National Human Development Report: 2001 - Indira Gandhi Institute ...

26STATE OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENTNATIONAL HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2001Human Development Index — 1981Human Development Index — 1991Key0 – 0.3140.315 – 0.3490.350 – 0.3990.400+Key0 – 0.3140.315 – 0.3490.350 – 0.3990.400+Bengal and Bihar improved theirHDI significantly in the eighties, innineties, the momentum wasmaintained only in case ofRajasthan, Madhya Pradesh andUttar Pradesh. Tamil Naduimproved it’s ranking by 4 positionsfrom 7 to 3, while Rajasthan from 12to 9. On the other hand the positionof Assam dropped from 10 to 14.Secondly, it turns out that for theeconomically better off States, aswell as for the poor States,attainments on HDI and incomelevels show a direct correspondence.In other words, the poor States arealso the States with relatively poorperformance on HDI. Similarly, theeconomically better-off States arealso the ones with relatively betterperformance on the HDI. However,the relation between the HDI andthe level of development does notshow any correspondence among themiddle-income States in thecountry. In this category of States,some States like Kerala have highattainments on HDI, at the sametime, there are States like AndhraPradesh or even West Bengal whereHDI values are not as high. Thirdly,though at the national level, theeconomic growth in the nineties wasnearly one percentage point higherthan the earlier decade, it has,perhaps, resulted in less humandevelopment in the nineties. This isprimarily on account of performanceof the outlier States and slowerimprovement in human developmentindicators for States alreadywith higher HDI values. Finally, itturns out that inequality acrossStates on the HDIs is less than theincome inequality as captured in theper capita State Domestic Product.GEI has been estimated tomeasure the inequality inattainments on human developmentindicators between females andmales. The index has been presentedas a ratio of attainments for females