The national average HDI for India in 2008 was 0.467. [1] By 2010, its average HDI had risen to 0.519. [2] [3] UNDP, the sponsor of Human Development Index methodology since 1990, reported India's HDI to be 0.554 for 2012, [4] an 18% increase over its 2008 HDI. United Nations declared India's HDI is 0.586 in 2014, [5] a 5.77% increase over 2012. As for the year 2018, HDI for India stood at 0.647. [6] [7] [8]
HDI is composite index that takes into consideration (1) health, (2) Education and (3) Per capita income.
This is a list of Indian states and union territories by Human Development Index as of 2018. [7]
Human Development Index (by UN Method) of Indian states since 1990 (2018 revision). [7]
State | HDI 1990 | HDI 1995 | HDI 2000 | HDI 2005 | HDI 2010 | HDI 2015 | HDI 2018 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Northern India | |||||||
Chandigarh | 0.633 | 0.641 | 0.638 | 0.663 | 0.648 | 0.734 | 0.775 |
New Delhi | 0.577 | 0.620 | 0.664 | 0.690 | 0.709 | 0.730 | 0.746 |
Haryana | 0.467 | 0.506 | 0.549 | 0.591 | 0.634 | 0.686 | 0.708 |
Himachal Pradesh | 0.479 | 0.530 | 0.589 | 0.644 | 0.667 | 0.704 | 0.725 |
Jammu and Kashmir | 0.493 | 0.511 | 0.528 | 0.587 | 0.640 | 0.674 | 0.688 |
Madhya Pradesh | 0.406 | 0.433 | 0.460 | 0.501 | 0.538 | 0.585 | 0.606 |
Punjab | 0.496 | 0.536 | 0.578 | 0.615 | 0.657 | 0.703 | 0.723 |
Uttar Pradesh | 0.397 | 0.429 | 0.463 | 0.504 | 0.535 | 0.577 | 0.596 |
Uttarakhand | 0.629 | 0.635 | 0.630 | 0.656 | 0.641 | 0.664 | 0.684 |
Western India | |||||||
Dadra and Nagar Haveli | 0.672 | 0.683 | 0.684 | 0.709 | 0.696 | 0.663 | 0.663 |
Daman and Diu | 0.651 | 0.662 | 0.664 | 0.688 | 0.677 | 0.690 | 0.708 |
Goa | 0.552 | 0.581 | 0.614 | 0.671 | 0.737 | 0.754 | 0.761 |
Gujarat | 0.470 | 0.498 | 0.527 | 0.573 | 0.606 | 0.651 | 0.672 |
Maharashtra | 0.493 | 0.525 | 0.558 | 0.602 | 0.644 | 0.680 | 0.696 |
Rajasthan | 0.403 | 0.436 | 0.469 | 0.510 | 0.548 | 0.605 | 0.629 |
Eastern India | |||||||
Andaman and Nicobar Islands | 0.683 | 0.693 | 0.694 | 0.720 | 0.707 | 0.721 | 0.739 |
West Bengal | 0.440 | 0.473 | 0.505 | 0.539 | 0.572 | 0.619 | 0.641 |
Bihar | 0.378 | 0.407 | 0.436 | 0.470 | 0.514 | 0.557 | 0.576 |
Chhattisgarh | 0.562 | 0.569 | 0.564 | 0.588 | 0.574 | 0.594 | 0.613 |
Jharkhand | 0.562 | 0.568 | 0.564 | 0.588 | 0.574 | 0.584 | 0.599 |
Odisha | 0.400 | 0.429 | 0.458 | 0.494 | 0.535 | 0.585 | 0.606 |
Northeastern India | |||||||
Assam | 0.411 | 0.447 | 0.488 | 0.531 | 0.567 | 0.598 | 0.614 |
Arunachal Pradesh | 0.437 | 0.471 | 0.502 | 0.535 | 0.641 | 0.661 | 0.660 |
Manipur | 0.495 | 0.526 | 0.559 | 0.598 | 0.681 | 0.694 | 0.696 |
Meghalaya | 0.456 | 0.469 | 0.477 | 0.533 | 0.620 | 0.648 | 0.656 |
Mizoram | 0.525 | 0.547 | 0.569 | 0.630 | 0.686 | 0.698 | 0.705 |
Nagaland | 0.531 | 0.533 | 0.522 | 0.557 | 0.661 | 0.679 | 0.679 |
Sikkim | 0.541 | 0.548 | 0.548 | 0.590 | 0.633 | 0.691 | 0.716 |
Tripura | 0.447 | 0.488 | 0.531 | 0.561 | 0.608 | 0.643 | 0.658 |
Southern India | |||||||
Andhra Pradesh | 0.424 | 0.450 | 0.478 | 0.530 | 0.580 | 0.629 | 0.650 |
Karnataka | 0.444 | 0.479 | 0.518 | 0.565 | 0.605 | 0.659 | 0.682 |
Kerala | 0.544 | 0.568 | 0.598 | 0.678 | 0.724 | 0.757 | 0.779 |
Lakshadweep | 0.693 | 0.704 | 0.705 | 0.731 | 0.717 | 0.732 | 0.750 |
Puducherry | 0.717 | 0.730 | 0.730 | 0.757 | 0.743 | 0.730 | 0.738 |
Tamil Nadu | 0.471 | 0.504 | 0.542 | 0.599 | 0.646 | 0.689 | 0.708 |
Telangana | 0.622 | 0.630 | 0.627 | 0.652 | 0.638 | 0.651 | 0.669 |
India | 0.431 | 0.463 | 0.498 | 0.539 | 0.582 | 0.627 | 0.647 |
Compared with the previous Indian National Human Development Reports and the latest state-level government statistical report, India has significantly improved its HDI in all of its administrative subdivisions:
Legend | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Very High/High Human Development Index 0.850–0.899 0.800–0.849 0.750–0.799 0.700–0.749 | Medium human development index 0.650–0.699 0.600–0.649 0.550–0.599 0.500–0.549 | Low human development index 0.450–0.499 0.400–0.449 0.350–0.399 0.300–0.349 0.250–0.299 ≤0.250 | Lack of information |
This is a list of Indian states by their respective Human Development Index (HDI), as of 2008. [1] Kerala stands first in Human Development Index among the states in India.
There are many ways to calculate HDI, and its calculation is sensitive to base data and assumptions. Using another approach, UNDP India and Government of India calculated the HDI nationwide average to be 0.605 in 2006. [10] This data was published by the Indian Government. [1] Note that the 2007-2008 HDI values in the table below is not based on income as is the UNDP standard practice for global comparisons, but on estimated consumption expenditure – an assumption which underestimates the HDI than actual. [11] Further, data was unavailable for the following states and union territories: Chandigarh, Lakshadweep, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Daman and Diu, Puducherry, and Dadra and Nagar Haveli. [12] [13]
Rank | State/Union Territory | consumption based HDI [14] (2007–08) |
---|---|---|
1 | Kerala | 0.810 |
2 | Delhi | 0.750 |
3 | Himachal Pradesh | 0.652 |
4 | Goa | 0.617 |
5 | Punjab | 0.605 |
6 | Northeast India (excluding Assam) | 0.573 |
7 | Maharashtra | 0.572 |
8 | Tamil Nadu | 0.570 |
9 | Haryana | 0.552 |
10 | Jammu and Kashmir | 0.542 |
11 | Gujarat | 0.527 |
12 | Karnataka | 0.519 |
– | National average | 0.513 |
13 | West Bengal | 0.492 |
14 | Uttarakhand | 0.490 |
15 | Andhra Pradesh | 0.473 |
16 | Assam | 0.444 |
17 | Rajasthan | 0.434 |
18 | Uttar Pradesh | 0.380 |
19 | Jharkhand | 0.376 |
20 | Madhya Pradesh | 0.375 |
21 | Bihar | 0.367 |
22 | Odisha | 0.362 |
23 | Chhattisgarh | 0.358 |
The economy of Bhutan, one of the world's smallest and least developed countries, is based on agriculture and forestry, which provide the main livelihood for more than 60% of the population. Agriculture consists largely of subsistence farming and animal husbandry. Rugged mountains dominate the terrain and make the building of roads and other infrastructure difficult and expensive.
Human capital is the stock of habits, knowledge, social and personality attributes embodied in the ability to perform labour so as to produce economic value.
A developed country, industrialized country, more developed country (MDC), or more economically developed country (MEDC), is a sovereign state that has a developed economy and advanced technological infrastructure relative to other less industrialized nations. Most commonly, the criteria for evaluating the degree of economic development are gross domestic product (GDP), gross national product (GNP), the per capita income, level of industrialization, amount of widespread infrastructure and general standard of living. Which criteria are to be used and which countries can be classified as being developed are subjects of debate.
The Human Development Index (HDI) is a statistic composite index of life expectancy, education, and per capita income indicators, which are used to rank countries into four tiers of human development. A country scores a higher HDI when the lifespan is higher, the education level is higher, and the gross national income GNI (PPP) per capita is higher. It was developed by Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haq and was further used to measure a country's development by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)'s Human Development Report Office.
The Kerala model of development is a model of development based on the practices adopted in the state of Kerala, India. It is characterized by achievements in social indicators such as education, healthcare, high life expectancy, low infant mortality and low birth rate, by the creation of productive social infrastructure rather than materialistic infrastructure. Kerala has achieved material conditions of living, reflected in indicators of social development comparable to those of developed countries, even though the state's per capita income is low. These achievements along with the factors responsible for such achievements have been considered characteristic results of the Kerala model.
The Human Poverty Index (HPI) was an indication of the poverty of community in a country, developed by the United Nations to complement the Human Development Index (HDI) and was first reported as part of the Human Deprivation Report in 1997. It was considered to better reflect the extent of deprivation in deprived countries compared to the HDI. In 2010 it was supplanted by the UN's Multidimensional Poverty Index.
The Human Development Report (HDR) is an annual report published by the Human Development Report Office of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
Human development is the process characterized by the variation of material conditions. These conditions influence the possibilities of satisfying needs and desires. They also explore and realize the physical and psychic, biological and cultural, individual and social potentials of each person. It is also the name of the science that seeks to understand how and why the people of all ages and circumstances change or remain the same over time. It involves studies of the human condition with its core being the capability approach. The inequality adjusted Human Development Index is used as a way of measuring actual progress in human development by the United Nations. It is an alternative approach to a single focus on economic growth, and focused more on social justice, as a way of understanding progress.
Gender inequality in India refers to health, education, economic and political inequalities between men and women in India. Various international gender inequality indices rank India differently on each of these factors, as well as on a composite basis, and these indices are controversial.
Multidimensional Poverty Indices use a range of indicators to calculate a summary poverty figure for a given population, in which a larger figure indicates a higher level of poverty. This figure considers both the proportion of the population that is deemed poor, and the 'breadth' of poverty experienced by these 'poor' households, following the Alkire & Foster 'counting method'. The method was developed following increased criticism of monetary and consumption based poverty measures, seeking to capture the deprivations in non-monetary factors that contribute towards well-being. While there is a standard set of indicators, dimensions, cutoffs & thresholds used for a 'Global MPI', the method is flexible and there are many examples of poverty studies that modify it to best suit their environment. The methodology has been mainly, but not exclusively, applied to developing countries.
The Gender Inequality Index (GII) is an index for measurement of gender disparity that was introduced in the 2010 Human Development Report 20th anniversary edition by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). According to the UNDP, this index is a composite measure to quantify the loss of achievement within a country due to gender inequality. It uses three dimensions to measure opportunity cost: reproductive health, empowerment, and labor market participation. The new index was introduced as an experimental measure to remedy the shortcomings of the previous indicators, the Gender Development Index (GDI) and the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM), both of which were introduced in the 1995 Human Development Report.
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) or Global Goals are a collection of 17 interlinked goals designed to be a "blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all". The SDGs were set in 2015 by the United Nations General Assembly and are intended to be achieved by the year 2030. They are included in a UN Resolution called the 2030 Agenda or what is colloquially known as Agenda 2030.
Santosh Mehrotra is a human development economist, whose research and writings have had most influence in the areas of labour, employment, skill development, child poverty, and the economics of education. He was an economic adviser in the United Nations system in New York City, Italy, and Thailand (1991–2006), and technocrat in the government of India (2006–2014), apart from making contributions to academic research since the mid-1980s. He has also in recent years established a reputation as an institution-builder in the field of research in India, despite facing difficult odds. He brings a combination of professional experience: with the Indian government as a policy maker and adviser, with international organisations as a technical expert, having lived on three continents and travelled to 63 countries providing technical advice to governments; and as an academic whose research work has been translated into French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian and German.