Kerala with lower per capital income has
a better human development ranking
Than haryana. Hence per capita income is not a useful criterion at all and should not be used to compare states. Do you agree?discuss
Answers
no it is not true. 1. per capita income decides the affluence and the human development index decides the development in its human resources. eg. Lichtenstein, qatar, Luxembourg have high gdp per capita but Singapore, japan and others have hdi. 2.they have their own importance and the per capita income decides the standard of living. the higher the per capita income is the higher the standard of living is.
3. kerala for instance has high hdi but haryana has low hdi. hdi has the potential to raise the gdp
No, I do not agree with the statement that per capita income is not a useful criterion at all. Kerala, with lower per capita income has a better human development ranking than Maharashtra because, human development ranking is determined using a combination of factors such as health, education, and income. So, this does not imply that per capita income is not useful. Rather, per capita income is one of the development factors and can not be neglected. The World Bank uses per capita income as the criterion for measuring development and comparing states. But this criterion has certain limitations because of which determination of Human Development Index (HDI) is done using this criterion along with some other development factors like health, education etc. If the rate of population growth, is higher than the rate of growth of national income, this will lead to fall in per capita availability of goods and services and economic welfare.