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
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-