 Appendix A of the report contains tables providing estimates of various items of assets as alsoof the total assets and liabilities of the households as on 30th June, 2002 at the state and all-Indialevel separately for rural and urban areas. Current liabilities are excluded from the purview of thisreport. As such, for this report, liabilities denote cash loans outstanding as on 30.6.02, which arehereafter referred to, in brief, as debts of households. The term ‘indebted households’ stands forthose households, which had some outstanding cash loans on All the estimates presented in this report are based on the central sample data only and alsobased on combined estimate of the two sub-samples. It would be in order to mention here that the cellfigures in any of these detailed tables, when added up, may not exactly equal the figure shownagainst the total column (or line) due to (i) rounding off and/or (ii) the presence of non-responsecases.1.8 Plan for release of results1.8.1 The present report is the first in a series of five reports to be brought out on the AIDISconducted in the NSS 59th round. This report gives the survey estimates on assets and liabilities(cash loans) of rural and urban households as on 30th June 2002. In general, the estimates areprovided -- separately for rural and urban areas -- for the country as a whole, as well as for all thestates and union territories.1.8.2 The second report of the series will be brought out in two parts -- one for rural areas and theother for urban areas. It will cover several aspects of household indebtedness like number ofhouseholds reporting cash loans and current liabilities, average amount of current liabilities,estimated number of households reported having kisan credit card and amount of credit receivedthrough it, distribution of cash loans by various characteristics, such as rate of interest, duration ofloan, credit agency, etc. The third report would examine different aspects of the related flow variablesby tabulating the number of households reporting current borrowings and repayments, amount ofborrowings and repayments, etc., classified by different variables like type of loan, credit agency,purpose of loan, type of security, etc. The fourth report will deal with selected aspects of householdassets and liabilities for different social groups. In the fifth report, some broad features of capitalexpenditure, sale and loss of physical assets of the rural and urban households during the agriculturalyear 2002-2003 will be discussed. 4
  11. 11. Chapter Two Concepts and Definitions2.0 The concepts and definitions of some of the important terms used in the survey and relevant to thisreport are explained below:2.1 Household: A group of persons who normally lived together and took food from a common kitchenconstituted a household. The adverb “normally” means that temporary visitors were excluded buttemporary stay-aways were included. Thus a child residing in a hostel for studies was excluded from thehousehold of his/her parents, but a resident employee or a resident domestic servant or paying guest (butnot just a tenant in the house) was included in the employer’s/host’s household. ‘Living together’ wasgiven more importance than ‘sharing food from a common kitchen’ in drawing the boundaries of ahousehold in case the two criteria were in conflict. However, in the special case of a person taking foodwith his family but sleeping elsewhere (say, in a shop or a different house) due to space shortage, thehousehold formed by such a person’s family members was taken to include the person also. Each inmateof a hotel, mess, boarding-lodging house, hostel, etc., was considered to be a single-member householdexcept that a family living in a hotel (say) was considered one household only. The same principle wasapplicable for the residential staff of such establishments.2.2 Household assets: Household assets represented all that were owned by the household and had moneyvalue. This included physical assets like land, buildings, livestock, agricultural machinery andimplements, non-farm business equipment, all transport equipment, durable household goods andfinancial assets like dues receivable on loans advanced in cash or in kind, shares in companies andcooperative societies, banks, etc., national saving certificates and the like, deposits in companies, banks,post offices and with individuals. The AIDIS does not include crops standing in the fields and stock ofcommodities held by the household in the household assets. As in the 48th round of the NSS, in thepresent AIDIS, currency notes and coins in hand were considered assets. The estimates of householdassets, presented in this report, include the amount of cash held by the households as on the date ofsurvey.2.3 Household durable assets: Articles which are used for domestic purposes and have a longer expectedlife, say, one year or more and which cannot be purchased at a nominal price were defined as householddurables. Such goods are usually purchased infrequently or they have a longer interval of purchase.However, minor items like bottles, knives, etc., though expected to last for a longer period, were excludedfrom household durable assets.2.4 Liabilities: All claims against a household held by others were considered liabilities of the household.Thus all loans payable by the household to others, irrespective of whether they were cash loans or kindloans were deemed as liabilities of the households. Unpaid bills of grocers, doctors, lawyers, etc., werealso considered liabilities of the household. Different kinds of liabilities are defined below. 5
  12. 12. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 5002.4.1 Cash loans: All loans taken in cash were considered to be cash loans, irrespective of whether thoseloans were repaid or proposed to be repaid in cash or in kind. Cash loans, generally, covered borrowingsat specific rates of interest for specific periods of time. However, if a loan was taken even at ‘nil’ rate ofinterest from relatives and friends, it was considered to be a cash loan. The loans may be taken against asecurity or without any security. Dues payable by the household owing to purchase of goods under a hire-purchase scheme were treated as cash loans.2.4.2 Kind loans: All loans taken in kind (except the cases of hire-purchase) irrespective of whetherthose were already repaid or yet to be repaid in cash or in kind were considered to be kind loans payable.2.4.3 Other liabilities: As distinguished from cash loans, ‘other liabilities’ comprised all kind loanspayable by the household and also liabilities arising out of goods and services taken from doctors,lawyers, etc. Similarly, outstanding taxes, rent payable to Government, other public bodies, landlords etc.,were included under other liabilities. Trade debt arising out of commercial transactions of the householdwas also included under ‘other liabilities’. Goods from grocers, milkman, etc., taken on credit by thehousehold and for which payment is made at frequent intervals, were considered as ‘other liability’, ifthey were not paid within due dates.2.4.4 Current Liabilities: All ‘kind loans’ and ‘other liabilities’ of a household, as defined above, takentogether constituted its current liabilities.2.5 Household Type: The report presents estimates of assets and liabilities for different types ofhouseholds. Two different classifications have been adopted for the rural and urban areas.2.6 Classification of rural households: The rural households are initially classified into two types, namely,cultivator and non-cultivator households.Cultivator households: All rural households operating at least 0.002 hectare of land during the 365 days preceding the date of survey are treated as cultivator households.Non-cultivator households: All rural households operating no land or land less than 0.002 hectare areconsidered to be non-cultivator households. They are further classified into agricultural labour, artisanand other households according to the principal household occupation as per the National classificationof occupations (NCO), 1968. Out of the occupations pursued by the members as their principal orsubsidiary (on the basis of income) occupations, that accounting for the maximum earnings to the house-hold in the reference year was considered to be the principal household occupation.Agricultural labour: A person was considered to be an agricultural labourer, if he/she followed one or more of the following agricultural occupations in the capacity of a manual labour: (a) farming, (b) dairy farming, (c) production of any horticultural commodity, (d) raising of livestock, bees or poultry, (e) any practice performed on a farm as incidental to or in conjunction with farm operations (including forestry and timbering) and the preparation for market and delivery to storage or to market of farm produce. 6
  13. 13. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 500Artisans: Own-account skilled workers and handicraftsmen engaged in any of the following occupations were considered to be artisans: (a) spinners, weavers, knitters, dyers, winders, wrappers, carpet makers, etc.; (b) tailors, dress makers, upholsterers, sewers, etc.; (c) shoe makers, repairers and cutters and other leather workers, etc.; (d) carpenters, cabinet makers, wood working machine operators, cart builders, wheel wrights, coach & body builders, ship-wrights & boat builders and related workers; (e) stone cutters & carvers; (f) blacksmiths, tool-makers, and machine-tool operators; (g) sheet metal workers; (h) jewelry & precious metal workers and metal engravers; (i) glass formers, potters and related workers; (j) printers, compositors, type-setters and photo-type setters, printing press man, stereotypers, electro-typers, engravers, book binders, photographic & dark-room workers; (k) construction painters; (l) makers of musical instruments, turners basketry and brush makers, non-metallic mineral product makers, doll makers, etc.; (m) brick layers, stone masons, plasterers, tile-setters, cement finishers, roofers, insulators, glaziers, hut builders, thatchers and other construction workers.Own-account workers were those who operated their enterprises without hiring anyone on salary or wagesexcept occasionally.Other rural households: All the remaining households were considered to be other households.2.7 Classification of urban households: In urban areas, each household was first categorised in one ofthe four groups self-employed, regular wage/ salaried employee, casual labour and others as per thedefinitions given below : Self-employed: Persons engaged in the farm or non-farm enterprises of their households are called self- employed workers. In urban areas, a household was considered self-employed, if the major source of its income during the 365 days preceding the date of survey was self-employment of its members. Regular wage/salaried household: Persons working in farm or non-farm enterprises not run by their own households and, in return, getting salary or wages on a regular basis (i.e. not on daily basis or on periodic renewal of work contract) are treated as regular salaried/wage employees. An urban household reporting that its major source of income during the 365 days preceding the date of survey was regular wage/salaried employment of members were treated as a regular wage/ salaried households. Casual labour household: Persons working in farm or non-farm enterprises not run by their own households and, in return, getting wages under terms of daily or periodic work contract are treated as casual wage labourers. An urban household reporting that major source of its income during the 365 days preceding the date of survey was casual wage employment of members was treated as a casual labour household. Other urban household: All the remaining urban households were treated as other households. 7
  14. 14. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 5002.8 Major household type: The term refers to cultivator and non-cultivator (i.e. other than cultivator)households for the rural areas. For the urban areas, self-employed and other households (i.e. householdswith household type codes either 2 or 3 or 9) are the two major household types.2.9 Household consumer expenditure: It is the expenditure of a household on domestic consumptiononly. It is the same as the expenditure covered in the consumer expenditure survey of the NSSO. Anyexpenditure incurred by the household on its enterprise account was excluded from consumer expenditure.Unlike the regular Consumer Expenditure Survey of the NSSO, the present survey collected data on thehousehold consumer expenditure through two direct questions on household consumption under twobroad categories, viz. (i) out of purchases and (ii) out of home grown, home produced stock, freecollection, transfer receipts, etc.2.10 Household monthly per capita consumer expenditure (MPCE): This was obtained from thehousehold’s total consumer expenditure during last 30 days divided by the household size and recorded intwo places of decimals.2.11 Valuation of assets: The survey evaluated a physical asset acquired prior to 30th June, 2002 at thecurrent market price of such an asset in its existing condition prevailing in the locality. An asset acquiredprior to 30th June 2002 that was disposed of during the reference period (i.e., during 1.7.2002 to the dateof survey) in a manner other than by sale was also evaluated at the current market price. If an assetacquired prior to 30th June, 2002 was disposed of through sale during the reference period, the sale pricewas regarded as the disposal value of the asset.2.11.1 On the other hand, if a physical asset was acquired by way of purchase or construction during thereference period, the purchase price or the total expenditure incurred on construction, including the valueimputed at current market price of labour and materials supplied from household stock, was considered asits value.2.11.2 For evaluation of an asset acquired in a manner other than by purchase or construction during thereference period, the current price of the asset in its existing condition prevailing in the locality wasconsidered to be its value.2.11.3 If an asset acquired during the reference period was owned on the date of survey, the value ofacquisition was considered to be the value of the asset on the date of survey. Similarly, if an assetacquired during the reference period was disposed of during the same period, the value considered foracquisition was also considered for disposal of the asset.2.12 Household assets holding class: Ten household assets holding classes have been decided byexamining the distribution of sample households over the asset holding classes for all India. Total value ofassets owned as on 30.6.02 was derived for each of the sample households by adding the values ofdifferent items of assets. One of the household asset holding classes have been assigned to each of thehouseholds depending upon the class in which the total value of assets so derived and rounded off (to Rs.thousand) falls. 8
  15. 15. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 5002.13 Farm business: Farm business comprised household economic activities like cultivation, includingcultivation of plantation and orchard crops, and processing of produce on the farm, e.g. paddy hulling andgur making. Although gur making is a manufacturing activity, this was covered under farm business onlywhen such activity was carried out in the farm by indigenous method. Farm business also includedactivities ancillary to agriculture, like livestock raising, poultry, fishing, dairy farm activities, bee keepingand other allied activities coming under Tabulation Categories A and B of the National IndustrialClassification 1998.2.14 Non-farm business: Non-farm business was defined as all household economic activities other thanthose covered in the farm business. This cover manufacturing, mining & quarrying, trade, hotel &restaurant, transport, construction, repairing and other services. For the purpose of this survey, non-farmbusiness shall exclude such activities when they are carried out in non-household enterprises. Non-farmbusiness enterprises, which were registered under section 2m(i) or 2m(ii) and section 85 of Factories Act,1948 and Bidi and Cigar manufacturing establishments registered under Bidi and Cigar Workers(condition of employment) Act, 1966 were kept outside the coverage of the survey.2.15 Major states: The discussion on summary of survey results in Chapter 3, besides covering thenational level estimates, deals with the estimates for relatively large states - in terms of population - aswell. These states are referred to as major states in the discussion. They are as follows: Andhra Pradesh,Assam, Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Karnataka, Kerala, MadhyaPradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal. Inaddition, the discussion also covers the estimates of urban Delhi. 9
  16. 16. Chapter Three Summary of Findings3.0.1 In India, Debt and Investment Surveys of NSSO, often called all-India Debt and InvestmentSurvey (AIDISs), are the principal sources of data on assets, liabilities and capital expenditure of thehousehold sector. As mentioned earlier, this survey is done once in ten years by NSSO. The presentreport pertains to the results obtained from the sixth AIDIS conducted by the NSSO in its 59th roundduring January – December, 2003. The report contains the results on value and composition ofhousehold assets as also estimates of the extent of indebtedness of the households and amount of debtper household as on 30th June, 2002.3.0.2 This chapter summarises the major findings of the survey and discusses the salient featuresrelating to assets and cash liabilities of the households as on 30th June, 2002. The observations aremainly confined to all-India estimates followed by an examination of the disparities in ownership ofassets and incidence of indebtedness across the major states and its rural-urban sectors. The estimatesfor the smaller states and union territories (UTs) have not been presented separately. The reason is thatthe sample sizes for the smaller states and UTs may not be adequate for getting a sufficiently reliableestimates – at least for measuring change or inter-state comparison. The estimates for those states andUTs have, however, been given in the Appendix. The major states that are considered here, are thosewith populations of one crore or more in respect of rural or urban sector separately. The discussionstarts with the observation on distribution of households by occupational categories – defined inrespect of different types of households. This is followed by a discussion of the assets and liabilities ofthe households for the different occupational categories of households. Composition of the householdsby household asset holdings has then been taken up for discussion. The variations in household assetholdings over various correlates like monthly per capita consumer expenditure, land owned by thehouseholds, etc., are discussed in some detail. Finally, the chapter concludes with a brief discussion onhousehold indebtedness, amount of debt per household in terms of cash dues and debt-asset ratio of thehouseholds as on 30.6.2002.3.0.3 To have an idea of the change of household asset holdings and indebtedness over the years since1971, the results of the earlier surveys of the NSSO on Debt and Investment, viz. the 26th (July 1971 –June 1972), 37th (January – December 1982) and 48th (January – December 1992) rounds, are alsopresented in this report. The estimates for assets and liabilities for the 26th round, 37th round and 48thround were obtained as on 30.6.71, 30.6.81 and 30.6.91, respectively, and the corresponding estimatesfor the 59th round have been obtained as on 30.6.02. In the 59th round, estimates for the number ofhouseholds have been obtained from the data of first visit (collected during January – August, 2003)only and, therefore, the estimates refer to the mid-point of the survey period of Visit 1, i.e. 30.4.03. Butto indicate a uniform reference period for the estimates of a round, in the summary tables of thischapter, the reference periods for the 26th, 37th, 48th and 59th rounds are stated as 1971, 1981, 1991 and2002, respectively. Estimates for the 26th round have not been presented in the summary tables for theurban sector as the results for the urban sector were not released for that round.3.0.4 For the purpose of report, the major states, which are relatively large in terms of population, are:Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & 10
  17. 17. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 500Kashmir, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan,Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Uttaranchal, West Bengal and urban Delhi. However, the estimates for all-India presented in the statement tables of this chapter as well as other tables of the report are based onthe data of all the states and union territories. Moreover, it is important to note that, generally, theestimates of household, etc., obtained from NSS surveys are found to be lower than those of the censusor projections. The differences are mainly due to differences in coverage and methods adopted in NSSin comparison to census operation. However, the ratios obtained from NSS surveys are expected toprovide a closer approximation to the true values. Thus, the estimated marginal aggregates ofhouseholds, assets, etc., presented in the detailed tables in the appendix may be used as weights forcombining the ratios.3.0.5 The states of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Uttaranchal have emerged in the recent past out of thepartition of erstwhile Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, respectively. The estimates on assetsand liabilities for these new states are available for the first time from the 59th round survey. Therefore,while presenting comparable figures with the earlier rounds at the state level, figures for these newstates are shown as ‘-’. It may be noted that for the earlier rounds, estimates shown for the states ofMadhya Pradesh, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh correspond to the erstwhile state boundaries that existedbefore the new states were carved out.3.1 Estimated number of households3.1.1 In the 59th round survey on Debt and Investment, 10,309 fsus (6,552 villages in rural areas and3,757 UFS blocks in urban areas) and 1,43,285 ssus (91,192 households in rural areas and 52,093households in urban areas) were surveyed in the country. The number of households in India asestimated from the 59th round survey was about 203.4 million, of which about 73% were in the ruralareas. Statement 1 presents the distribution of households over the major states in India, separately forthe rural and urban areas. The major states accounted for a little over 98% of all households in thecountry. In many major states, the proportions of households in the rural areas to all households in thestate exceeded 80% and such states were Assam (89%), Bihar (89%), Himachal Pradesh (89%), Orissa(86%) and Chhattisgarh (85%). The corresponding proportions were comparatively low in Gujarat(64%), Maharashtra (57%) and Delhi (15%) - indicating that these states are more urbanized than theothers.3.2 Occupational categories of the households3.2.1 In this report, all the estimates of assets and liabilities are presented for different occupationalcategories of households defined in terms of types of households. For this purpose, two differentclassifications have been used for identifying the occupational categories of the households in the ruraland urban areas. It would, therefore, be appropriate to mention the concepts and definitions involved inclassifying the households into occupational categories in the rural and urban areas. 11
  18. 18. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 500Statement 1: Percentage distribution of households in India over 3.2.2 Categories of rural households:the major states The households in the rural areas are broadly classified as cultivator and State % of rural rural urban combined households non-cultivator households. The(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) cultivator households are defined as those who operated an area of landAndhra Pradesh 9.6 9.1 9.5 74 0.002 hectare or more during theAssam 2.8 0.9 2.3 89 agricultural year 2002-03. ThoseBihar 7.9 2.6 6.5 89 who did not operate any land orChhattisgarh 2.5 1.2 2.1 85 operated an area of land less thanDelhi 0.3 4.3 1.4 15 0.002 hectare during the agriculturalGujarat 4.2 6.4 4.8 64 year 2002-03, are considered non-Harayana 2.1 2.2 2.1 72 cultivator households and are furtherHimachal Pradesh 0.8 0.3 0.7 89 classified as (i) agricultural labourJammu & Kashmir 0.7 0.6 0.7 76 households, (ii) artisan householdsJharkhand 2.5 1.7 2.3 80 and (iii) other rural householdsKarnataka 4.7 6.3 5.1 67 depending upon the principalKerala 3.4 3.1 3.3 74 occupation code of the householdsMadhya Pradesh 6.4 5.4 6.1 76 obtained from the survey. The aboveMaharashtra 8.0 16.1 10.2 57 definitions are the same as thoseOrissa 4.5 1.9 3.8 86 followed in the 48th round survey, butPunjab 2.0 2.9 2.3 65 are somewhat different from thoseRajasthan adopted in the 37th and 26th rounds. In 4.7 3.9 4.5 76Tamil Nadu these surveys, cultivators were 7.5 9.8 8.1 67Uttaranchal defined as in the 59th round, but non- 0.8 0.6 0.7 80Uttar Pradesh cultivators were classified in the 15.0 11.3 14.0 78 three categories mentioned aboveWest Bengal 8.2 7.5 8.0 75 depending upon the major source of income of the households during theOther states/UTs 1.4 1.9 1.5 66 365 days preceding the date ofAll-India 100.0 100.0 100.0 73 survey, with occupations differing somewhat from those adopted for the48th and 59th round surveys. However, the different criterion adopted in the 48th and 59th round surveysfor classifying the households into occupational categories (see Para 2.6 of Chapter Two) is notexpected to affect significantly the comparison with the estimates obtained from the 26th or 37th roundsurveys.3.2.3 Categories of urban households: Depending upon the income of the households from thedifferent sources during last 365 days, each of the urban households is classified in one of the fourhousehold types: self-employed, regular wage/salaried employee, casual labour and others. Thehouseholds in the urban areas are broadly categorized into two occupational groups such as self-employed and other. The broad category other comprises households with household type regularwage/salaried employee, casual labour and others. Those households for which household type couldnot be recorded are classified neither as self-employed nor as other but are considered in the count oftotal number of households. The self-employed urban households are further sub-classified into sevenoccupational groups considering the entry for principal occupation code of the households. 12
  19. 19. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 500These groups are:1. professional, technical and related workers,2. administrative, executive and managerial workers,3. clerical & related workers,4. sales workers,5. service workers,6. farmers, fishermen, hunters, loggers and related workers,7. production and related workers, transport operators and labourers.3.2.4 Statement 2 presents the percentage distribution of rural households by occupational category asobtained from the present survey and that from the earlier Debt and Investment Surveys of NSSO. TheStatement 2: Percentage distribution of rural households by results indicate that during 2002, about 60%occupational category during 1971, 1981, 1991 and 2002 of the households in the rural areas were all-India cultivator households and the proportion ofhousehold percentage of households households of this category shows aoccupational 1971 1981 1991 2002category (26th) (37th) (48th) (59th) systematic decline over the three decennial (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) time points since 1981, but at a slower rate between the periods 1991 and 2002. Thecultivators 72.4 76.3 66.1 59.7 remaining 40% of the households in the ruralnon-cultivators: areas could be termed, according to theagr. labour 14.6 11.3 14.2 14.4 definitions adopted in the AIDIS 2002, asartisans 2.4 1.6 3.8 5.2 non-cultivator households with theothers 10.6 10.8 15.8 20.7 composition, among them, of about 36%all non-cultivators 27.6 23.7 33.9 40.3 agricultural labour households, about 13%all households 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 artisan households and 51% otherNote: The estimates of households shown in this table actually refer to households. The percentage of non-the periods 1972, 1982, 1992 and 2003, respectively. cultivator households, along with its twoStatement 3: Percentage distribution of urban households important components in terms of theirby occupational category during 1981, 1991 and 2002 all-India shares, viz., other and artisan households,household percentage of households shows an increasing trend over the periodsoccupational 1981 1991 2002 1981 to 2002 except for agriculture labourcategory (37th) (48th) (59th) households for which the percentage share(1) (2) (3) (4) remained almost stationary between 1971self-employed: and 2002 with a dip of about 3% point in professional etc. 1.7 1.6 1.7 1981. In respect of the different categories of administrative etc. 2.4 3.9 8.0 households discussed above, the trend in the clerical etc. 0.8 0.2 0.3 estimates between the periods 1971 and sales workers etc. 10.6 11.2 11.5 service workers etc. 1.9 2.1 2.7 1981 was not the same as for the periods farmers etc. 4.0 3.7 1.7 1981 to 2002. production workers etc. 10.8 11.0 10.0all self-employed 32.6 34.0 36.1 3.2.5 Similar to that for the rural areas, theothers 67.4 66.0 63.8 distribution of households by theall households 100.0 100.0 100.0 occupational categories, obtained from theNote: The estimates of households shown in this table actually refer to 37th, 48th and 59th round surveys of thethe periods 1982, 1992 and 2003, respectively. NSSO, is given in Statement 3 for the urban 13
  20. 20. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 500areas. More than one-third of the urban households in India were self-employed in 2002. Among theself-employed households, whose members were engaged as ‘sales workers’ or those engaged as‘production and related workers’, ‘transport equipment operators and labourers’ or those engaged as‘administrative, executive and managerial workers’ constituted the major part of the group. Thesethree occupational categories of the urban households constituted more than 29% of all households inthe urban areas. The pattern in the distribution of households over the occupational categories have been quitesimilar among the last three AIDISs. The percentage of self-employed households increased from 33%in 1981 to 34% in 1991 and then had a lead by about 2 percentage points in 2002. As in 1981 and1991, the two occupational categories, viz. sales workers’ and production & related workers, etc.’were the two major groups among the categories of households in the urban areas in 2002. These two categories of self-employed householdsStatement 4: Percentage of cultivator households in rural areas accounted for about 22% of the urbanduring 1971, 1981, 1991 and 2002 households both in 1991 and in 2002. As observed from Statement 3, the 1971 1981 1991 2002 share of urban households whoseState th (26 ) th (37 ) th (48 ) th (59 ) members were engaged as(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) ‘administrative, executive andAndhra Pradesh 61.6 65.8 55.8 43.0 managerial workers’ or engaged asAssam 81.6 86.8 71.7 62.8 ‘service workers’ increased during theBihar 80.4 77.4 69.8 60.5 two decades ending 2002. The share ofJharkhand - - - 76.1 the occupational group ‘administrative,Gujarat 64.0 79.6 60.4 56.4 executive and managerial workers’Harayana 60.0 57.0 57.3 58.9 increased by nearly 6 percentage pointsHimachal Pradesh 92.4 87.4 84.2 75.3 and that of the occupational group ‘service workers’ increased by about 1Jammu & Kashmir 93.9 83.3 86.3 88.6 percentage point during the twoKarnataka 68.7 75.1 69.3 57.4 decades. On the other hand, a decreaseKerala 89.7 93.2 78.2 49.6 of about 2 percentage points isMadhya Pradesh 82.0 80.3 70.8 66.1 observed in the proportion of theChhattisgarh - - - 75.3 farmer households in the urban areasMaharashtra 68.8 67.4 60.2 55.0 during the two decades ending 2002.Orissa 77.2 83.8 68.5 64.5Punjab 42.9 63.3 43.7 53.7 3.2.6 Occupational Categories -Rajasthan 86.8 84.8 80.4 74.6 Inter-state ComparisonTamil Nadu 55.4 68.9 43.8 34.8Uttaranchal - - - 74.0 The percentage of cultivatorUttar Pradesh 77.8 78.4 76.4 74.9 households to the total households inWest Bengal 65.8 78.4 65.2 56.6 the rural areas for the periods 1971,India 72.4 76.3 66.0 59.7 1981, 1991 and 2002 is given inNote: The estimates of households shown in this table actually refer to Statement 4 for 20 major states inthe periods 1972, 1982, 1992 and 2003, respectively. order to study the changes during the three decades ending 2002. Asobserved from Statement 4, there is a wide inter-state variation in the percentage of cultivatorhouseholds. The percentage ranged from as low as 35 (in Tamil Nadu) to as high as 89 (in Jammu &Kashmir) in 2002. Among the major states, the proportion of cultivator households to all ruralhouseholds was below the all-India level (60%) for the states Tamil Nadu (35%), Andhra Pradesh 14
  21. 21. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 500(43%), Kerala (50%), Punjab (54%), Maharashtra (55%), Gujarat (56%), Karnataka (57%), WestBengal (57%) and Haryana (59%). The states with a very high percentage of cultivator householdswere Jammu & Kashmir (89%), Jharkhand (76%), Chhattisgarh (75%), Himachal Pradesh (75%),Rajastahn (75%) and Uttar Pradesh (75%). In India, the proportion of cultivator households to all rural households during 1971, 1981,1991 and 2002 were 72%, 76% , 66% and 60%, respectively. Keeping aside the estimates for 1971,the declining trend observed in the all-India estimates over the period 1981 to 2002 is generallyrevealed in most of the major states under consideration. The variability, in terms of range, in thepercentage of cultivator households to all rural households across the major states was very highduring 1971 and 1991, and was somewhat moderate during 1981. The said percentage ranged from 43(in Punjab and Tamil Nadu) to 94 (in Jammu & Kashmir) in 1971, 57 (in Haryana) to 93 (in Kerala) in1981, and from 44 (in Tamil Nadu) to 86 (in Jammu & Kashmir) in 1991. As compared to the 1991estimates, there has been a steady fall in the percentage of cultivator households in 2002 for all themajor states excepting Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir and Punjab where a rise in this percentage isnoted. Statement 5 presents the percentage of self-employed households among all urban households for the 21 major states (including Delhi) asStatement 5: Percentage of self-employed households in obtained from the 37th , 48th and 59th roundurban areas during 1981, 1991 and 2002 surveys of the NSSO on Debt and Investment. As observed, there is a wide 1981 1991 2002 inter-state variation in the percentage ofstate (37th) (48th ) (59th) self-employed households. The percentage(1) (2) (3) (4) ranged from a low 26 (in Chhattisgarh) to aAndhra Pradesh 34.6 32.4 34.0 high 50 (in Jammu & Kashmir, Bihar andAssam 38.9 39.9 46.7 Uttar Pradesh) in 2002. Among the majorBihar 36.6 39.0 50.4 states, the percentage of self-employedJharkhand - - 27.3 households to all the urban households wasDelhi 30.6 30.6 35.4 much below the all-India level (36) forGujarat 32.8 34.5 37.2 states like Chhattisgarh (26), JharkhandHarayana 40.0 46.3 40.3 (27), Maharashtra (28) and it was very highHimachal Pradesh 29.0 32.4 29.6 for the states like Jammu & Kashmir, Bihar,Jammu & Kashmir 44.5 28.2 50.1 Uttar Pradesh (each with 50), Assam (47),Karnataka 36.0 29.2 30.5 Punjab (44), etc.Kerala 31.1 34.4 33.0Madhya Pradesh 32.0 29.1 35.0 The all-India estimate of percentageChhattisgarh - - 26.1 of self-employed households to all the urbanMaharashtra 25.9 29.0 28.5 households during 1981, 1991 and 2002Orissa 25.3 32.3 33.9 were 33, 34 and 36, respectively. In allPunjab 44.5 43.1 44.4 the AIDISs, the estimates reveal a wideRajasthan 37.8 34.9 37.4 inter-state variation in respect of theTamil Nadu 27.5 28.4 31.1 percentage of self-employed households.Uttaranchal - - 38.4 The percentage in the urban ranged from 24Uttar Pradesh 42.1 47.9 49.9 (in West Bengal) to 45 (in Jammu &West Bengal 24.3 33.4 40.0 Kashmir and Punjab) in 1981. In 1991, it varied between 28 ( in Jammu & KashmirIndia 32.6 34.0 36.1 and Tamil Nadu) to 48 ( in Uttar Pradesh).Note: The estimates of households shown in this table actuallyrefer to the periods 1982, 1992 and 2003, respectively. 15
  22. 22. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 500During the period 1981 to 2002, there was a rise in the proportion of self-employed households in theurban areas for most of the states excepting a few states like Andhra Pradesh (where dropped from35% to 34%), Karnataka (where dropped from 36% to 31%).3.3 Average Assets Holdings of the Households3.3.1 Information on both physical and financial assets owned by the households as on 30th June, 2002were collected in the 59th round survey on Debt and Investment. Under physical assets, land, buildings,livestock, agricultural implements & machinery, non-farm business equipment, transport equipmentand household durables were taken into account while shares, deposits, etc., and cash and kind duesreceivable and cash in hand were considered underfinancial assets. All these assets owned by the Statement 6: Percentage (P) of householdshouseholds constitute the asset holdings of the owning assets and average value of total assetshouseholds. (AVA) owned as on 30.6.02 all-India3.3.2 The average assets holdings (AVAs) of the occupational category P AVAhouseholds, i.e. average values of all physical and (Rs.) (1) (2) (3)financial assets per household, are presented inStatement 6 separately for each occupational category ruralin the rural and urban areas of India. The statement cultivator 100.0 372632also gives, along with AVAs, the percentage of non-cultivator 99.8 107230households reporting ownership of some assets. As all rural households 99.9 265606expected, almost all households, except 1 in 1000 ruralhouseholds and 2 in 1000 urban households, owned urbansome kind of physical or financial assets. The average self-employed 100.0 554844value of assets owned by a rural household was Rs. others 99.7 3390022.66 lakh and by an urban household Rs. 4.17 lakh --nearly 57% more than a rural household. Large all urban households 99.8 417158differences in AVA is observed among theoccupational categories in both the rural and urban areas. A rural cultivator household, on an average,owned assets of Rs. 3.73 lakh, which were three-and-half times than those owned by its ruralcounterpart (Rs. 1.07 lakh). The differences in the urban areas in this respect were narrower: AVA ofself-employed household at Rs. 5.55 lakh was 64% higher than AVA of other urban households at Rs.3.39 lakh.3.3.3 Inter-state comparison of AVA3.3.3.1 In rural areas: Statement 7 shows the AVAs as on 30th June, 2002 separately for cultivator andnon-cultivator households in 20 major states. A state-wise analysis of AVA shows that it was thehighest in Punjab (Rs. 9.04 lakh), followed by Haryana (Rs. 7.16 lakh ), Jammu & Kashmir (Rs.6.15lakh) and Kerala (Rs. 5.10 lakh). Orissa had the lowest AVA with Rs. 0.98 lakh per household andclose to it were Andhra Pradesh (Rs. 1.35 lakh), Assam (Rs. 1.46 lakh), West Bengal and Jharkhand(each Rs. 1.52 lakh). In all the states, AVA for cultivator households is found to be much higher thanthat for non-cultivator households. Moreover, the differences in the AVA values between the twocategories do not reveal any relationship with the overall magnitude of AVA. 16
  23. 23. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 500 Statement 8: Average value of assets (AVA) (in Rs.)Statement 7: Average value of assets (AVA) ) (in Rs.) per household by household category in urban areasper household by household category in rural areas of of major statesmajor states self- non-state cultivator all state employ others all cultivator ed(1) (2) (3) (4) (1) (2) (3) (4)Andhra Pradesh 226316 66502 135146 Andhra Pradesh 406194 331113 356656Assam 187935 74545 145782 Assam 276326 277486 276793Bihar 294497 70867 206055 Bihar 388977 253970 321975Jharkhand 175802 74913 151692 Chhattisgarh 448582 220340 280032Gujarat 478126 133490 327864 Delhi 830021 433781 573990Harayana 1070247 209556 716379 Gujarat 677682 329875 459333Himachal Pradesh 563604 232830 481943 Harayana 972609 470177 672684Jammu & Kashmir 654402 306421 614671 Himachal Pradesh 713465 427123 511820Karnataka 362150 94977 248409 Jammu & Kashmir 1311967 821052 1067081Kerala 777734 245914 509679 Jharkhand 254268 240550 244288Madhya Pradesh 316834 83302 237670 Karnataka 549828 302293 377726Chhattisgarh 235531 57445 191602 Kerala 1166862 562661 762200Maharashtra 388048 87450 252749 Madhya Pradesh 594344 365057 444952Orissa 119536 60154 98454 Maharashtra 635438 333457 419667Punjab 1461616 255634 903717 Orissa 315233 216899 250218Rajasthan 412720 198373 358351 Punjab 780629 385013 560705Tamil Nadu 331133 101323 181376 Rajasthan 686253 377414 492805Uttaranchal 453982 204767 389222 Tamil Nadu 477193 251939 322129Uttar Pradesh 400441 121113 330456 Uttaranchal 375058 477845 438424West Bengal 211115 74535 151842 Uttar Pradesh 399427 338936 370084India 372632 107230 265606 West Bengal 335112 313485 322023 India 554844 339002 417158The AVA of cultivator households was 5.72 times that of non-cultivator households in Punjab, 5.20times in Haryana, 2.14 times in Jammu & Kashmir, 3.16 times in Kerala, 3.40 times in AndhraPradesh, 2.52 times in Assam, 2.35 times in Jharkhand and 2.84 times in West Bengal. Thecorresponding number was the lowest in Orissa – the AVA for cultivator household being 1.99 times. In urban areas: Statement 8 shows the AVAs of the urban households as on 30th June, 2002 for21 major states. This gives the AVAs separately for self-employed and other households in the states.Similar features in respect of household categories are observed in the case of urban households as inthe case of the rural. The AVA of self-employed households was higher than that of other urbanhouseholds in all the states. The differencial in respect of AVA in these two urban categories ofhouseholds was smaller than the corresponding rural household categories of cultivator and other. Thestates that reported very high AVA were Jammu & Kashmir (Rs. 10.67 lakh), Kerala (Rs. 7.62 lakh),Haryana (Rs. 6.73 lakh ) and Delhi (Rs. 5.74 lakh). Punjab, which topped in the rural areas, reportedlower urban AVA of Rs. 5.61 lakh. Incidentally, rural Haryana is also better in respect of AVA perhousehold than its urban parts. On the other hand, Jharkhand reported lowest ownership of assets (Rs.2.44 lakh), preceded by Orissa (Rs. 2.50 lakh), Assam (Rs. 2.77 lakh), Chhatishgarh (Rs. 2.80 lakh),Bihar, West Bengal and Tamil Nadu (Rs. 3.22 lakh each). 17
  24. 24. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 5003.3.3.3 Changes in Average Value of Assets (AVA) – Rural Areas: The changes in the average value ofassets (AVA) of the rural households over the two decades beginning with 1981 are shown inStatement 9 for 20 major states and all India. It may be seen that there is a very little change in therelative position of the states in respect of AVA during the two decades. Punjab, Haryana, Kerala,Jammu and Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh have maintained their high AVAs in all the periods 1981,1991 and 2002, and on the other hand, Orissa, Andhra Pradesh, Assam, West Bengal and Tamil Naduare found with low AVAs in these periods. In fact, the relative positions of the states in 1991 areobserved to be roughly the same as in 1981. Some new states have emerged through partitioning ofsome big states during 1991 and 2002. In that sense, although strict comparison between the periods1991 and 2002 is not possible, the relative positions of the states observed in 1991 have remainednearly the same in 2002. Statement 10: Average value of assets (AVA) perStatement 9: Average value of assets (AVA) per rural urban household during 1981, 1991 and 2002household during 1981, 1991 and 2002 Urban Rural AVA (Rs.000) AVA (Rs.000) state 1981 1991 2002state 1981 1991 2002 (37th) (48th ) (59th) (37th) (48th ) (59th) (1) (2) (3) (4)(1) (2) (3) (4) Andhra Pradesh 32 95 357Andhra Pradesh 26 58 135 Assam 33 112 277Assam 20 60 146 Bihar 36 99 322Bihar 32 98 206 Chhattisgarh - - 280Chhattisgarh - - 192 Delhi 92 284 574Gujarat 37 103 328 Gujarat 43 160 459Haryana 91 338 716 Haryana 60 151 673Himachal Pradesh 63 134 482 Himachal Pradesh 54 161 512Jammu & Kashmir 59 163 615 Jammu & Kashmir 84 202 1067Jharkhand - - 152 Jharkhand - - 244Karnataka 33 107 248 Karnataka 42 125 378Kerala 77 182 510 Kerala 112 222 762Madhya Pradesh 30 93 238 Madhya Pradesh 42 117 445Maharashtra 35 93 253 Maharashtra 43 165 420Orissa 18 46 98 Orissa 22 72 250Punjab 97 329 904 Punjab 55 256 561Rajasthan 41 159 358 Rajasthan 40 161 493Tamil Nadu 20 62 181 Tamil Nadu 34 120 322Uttaranchal - - 389 Uttaranchal - - 438Uttar Pradesh 45 139 330 Uttar Pradesh 38 158 370West Bengal 21 62 152 West Bengal 28 101 322India 36 107 266 India 41 144 4173.3.3.4 In urban areas: Statement 10 shows the changes in the AVA of the urban households over thedecade ending 2002 for 21 major states and all India. A state-wise analysis of AVA in the urban showssimilar features as for that in the rural areas. The relative position of the states in respect AVA in theurban areas did not change much during the two decades, except in the case of Andhra Pradesh andMadhya Pradesh. These two states show a significant upward movement in terms of AVA. The changein the case of Madhya Pradesh could be due to its partition to form Chhattisgarh, where the AVAs waslower. 18
  25. 25. Household Assets and Liabilities as on 30.06.2002 Report No. 500 Figure 1: Average value of assets of rural households during 1981, 1991 and 2002 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Kerala West Bengal Haryana Assam Andhra Pradesh Jammu & Kashmir Himachal Pradesh Uttar Pradesh Madhya Pradesh India Gujarat Tamil Nadu Karnataka Orissa Uttaranchal Punjab Maharashtra Bihar Jharkhand Chhattisgarh Rajasthan 1981 1991 2002 Figure 2: Average value of assets (Rs. 000) of urban households in 1981, 1991 and 2002 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Assam Tamil Nadu Haryana Karnataka Kerala Gujarat WB Uttaranchal J&K Rajasthan Maharashtra Orissa Bihar Chhattisgarh Delhi AP Jharkhand India Uttar Pradesh HP MP Punjab 1981 1991 20023.3.4 Average value of assets by land owned 19

    Be the first to comment

    Login to see the comments

  • YOGESHjanbandhu09

    Dec. 4, 2014


Total views


On Slideshare


From embeds


Number of embeds