logo
No, India Is Not the Fourth Most Equal Country. Here's the Real Data

No, India Is Not the Fourth Most Equal Country. Here's the Real Data

The Wire2 days ago
Today, several major Indian newspapers – including The Hindu, Business Standard, The Times of India and The Indian Express – carried a story claiming that India is the fourth most equal country in the world, attributing the finding to a recent World Bank report. This is incorrect: India ranks not four but 176 out of the 216 countries, as of 2019. Let's unpack how this serious misrepresentation came to be.
This claim is based on a Press Information Bureau (PIB) release, which gravely misreads a World Bank brief. Unfortunately, multiple media houses ran with the story without any fact-checking or data scrutiny.
Here's what the the World Bank Brief says:
'India's consumption-based Gini index improved from 28.8 in 2011–12 to 25.5 in 2022–23, though inequality may be underestimated due to data limitations. In contrast, the World Inequality Database shows income inequality rising from a Gini of 52 in 2004 to 62 in 2023. Wage disparity remains high, with the median earnings of the top 10 percent being 13 times higher than the bottom 10 percent in 2023–24.'
The PIB picks out the 25.5 figure – which measures consumption inequality – and uses it to compare India to other equal countries whose rankings are based on income inequality. This is a basic and critical statistical error.
Note, the consumption inequality as an index is usually lower than income inequality for countries. This is because the rich save a large part of their income, so consumption, as unequal as it is, at least looks more equal than income. So, when the PIB compares India's consumption Gini of 25.5 with other countries' income Ginis, it's comparing apples to oranges. In fact, the World Bank brief also does not make any such comparisons based on these numbers since they are not comparable, even though PIB seems to claim it does.
A fair comparison would either be to compare India's income inequality with other countries' income Ginis, or compare India's consumption inequality with other countries' consumption Ginis – which the World Bank brief does not provide.
Screenshot from PIB, where it says 'India Achieves Greater Income Inequality', with a figure right below saying 'Consumption-based Gini Index'.
India's Gini index for income inequality, comparable with other countries, is 61 (in 2019 and 2023), according to the world inequality database, and as also stated in the World Bank brief. This inequality has been consistently increasing since the 1990s, placing India as a highly unequal country (the higher the index, higher the inequality). Ranking countries based on how equal they are in terms of the income Gini, we find that India is ranked 176 out of a total of 216 countries in 2019, while its rank was 115 in 2009 – thereby becoming much more unequal, relative to other countries, over time. The wealth inequality Gini index as per the world inequality database for India is even higher, at 75 in 2023 (and 74 in 2019).
India's comparison with a few selected countries. India is among the most unequal in the world, alongside Brazil, South Africa. Source: World Inequality Database
Let's turn our attention towards comparable consumption inequality figures. First, the World Bank does not compare India's consumption Gini index with any other country. Worse still, the World Bank brief explicitly cautions that India's consumption inequality may be underestimated due to data limitations; specifically it notes 'International poverty estimates for India are derived from the 2011-12 Consumption Expenditure Survey (CES) and the 2022-23 Household Consumption Expenditure Survey, using the modified mixed reference period and a spatially and intertemporally deflated welfare aggregate. Changes in questionnaire design, survey implementation, and sampling in the 2022-23 survey represent improvements but present challenges for making comparisons over time. Moreover, sampling and data limitations suggest that consumption inequality may be underestimated.' And those limitations are substantial. The survey methodology for the 2022-23 Household Consumption Expenditure Survey underwent considerable changes from the earlier 2011-12 CES, making direct comparisons unreliable. This has been widely discussed by Indian economists and statisticians.
To make some reasonable comparisons of consumption inequality, we can look at inequality in per capita calorie intake, which also reflects food consumption disparities. According to data from the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations and processed by Our World in Data, we find that India ranked 102nd out of 185 countries in 2019 – a worse position than in 2009, when it ranked 82nd. So, by this measure too, India's relative performance has deteriorated over the past decade.
Whichever way one looks at the data, the picture is clear: India is a highly unequal country, and inequality is worsening. The intervention needed for a massive redistribution, including taxing the rich, is urgent. Misreporting this reality is not just misleading – it can be dangerous. When trusted national media outlets reproduce statistical errors without scrutiny, they obscure urgent issues facing the country and downplay the lived realities of millions that we collectively need to address.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Express View: For India, is BRICS worth it?
Express View: For India, is BRICS worth it?

Indian Express

time29 minutes ago

  • Indian Express

Express View: For India, is BRICS worth it?

The 2025 BRICS Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil ended over the weekend with a wide-ranging declaration on global and regional issues. But few outside the hapless desk officers in various foreign offices around the world and policy wonks in think tanks would want to pore over the 126-paragraph, 47-page, over-16,000-word declaration. With such familiar phrases as 'multipolar world', 'Global South', 'inclusive', 'sustainable' and 'global governance', it will certainly impress the enthusiasts who see BRICS as a powerful instrument to upend the global order. Many in the West do fear BRICS for the same reason. There is no reason to believe that US President Donald Trump would have had the time to read the long declaration, but he has repeated his earlier claim that BRICS is 'anti-American' and threatened to impose additional tariffs on members of the forum. But the hopes and fears of BRICS engineering a global transformation are misplaced. For, the forum is riddled with several contradictions of its own and its grasp has always been larger than its reach. As irony would have it, if anyone is trying to build a 'post-American order', it is Trump. In less than six months, he has overturned many traditional assumptions about US global policies and is seeking to radically overhaul the international system that Washington built after World War II and that was modified by it at the turn of the 1990s. Consider, for example, the BRICS talk about reforming the Bretton Woods system; Trump is doing precisely that by pressing for change at the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The BRICS call to save the World Trade Organisation is a sad (and hypocritical) cry in the wilderness with Trump well on his way to demolishing the rule-maker for world commerce. Even more damaging is that leading members of BRICS have been queuing up in Washington to negotiate bilateral deals with Trump holding a gun to their heads. They are not saving the WTO but protecting their own national trade with America by looking for bilateral deals. China has cut a limited deal. Vietnam, another communist country, announced a trade deal of its own. India hopes that its intensive trade negotiations with Trump's Washington in the past few months will bear fruit this week. Equally far-fetched is the idea that members of BRICS can submerge their bilateral differences to collectively blunt American dominance. For India, the economic and security challenges presented by China are much bigger than those posed by American hegemony. Two BRICS states — Saudi Arabia and the UAE — are as worried as Israel and the US about the nuclear weapons programme of a third member, Iran. But here is the rub. Trump's actions to overhaul the global economic, financial, and security order have produced great global churn. The Rio declaration has no answers, only hot air, in response to the Trump challenge. The circumstances that persuaded India to found BRICS and promote it for three decades are no longer present. Yet the political groupthink in Delhi is so entrenched that no questions are asked about the virtue of India investing so much political and diplomatic capital in a forum that does little to serve the country's current interests. With India taking over the chair of BRICS, the time to ask those questions is now.

China fumes as Modi greets Dalai Lama on his birthday
China fumes as Modi greets Dalai Lama on his birthday

Hans India

time33 minutes ago

  • Hans India

China fumes as Modi greets Dalai Lama on his birthday

Beijing: China on Monday objected to Prime Minister Narendra Modi wishing the Dalai Lama on his 90th birthday and to Indian ministers flocking to his residence in Dharamshala for celebrations, reiterating Beijing's stance on matters concerning Tibet. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters that the country's position on Tibet is consistent and well-known. Mao further stated that the Dalai Lama is a political exile and alleged that he has been involved in efforts to separate Xizang -- also known as Tibet outside China -- under the guise of religion. 'India should fully appreciate the great sensitivity of Xizang-related issues and recognise the anti-separatist nature of the 14th Dalai Lama and honour the commitment it made to China on issues related to Xizang,' she said. She also alleged that India is trying to use the Dalai Lama issue to interfere in China's internal affairs and cautioned New Delhi against doing so. The Chinese Embassy in India protested against the Dalai Lama's announcement regarding the continuation of the reincarnation system, asserting that he has no authority to decide whether the institution should continue or be abolished. Prime Minister Modi on Sunday extended warm wishes to the Dalai Lama, and said he has been an enduring symbol of love, compassion, patience and moral discipline. "His message has inspired respect and admiration across all faiths. We pray for his continued good health and long life," Modi posted on X. Union ministers Kiren Rijiju and Rajiv Ranjan Singh, Arunachal Pradesh Chief Minister Pema Khandu, and Sikkim minister Sonam Lama attended his birthday celebrations in Dharamshala.

Sebi has all powers to act against manipulative trading: Pandey
Sebi has all powers to act against manipulative trading: Pandey

Hans India

time34 minutes ago

  • Hans India

Sebi has all powers to act against manipulative trading: Pandey

New Delhi: Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) Chairman, TuhinKanta Pandey, said on Monday that the market regulator has all the powers to act against manipulative trading activities in the matter related to New York-headquartered trading major Jane Street Group, which is very evident from the interim order that has been issued to ban it from the Indian stock market. Asked whether there is a need to have more regulations to act against such entities, the Sebi Chairman quipped that the need was for enforcement and surveillance rather than more regulations, and the 'order in the Jane Street case speaks for itself.' 'Within the regulations only, we have bought it. So, with regulations remaining the same, it is enforcement and surveillance that can actually help. Excess regulations do not mean excess regulation. Those are two different things,' Pandey remarked. He highlighted that a great deal of analytical work went into the Jane Street case, as manipulative activities were done in many ways 'Manipulative practices can be worked out by different players in different ways. There is no one particular way in which you have to assess. Our regulations very clearly mention that manipulative and fraudulent practices are not allowed in the market and within the regulations, Sebihas all the powers to investigate and act,' Pandey explained. 'Obviously, surveillance both at the exchange level and the Sebi level will continue, and we will also upgrade those surveillance measures,' said Pandey. Jane Street has been barred by the Sebi from the Indian stock market for indulging in manipulative trading practices that allegedly enabled the company to make unlawful profits. It indulged in aggressive trading in the derivatives (futures) segment, where the firm executed trades to influence market prices by unfair means to make a fast buck. The Sebidescribed it as 'non-neutral trading behaviour', a strategic attempt to influence prices rather than simply engage with the market. And the tactic wasn't random; it followed a well-known play in the trading world, which is termed 'marking the close.' Jane Street is a proprietary trading firm, which means it trades with its own capital rather than managing client funds. The firm allegedly made a staggering Rs 32,681 crore in profits by manipulating the stock market and repatriating the amount overseas.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store