Niti Aayog’s multidimensional index useless for measuring poverty: ex-chief statistician

NEW DELHI: The big poverty debate that refuses to die down has been reignited by the recent Niti Aayog report on the National Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI). As per the recent MPI report, which measures ‘poverty’ beyond the income parameter, 14.96% of the population in India was multidimensionally poor during 2019-21, a sharp decline from the 2015-16 level of 24.85%.

And even though multidimensional poverty is different from the traditionally measured poverty level measured through consumption expenditure, it has refuelled the poverty debate.

The National MPI measures simultaneous deprivations across the three equally weighted dimensions of health, education, and standard of living that are represented by indicators such as nutrition, child and adolescent mortality, maternal health, years of schooling, school attendance, cooking fuel, sanitation, drinking water, electricity, housing, assets, and bank accounts.

But does it correctly represent the poverty level in India?

“Poverty is an income concept. Multidimensional index is a deprivation concept – they are two different things,” says Pronab Sen, the former chief statistician of India.

He adds that the multidimensional poverty index actually measures deprivation, and deprivation may or may not have anything to do with poverty.

He explains: “Think of an old zamindar. He lives in the old family mansion — a pakka house– but he is broke. But in terms of the multidimensional poverty index, he may not be so.”

Amit Basole, Associate Professor of Economics, School of Arts and Sciences, at Azim Premji University, says that the Multidimensional Poverty Index is not a substitute for the traditional way of measuring poverty.