01.02.2014 Views

People with Disabilities in India: From Commitment to Outcomes

People with Disabilities in India: From Commitment to Outcomes

People with Disabilities in India: From Commitment to Outcomes

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

ANNEX 1: COMPARING THE INCOMPARABLE: DISABILITY ESTIMATES<br />

IN THE CENSUS AND THE NATIONAL SAMPLE SURVEY 219<br />

1. Disability prevalence estimates often differ across and <strong>with</strong><strong>in</strong> countries. In <strong>India</strong>,<br />

accord<strong>in</strong>g <strong>to</strong> the 58 th round of the National Sample Survey (NSS), there were 18.5 million persons<br />

<strong>with</strong> disabilities <strong>in</strong> 2002 compared <strong>with</strong> 21.9 million reported by the Census of 2001. This<br />

translates <strong>to</strong> a 20 percent difference <strong>in</strong> the prevalence estimates. It is important <strong>to</strong> try and<br />

understand the differences <strong>in</strong> prevalence estimates from the Census of <strong>India</strong> of 2001 and the 58 th<br />

round of the NSS. This annex explores the fac<strong>to</strong>rs that contribute <strong>to</strong> the differences between the<br />

two sources, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g different sampl<strong>in</strong>g designs and disability def<strong>in</strong>itions.<br />

2. The Census and the NSS have different sampl<strong>in</strong>g design. The Census is an enumeration<br />

of the entire population of <strong>India</strong> while the NSS has a nationally representative stratified sample.<br />

3. In both sources, disability was self-reported. Different def<strong>in</strong>itions of overall disability and<br />

disability types may have contributed <strong>to</strong> differences <strong>in</strong> estimates.<br />

Overall disability:<br />

4. The Census of 2001 does not have a general def<strong>in</strong>ition of disability. Instead, a question<br />

on type of disability was <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> the population enumeration section as follows: “If the person<br />

is physically/mentally disabled, give appropriate code number from the list below: <strong>in</strong> see<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong><br />

speech, <strong>in</strong> hear<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong> movement, mental.” The Census thus has a functional limitation question,<br />

which prompts respondents <strong>to</strong> report their type of functional limitation (e.g., <strong>in</strong> see<strong>in</strong>g, hear<strong>in</strong>g).<br />

5. In schedule 0.0 of the 58 th round of the NSS, some broad <strong>in</strong>formation about the<br />

households (e.g., hous<strong>in</strong>g conditions, disability) were collected dur<strong>in</strong>g the household list<strong>in</strong>g. This<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation was required ma<strong>in</strong>ly <strong>to</strong> identify and develop a frame for selection of households for<br />

subsequent schedules, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g schedule 26 adm<strong>in</strong>istered only <strong>to</strong> households <strong>with</strong> persons <strong>with</strong><br />

disabilities. In the NSS, a person is considered disabled “if the person has restrictions or lack of<br />

abilities <strong>to</strong> perform an activity <strong>in</strong> the manner or <strong>with</strong><strong>in</strong> the range considered normal for a human<br />

be<strong>in</strong>g”. Disability is thus def<strong>in</strong>ed as an activity limitation <strong>in</strong> the NSS.<br />

6. The disability question and the def<strong>in</strong>itions of different disability types used <strong>in</strong> the Census<br />

and the NSS are presented <strong>in</strong> Table A2.1. Prevalence estimates are reported <strong>in</strong> Bhanushali (2005).<br />

Type of disability:<br />

7. In both sources, persons who report be<strong>in</strong>g disabled are asked about their limitation types<br />

(mental, locomo<strong>to</strong>r, visual, hear<strong>in</strong>g, speech). Despite similar sequence <strong>in</strong> the identification of<br />

disability types, there are also tremendous variations <strong>in</strong> prevalence estimates of types of disability<br />

across the two data sources.<br />

8. Visual: (Higher Census – Lower NSS) Accord<strong>in</strong>g <strong>to</strong> the Census 2001, nearly 50 percent<br />

of PWDs are visually disabled, compared <strong>to</strong> 15.3 percent <strong>in</strong> the NSS. For visual disability, the<br />

Census <strong>in</strong>cludes persons who have blurred vision and have had no occasion <strong>to</strong> test their vision. It<br />

thus <strong>in</strong>cludes persons who may be able <strong>to</strong> see <strong>with</strong> spectacles. In contrast, the NSS does not<br />

consider whether or not a person’s vision has been tested and focuses on the ability <strong>to</strong> perform<br />

tasks requir<strong>in</strong>g visual acuity.<br />

219 This annex is drawn from the background paper by Mitra and Sambamoorthi (2006).<br />

-152-

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!