Rural Indebtedness, Assets and Credit: Inter-State Variations in India

A.Venkateswarlu* and B. Sampath Rao**

1. Introduction

Till Independence in India, the credit requirements of rural households were

mainly met from the non-institutional sources, as the banking and cooperative movement
were in the nascent stages. The rural households, both cultivators and non-cultivators,
require credit for the productive and nonproductive purposes. Even now the purposes
remain the same. At present, the productive purposes of cultivators include loans both
working capital and fixed capital. Working capital is used to buy seeds, fertilisers,
pesticides, etc., and to pay taxes to the government, etc. Fixed capital is meant for
permanent improvements on land, digging and deepening of wells, fencing of land, and
for purchasing implements and machinery, etc. Non-cultivators also use loans for
creation of income generating assets in the sense of formation of fixed capital and for
circulating capital in the sense of working capital. The unproductive purposes are the
same for both the cultivators and non-cultivators, such as celebration of marriages, births
and deaths, for litigation, etc.

Rural credit was dominated by the non-institutional (unorganized or private)

sector in both 1951-52 and 1961-62 as that sector provided about 93.0 percent of the total
borrowings in 1951-52 and 82.0 percent of such borrowings in 1961-62 (Ghatak, 1976).
The non-institutional sources were mainly agricultural and professional money lenders.
Even by the early 1970s, the studies in Eastern India of Bhaduri (1973), Prasad (1973)
and Chandra (1975) theorized that prevailing agrarian relations were of semi-feudalism,
as the rural exploiters were operating both as land-owners and money-lenders, subjecting
the share cropper tenants, marginal farmers and agricultural labourers to involuntary
exchange in rural credit, land and product markets so that they were in perpetual
indebtedness. The data of village level studies of Bhaduri and Chandra was related to the
early 1970s in West Bengal and that of Prasad belonged to Bihar of early 1970s. But,
Bardhan and Rudra (1978) conducted a large scale survey in the East India, involving
276 villages from three States viz., West Bengal, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh (East) and their
study could not find many of the so called semi-feudal characteristics. Thus, in this
Eastern India syndrome (as aptly called by Thorner (1982)), Bardhan and Rudra
concentrated on refutation of semi-feudal thesis.

However, after the nationalisation of banks in India, on 19th July 1969, a lot of
change in the operation of institutional credit in rural areas has been seen. As per Clive
(1990), as shown in Table-1, the shares of debt from non-institutional sources came down
(i) for total households from 92.8 percent in 1951 to 82.7 percent in 1961 and then to 70.8
_____________________________________________
* Fellow at CESS, Hyderabad. ** Research associate at CESS, Hyderabad
This is presented at the National Seminar on Emerging Trends in Rural Economy: Post-Globalisation
Dimensions Seminar, held in Department of Economics, Kakatiya University, Warangal, during
November 3-4, 2007.

1
percent in 1971 and (ii) for the cultivators it decreased from 92.4 percent in 1951 to
81.6 percent in 1961 and then to 68.3 percent in 1971. By 1981, it further diminished to
38.8 percent for the total households and 36.8 percent fore the cultivators. Thus, it is
necessary to look into the performance of institutional and non-institutional agencies in
the recent period.

2. Objective of the Study

The main objective of the study is to look into the inter-state variations in the
borrowings during 2002-03 and debt as on 30th June 2002, based on the GOI (2005a,
2005b, 2006), i.e., the NSS Reports No.500, 501 and 502 respectively. However the
specific objectives are:

(i) to look into the incidence of indebtedness, average amount of assets and
debt per household and debt asset ratio, with temporal changes over the
comparable period;
(ii) to see the incidence of borrowings and the average amount of borrowings
with temporal changes over the comparable period;
(iii) to examine the institutional and non-institutional components in the debt
and borrowings over the comparable period;
(iv) to look into the inter-state variations of the levels of cash borrowings per
household and the distribution of borrowings, by agencies under different
household types; and
(v) to deal with the structure of debt as on 30th June 2002 and of borrowings
during 2002-03, in terms of household type and institutional and non-
institutional components.

3. Incidence of Debt, Average Assets and Debt and Debt Asset Ratio

In this section, first we deal with the temporal changes in the incidence of
indebtedness (IOI %) and then with average amount of assets (AOA), average of debt
(AOD) and the debt-asset ratio (DAR).

3.1 Incidence of Debt

Table-2 shows the incidence of indebtedness (IOI %). At the all-India level, in
1971, the incidence is as high as 43.0 percent. Though by 1981, it decreases to 20.0
percent, it shows rising trend thereafter. In 1991 and 2002, the incidence increases to
23.0 percent and further to 27.0 percent in 2002. At the state level, the highly indebted
state in1971 is Rajasthan with incidence of 57.0 percent, followed by Punjab (54.0
percent). In 1981, the highest incidence is seen for Tamilnadu (29.0 percent), followed
by Kerala (28.0 percent). In 1991 and 2002, Andhra Pradesh shows the highest
incidence with 35.0 and 42.0 percent. Again Kerala follows AP in both these periods.
In 1971, 8 states show higher incidence than all-India. Similarly 9, 8 and 8 states exhibit
higher incidence than that of all-India in 1981, 1991 and 2002 respectively.

2
3.2 Average Assets, Average Debt and Debt-Asset Ratio

Table-3 shows average assets (AVA) per household, average debt (AOD) per
household and debt-asset ratio (DAR).

Looking at the AVA, at the all-India level, in 1971, it is Rs.11.31 thousand and it
gets trebled by 1981 (Rs.36 thousand). Again, it gets trebled by 1991 (Rs.107 thousand);
but by 2002, it becomes 2 ½ times (Rs.266 thousand). It is to be kept in mind that these
figures are not comparable in strict terms, as they are not adjusted for the price rise,
though the trend is discernible.

Across the states, the AVA exhibits the highest average for Punjab in 1971, 1981
and 2002. Only in 1991, Haryana shows the highest average (but only slightly higher
thanPunjab’s). Nine states each in 1971 and 2002, eight states each in 1981 and 1991
show higher AVA than that of all-India. Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir,
Kerala, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh show higher AVA than all-India in all the
points of time. Gujarat (except in 1991) also has similar higher average.

As regards AOD, in 1971, in all-India level, it assumes Rs.0.501 thousand and

by 2002, it reaches Rs.7.554 thousand. In 1971 and 1981, Punjab assumes the highest
AOD with Rs.1.085 and Rs.1.552 thousand. Haryana in 1991, and Kerala in 2002
assume the highest AOD of Rs.4.394 and Rs.19.663 thousand respectively. In 1971 and
1981, 9 states each, 8 states in 1991 and 10 states in 2002 take higher AOD than that of
all-India.

Now we turn towards debt asset ratio (DAR). The 'debt-asset' ratio is defined as
the average amount of debt outstanding on a given date for a group of households
expressed as a percentage of the average value of assets owned by them on the given
date. Thus, this ratio reflects the burden of debt on any particular group of households on
a given date. At all-India level, in 1971 it is as high as 4.43. It decreases first to 1.83
percent in 1981 and then to 1.78 in 1991. But again it rises to 2.84 by 2002. Thus, the
burden of debt begin to rise after 1991.

At the state level, in 1971 and 1981, Tamilnadu assumes highest debt burden with
10.18 and 5.18 percent respectively, followed by Andhra Pradesh with 8.21 percent in
1971, and Karnataka with 3.78 percent in 1981 respectively. In 1991and 2002, Andhra
Pradesh assumes the highest burden with 4.48 and 7.84 percent respectively, and
Tamilnadu takes second topmost position with 3.96 and 5.13 percent DAR respectively.
In 1971, 6 states and 1981, 8 states; and 9 states each in 1991 and 2002 exhibit higher
DAR than all-India. Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Tamilnadu
consistently fall under higher DAR than all-India; Gujarat except in 1991 and Orissa
except in 1971 also show higher DAR than all-India. Three of the four Southern states
are under higher DAR.

3
4. Incidence of Borrowings and Average Amount of Borrowings

The incidence of cash borrowings (IOB), i.e., percentage of households reporting

cash borrowings, has been shown in Table-4. The borrowings are generally shown for
the year from 1st July of the year to 30th June of the next year. At all-India level, in 1971-
72, the incidence of borrowings is 27.7 percent. In 1981-82 and 1991-92, this was just
below 20.0 percent and by 2002-03, it reaches 20.8 percent. Thus, not much increase is
there in the incidence of borrowing in the period between 1981-82 and 2002-03. In fact,
this shows only supply side phenomenon, but not on demand side. On demand side,
there would be a lot of potential for credit requirements. But, the availability of credit is
a problem. At the state level, the highest incidence is seen in respect of Punjab in 1971-
72, Kerala in 1981-82, Andhra Pradesh in 1991-92 and Tamilnadu in 2002-03 with
incidence of 58.0, 33.7, 34.7 and 41.6 percent respectively. Ten states in 1971-72, 5
states in 1981-82, 8 states in 1991-982 and 5 states in 2002-03 show higher incidence
than that of all-India.

Looking at the average amount of borrowings (AOB), in all-India, in 1971-72 it

was just Rs.174 per household. It gets 2 ½ times in 1981-82 (Rs.446) and again assumes
2 ½ times in 1991-92 (Rs.1160). But, between 1991-92 and 2002-03, it becomes more
than trebled, with Rs.3726 per household. At the state level, the highest AOB per
household is assumed by Punjab in all the four points of time, with Rs.723, 1659, 2868
and 13264 respectively. In 1971-72 and 1991-92, Haryana assumes second top position,
whereas in 1981-82 and 2002-03, Kerala takes the second highest position. Haryana
assumes third position in 1981-82 and 2002-03 after Kerala. In 1971-72 and 1981-82, 9
states each show higher AOB than all-India. In 1991-92, 10 states and in 2002-03, 8
states take higher AOB than that of all-India.

5. Institutional and Non-Institutional Agencies in Debt and Borrowings

Table-5 shows the percentage shares of institutional agencies in the total cash
dues and total cash borrowings. For institutional share in the cash debt, at the all-India
level, in 1971 the share is as low as 29.0 percent. There is a big jump to 61.0 percent in
1981-82 and it reaches peak level 64.0 percent in 1991-92. But by 2002-03, it decreases
to 57.0 percent. It seems that in the post bank-nationalisation phase, there has been
improvement in the institutional sources. At the state level, in 1971, Maharashtra is
dominant with 67.0 percent of the institutional sources, followed by Gujarat (47.0
percent.), Kerala (44.0 percent) and Punjab (36.0 percent). The least positions are taken
by Rajasthan (9.0 percent), Bihar (11.0 percent) and Andhra Pradesh (14.0 percent). By
1981, all the states show a lot of improvement, just as at the all-India, as an impact of
nationalisation of banks. Again Maharashtra occupies dominant position with 86.0
percent, followed by Orissa (81.0 percent) and Kerala (79.0 percent). The least positions
are taken by Assam (31.0 percent), Andhra Pradesh (41.0 percent) and Rajasthan (41.0
percent). In 1991, 11 states (out of 17) show improvement over 1981. Now the dominant
position is occupied by Kerala (92.0 percent), followed by Maharashtra and West Bengal
with 82.0 percent share each. The least positions are assumed again by Andhra Pradesh
(34.0 percent) and Rajasthan (40.0 percent). By 2002, just as at the all-India level, most

4
of the states, 15 of the comparable 17 states, record decrease and only Maharashtra and
Himachal Pradesh show improvement in their shares. The highest position is assumed by
both Maharashtra and Chhattisgarh with 85.0 percent each, followed by Kerala (81.0
percent). The least positions are held by Andhra Pradesh (27.0 percent), Rajasthan (34.0
percent) and Bihar (37.0 percent). Further, 9 states in 1971, 10 states in 1981, and 13
states each in 1991 and 2002 show higher shares than all-India share.

If we look at the institutional share in cash borrowings, at all-India level, in 1981-

82, it assumes 54.5 percent. It slightly decreases to 53.3 percent in 1991-92, but again
improves by 2002-02 and reaches 57.2 percent. This scenario of institutional dependence
is completely after the nationalisation of banks. At the state level, in 1981-82, Haryana
takes the top position (75.2 percent), followed by Maharashatra (71.0 percent) and Orissa
(69.2 percent). Assam, Rajasthan, Bihar and AP take the least positions. In 1991-92, 8
states (out of 17) slide down in their shares. The highest share is assumed by Kerala
(77.2 percent), followed by Maharashtra (75.9 percent) and Gujarat (71.9 percent). The
least positions are held by Andhra Pradesh (23.9 percent) and Rajasthan (26.6 percent).
By 2002-03, 12 of the 17 comparable states show improvement in their institutional
shares, just as at the all-India. Jharkhand assumes the highest share (90.7 percent),
followed by Jammau & Kashmir (82.7 percent) and Kerala (81.6 percent). The least
positions are acquired by Bihar (23.4 percent), Andhra Pradesh (37.6 percent) and
Rajasthan (38.6 percent).

6. Borrowings during 2002-03: Agency-wise by Household Type

In this section, we look into the variations of the levels of cash borrowings per
household and the distribution of borrowings under the agencies by different household
types. Agencies are institutional, non-institutional sources and total sources. Household
types are cultivators, agricultural labourers, artisans, others, non-cultivators and all
households. Non-cultivators are taken as combination of agricultural labourers, artisans,
and others.

6.1 Borrowings under Institutional Agencies

Table-6 portrays these figures. At the all-India level, among cultivators, the
institutional borrowings per household is Rs.2647, while that of non-cultivators is only
half of that (Rs.1362). At the state level, it is Kerala that dominates the scene among all
types of households. Punjab and Haryana have the second and third positions among
cultivators and all households. Lowest positions are taken by Assam and Bihar.

As per the distribution of institutional borrowings among the states, at the overall
level, Kerala, Tamilnadu, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh together
capture 55.10 percent. Further, Kerala dominates in all categories of households (except
agricultural labourers). In the institutional loans of cultivators, six states – Kerala,
Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Punjab and Tamilnadu – occupy a high
share of 59.41 percent. Among agricultural labourers, Madhya Pradesh and Tamilnadu
together grab 61.87 percent. Among artisans, Tamilnadu, Kerala and Punjab together

5
take 72.38 percent. Among non-cultivators, Tamilandu, Kerala, Maharashtra together
get 51.64 percent.

6.2 Borrowings under Non-Institutional Agencies

Table-7 gives these details. At the all-India level, the non-institutional borrowings
per household among the cultivators is Rs.1799, and among the artisans also it is nearly
the same (Rs.1782). Among the non-cultivators, it is Rs.1295, forming 72.0 percent of
that among cultivators. At the state level, at the overall level, Punjab dominates,
followed by Tamilnadu and Haryana. Among the cultivators, it is the highest in Punjab,
followed by Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh. Among agricultural labourers, Uttaranchal
assumes dominant position, followed by Haryana and Andhra Pradesh. Among artisans,
others and non-cultivators, Tamilnadu dominates, leaving second or third position to
Punjab. Jharkhand, Jammu & Kashmir and Assam maintain lower positions consistently
among all types of households, just at the overall level.

If we consider the distribution of non-institutional borrowings among the states,

either Andhra Pradesh or Tamilnadu maintains the highest position. At the overall level,
Andhra Pradesh grab 19.98 percent and Tamilnadu gets 18.00 percent . Further, Andhra
Pradesh, Tamilnadu, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and Rajasthan together occupy 61.75 percent.
Among cultivators also the same 5 states get 59.28 percent. Among agricultural
labourers, artisans, and non-cultivators, Andhra Pradesh and Tamilnadu together take
50.7 to 59.0 percent among other households, and among others, they together get 45.30
percent.

6.3 Borrowings under Both Agencies (Institutional and Non-Institutional together)

Table-8 shows these figures. At the all-India level, the total borrowings per
household among cultivators is Rs.4446 and among all households, it is Rs.3726.
Looking at the inter-sate variations, at the overall level, Punjab shows the highest
borrowings, followed by Kerala and Haryana. Similar situation is seen among the
cultivators. Among artisans, others and non-cultivators, the highest position is held by
Kerala, followed by Tamilnadu. The lower positions are assumed by Assam, Utaranchal
(except for agricultural labourers) and Bihar.

When we look into the distribution of total borrowings, at the overall level,
Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, Uttar Pradesh and Mahrashtra dominate by
capturing 55.60 percent. Among cultivators, Andhra Pradesh, Tamilnadu, Kerala and
Punjab together occupy 50.91 percent. Among agricultural labourers, Andhra Pradesh
and Tamilanadu together account for 51.54 percent. Among artisans, other, and non-
cultivators, Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh and Kerala together grab 50.80 to 64.70 percent

7. Structure of Debt (2002) and Borrowings (2002-03): Components by Agencies

The outstanding debt as on 30th June 2002 and cash borrowings during 2002-03
are analysed by type of households, under agencies by different sources. Household

6
types are cultivators, non-cultivators and all households. Agencies are institutional, non-
institutional, and combined agencies. Under institutional agencies, government,
cooperative societies, banks and regional rural banks (RRBs) are the main sources. These
are shown as ‘G+S+BR’ in Tables, but simply they can be referred as GSBR. Under
non-institutional agencies, landlords (LL), agricultural money lenders (AML),
professional money lender (PML) and traders (Tr) are important sources. The same
sources are repeated under combined agencies.

7.1 Outstanding Debt as on 30th June 2002: by Household type, Agency and Source

Table-9 shows these details. For cultivators, at the all-India level, the outstanding
debt is mostly covered under institutional agencies to the extent of 61.3 percent, leaving
other 38.9 percent for non-institutional agencies. Within institutional agencies, the GSBR
sources cover 58.2 percent. Within the non-institutional agencies, PML is dominant (16.9
percent) followed by AML (9.9 percent). Across the states, the share of institutional
agencies varies between 32.7 percent for Andhra Pradesh and 87.5 percent for
Chhattisgarh. The same states show lower and upper limits for GSBR sources (30.6 and
85.5 percent). Under non-institutional agencies, the share of PML and AML sources
together becomes prominent for AP (54.2 percent), Rajasthan, Haryana and Bihar (37.6
percent).

For non-cultivators, at the all-India, the debt is covered mostly from non-
institutional agencies to the extent of 54.1 percent, with the share of institutional agencies
of 45.9 percent. The GSBR sources under institutional agencies cover 42. 8 percent.
Under non-institutional agencies, PML is prominent with 27.0 percent, followed by AML
(10.2 percent). At the state level, the institutional agencies vary between 17.0 percent for
Andhra Pradesh and 83.4 percent for Maharashtra. Under non-institutional agencies, 8
states are highly dependent on PML and AML sources – Bihar (63.3 percent), AP, MP,
Haryana, TN, Rajasthan, UP and Punjab (40.8 percent).

For all households, at the all-India, institutional agencies cover 57.1 percent.
Under institutional agencies, the GSBR sources get 54.1 percent. Under non-institutional
agencies, PML takes 19.6 percent, followed by AML (10.0 percent). At the state level,
under institutional agencies, just as for the cultivators, AP and Chhattisgarh take lower
and upper shares (27.3 and 85.2 percent). The behaviour of GSBR sources also reflect
the same pattern. Under non-institutional agencies, the share of PML and AML sources
together dominates for AP (57.4 percent), Rajasthan, Bihar, TN, Haryana and MP (30.9
percent).

7.2 Borrowings During 2002-03 : by Household type, Agency and Source

Table-10 shows these figures. For cultivators, at the all-India level, the
borrowings is mostly covered under institutional agencies to the extent of 59.3 percent.,
just as in respect of the debt. Within institutional agencies, the GSBR sources cover 56.7
percent. Within the non-institutional agencies, PML is dominant (17.9 percent) followed

7
by AML (11.2 percent). Across the states, the share of institutional agencies varies
between 28.7 percent for Bihar and 84.7 percent for Kerala. The same states show lower
and upper limits for GSBR sources (27.4 and 82.3 percent). Under non-institutional
agencies, the share of PML and AML sources together is dominant for AP (54.8 percent),
Tamilnadu, Bihar, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh (30.8 percen).

For non-cultivators, at the all-India, the borrowings under institutional agencies

covers just more than half (51.3 percent). The GSBR sources under institutional
agencies cover 45.2 percent. Under non-institutional agencies, PML is prominent with
27.5 percent, followed by ‘others’ (12.4 percent). At the state level, the institutional
agencies vary between 13.1 percent for Bihar and 96.7 percent for Jharkhand. Under non-
institutional agencies, 8 states are highly dependent on combined sources of PML and
‘others’ – Bihar (71.5 percent), Uttaranchal, Haryana, TN, West Bengal, UP, Rajasthan,
Assam and Punjab (46.9 percent).

For all households, at the all-India, institutional agencies cover 57.2 percent.
Under institutional agencies, the GSBR sources get 53.4 percent. Under non-institutional
agencies, PML takes 20.6 percent, followed by AML (9.6 percent). At the state level,
under institutional agencies, Bihar and Jharkhand assume lower and upper shares (23.4
and 90.7 percent). The behaviour of GSBR sources also reflect the same pattern. Under
non-institutional agencies, the share of PMLR and AML sources together dominates for
AP (54.6 percent), Tamilnadu, Rajasthan, Bihar, Punjab, and Haryana (30.49 percent).

References

Bardhan,Pranab and Rudra, Ashok (1978): “Interlinkage of Land, Labour and Credit Relations : An
Analysis of Village Survey Data in East India”, Economic and Political Weekly, February,

Bhaduri, Amit (1973): “An analysis of semi feudalism in East India”, Frontier, September 29, 1973.

Chandra, N.K (1975): “Agrarian Transition in India”, Frontier, November 22 and 29 and December 6,
1975.
Government of India (2005a): NSS Report No.500, Household Assets and Liabilities in India (as on
30.06.2002), NSS 59th Round, (January–December 2003), National Sample Survey Organisation,
Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, November.

________ (2005b): NSS Report No.501, Household Indebtedness in India (as on 30.06.2002), NSS 59th
Round, (January–December 2003), All India Debt and Investment Survey, National Sample
Survey Organisation, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, December.

________ (2006): NSS Report No.502, Household Borrowings and Repayments in India during 1.7.2002
to 30.6.2003, , NSS 59th Round, (January–December 2003), All India Debt and Investment
Survey, National Sample Survey Organisation, Ministry of Statistics and Programme
Implementation, January.

Pradham, H. Prasad, “Production Relations Achilles Heal of Indian Planning”, EPW, May 5, 1973

Thomer , Alice (1982): “Semi-Feudalism or Capitalism”, Economic and Political Weekly, December 4, 11
and 18 ,1982.

8
 Table 1. The Share of Debt of Rural Households Held by Different Creditors: The Official Evidence (Percent)
%
Cultivators/ TD
S.No. Govt. Coops. Banks R&F LL AML PML TCA Others % Inst. Non-
Families (M.Rs)
inst

1 1951
Cultivators 3.9 3.7 11.4 3.2 25.2 46.8 4.7 1.1 - 92.4 7.6
All families 3.7 3.5 11.5 3.5 25.2 46.4 5.1 1.1 - 92.8 7.2
2 1961
Cultivators 6.7 11.4 0.3 5.2 0.9 48.1 13.8 7.1 6.5 31,257 81.6 18.4
All families 6.6 10.4 0.3 5.8 1.1 47.0 13.8 7.5 7.5 36,100 82.7 17.3
3 1971
Cultivators 7.1 22.0 2.6 13.1 8.1 23.0 13.1 8.4 2.6 32,917 68.3 31.7
All families 6.7 20.1 2.4 13.8 8.6 23.1 13.8 8.7 2.8 37,541 70.8 29.2
4 1981
Cultivators 3.9 29.8 29.5 8.7 3.7 8.3 7.8 3.1 5.2 21,641 36.8 63.2
All families 4.0 28.6 28.6 9.0 4.0 8.6 8.3 3.4 5.5 23,361 38.8 61.2
Source: Clive (1990)
R&F= Relatives and friends; LL= Landlords; AML= Agricultural Money lenders; PML= Professional Money lenders;
TCA= Traders and commission Agents: TD= Total Debt
Notes:
1. For 1951, the percentage of debt is held by cooperatives and banks jointly.
2. For 1971 and 1981, the share under banks iIncludes insurance and provident funds.
3. Government lending means, some government departments, especially those connected
with the Ministry of Agriculture, make loans to households, often in kind, such as seeds and fertilisers
4. TD (M.Rs) is at 1970-71 (wholesale) prices. One 1970-71 rupee is worth about 40 current U.S. cents
at the official exchange rate in 1970-71.

Table-2: Incidence of Indebtedness (IOI %) of Rural Households

IOI(%)
S.No States
1971 1981 1991 2002
1 Andhra Pradesh 48.0 26.0 35.0 42.0
2 Assam 27.0 5.0 6.0 8.0
3 Bihar 42.0 13.0 16.0 22.0
4 Jharkhand 12.0
5 Gujarat 47.0 19.0 17.0 28.0
6 Harayana 35.0 11.0 28.0 27.0
7 Himachal Pradesh 37.0 12.0 22.0 15.0
8 Jammu & Kashmir 48.0 9.0 14.0 4.0
9 Karnataka 50.0 24.0 28.0 31.0
10 Kerala 34.0 28.0 31.0 39.0
11 Madhya Pradesh 42.0 21.0 21.0 26.0
12 Chhattisgarh 20.0
13 Maharashtra 46.0 22.0 22.0 28.0
14 Orissa 37.0 20.0 23.0 26.0
15 Punjab 54.0 20.0 25.0 26.0
16 Rajasthan 57.0 25.0 30.0 34.0
17 Tamil Nadu 49.0 29.0 30.0 31.0
18 Uttaranchal 6.0
19 Uttar Pradesh 38.0 18.0 19.0 23.0
20 West Bengal 37.0 18.0 26.0 22.0
India 43.0 20.0 23.0 27.0
Source: NSS Report No.500, GOI (2005a)

9
 Table-3: Average Value of Assets (AVA), Average of Debt (AOD) and Debt Asset Ratio for the Major States of India
Per Household AVA (Rs.000) Per Household AOD (Rs.000) Debt Asset Ratio (%)
S.No. States
1971 1981 1991 2002 1971 1981 1991 2002 1971 1981 1991 2002
1 Andhra Pradesh 8.08 26 58 135 0.663 0.931 2.598 10.590 8.21 3.58 4.48 7.84
2 Assam 7.83 20 60 146 0.188 0.050 0.252 0.643 2.40 0.25 0.42 0.44
3 Bihar 12.83 32 98 206 0.302 0.208 0.637 2.992 2.35 0.65 0.65 1.45
4 Jharkhand 152 1.124 0.74
5 Gujarat 12.87 37 103 328 0.928 0.877 1.679 11.794 7.21 2.37 1.63 3.60
6 Harayana 27.14 91 338 716 0.925 0.965 4.394 12.359 3.41 1.06 1.30 1.73
7 Himachal Pradesh 22.67 63 134 482 0.562 0.353 1.206 5.196 2.48 0.56 0.90 1.08
8 Jammu & Kashmir 15.26 59 163 615 0.359 0.254 1.108 1.114 2.35 0.43 0.68 0.18
9 Karnataka 10.03 33 107 248 0.734 1.247 2.536 9.193 7.32 3.78 2.37 3.70
10 Kerala 11.62 77 182 510 0.370 0.963 3.440 19.663 3.18 1.25 1.89 3.86
11 Madhya Pradesh 10.52 30 93 238 0.410 0.588 1.665 9.031 3.90 1.96 1.79 3.80
12 Chhattisgarh 192 3.933 2.05
13 Maharashtra 11.68 35 93 253 0.598 0.854 2.139 10.391 5.12 2.44 2.30 4.11
14 Orissa 6.02 18 46 98 0.202 0.360 1.058 3.609 3.35 2.00 2.30 3.67
15 Punjab 31.83 97 329 904 1.085 1.552 4.145 16.502 3.41 1.60 1.26 1.83
16 Rajasthan 12.75 41 159 358 0.895 1.181 3.578 12.031 7.02 2.88 2.25 3.36
17 Tamil Nadu 6.83 20 62 181 0.695 1.036 2.455 9.304 10.18 5.18 3.96 5.13
18 Uttaranchal 389 1.113 0.29
19 Uttar Pradesh 13.53 45 139 330 0.346 0.464 1.487 5.059 2.56 1.03 1.07 1.53
20 West Bengal 7.33 21 62 152 0.201 0.307 1.345 3.194 2.74 1.46 2.17 2.10

India 11.31 36 107 266 0.501 0.659 1.905 7.539 4.43 1.83 1.78 2.84
Source: 1. GOI (2005a)
2. Pathak, et al. (1977)
Table-4: Households Reporting Cash Borrowings (IOB %) and Average Amount of Borrowings (AOB)
Incidence of Borrowings (%) AOB in Rs.
S.No. States 1971- 1981- 1991- 2002- 1971- 1981- 1991- 2002-
72 82 92 03 72 82 92 03
1 Andhra Pradesh 26.5 29.2 34.7 33.2 155 664 1894 5306
2 Assam 11.0 4.8 11.1 12.4 31 29 236 622
3 Bihar 17.2 13.7 10.9 14.3 62 113 305 1028
4 Chhattisgarh 16.3 1569
5 Gujarat 25.1 14.0 13.6 16.1 232 478 1222 4270
6 Harayana 36.2 15.4 20.0 19.4 537 841 2430 9327
7 Himachal Pradesh 23.0 10.5 12.4 12.3 235 309 1288 3464
8 Jammu & Kashmir 34.3 15.6 8.1 2.6 175 392 744 1544
9 Jharkhand 6.3 1368
10 Karnataka 28.4 16.1 20.3 21.8 239 506 1285 4446
11 Kerala 23.8 33.7 25.8 35.9 136 919 2171 11066
12 Madhya Pradesh 30.5 17.6 18.1 17.9 180 349 1025 3288
13 Maharashtra 31.8 21.7 19.5 15.5 200 659 1522 3957
14 Orissa 17.6 13.6 9.4 14.8 53 194 269 1548
15 Punjab 58.0 31.1 26.7 32.7 723 1659 2868 13264
16 Rajasthan 49.5 18.5 25.0 16.2 380 639 1745 3435
17 Tamil Nadu 29.7 28.5 30.2 41.6 192 538 1870 7231
18 Uttaranchal 5.4 882
19 Uttar Pradesh 30.6 19.0 30.2 18.6 157 364 773 2227
20 West Bengal 28.4 19.0 19.2 18.7 100 196 615 1400
India 27.7 19.7 19.9 20.8 174 446 1160 3726
Source: NSS Report No. 502, GOI (2006)

10
 Table-5: Share of Institutional Agencies for Debt and Borrowings
Inst. Share in Cash Debt (%) Inst. Share in Cash Borrowings (%)
S.No. States
1971 1981 1991 2002 1981-82 1991-92 2002-03
1 Andhra Pradesh 14 41 34 27 40.9 23.9 37.6
2 Assam 35 31 66 58 22.6 44.7 46.5
3 Bihar 11 47 73 37 39.8 57.7 23.4
4 Chhattisgarh 85 57.9
5 Gujarat 47 70 75 67 65.8 71.9 75.7
6 Harayana 26 76 73 50 75.2 52.4 61.7
7 Himachal Pradesh 24 75 62 74 68.6 60.2 57.0
8 Jammu & Kashmir 20 44 76 73 48.4 42.8 82.7
9 Jharkhand 71 90.7
10 Karnataka 30 78 78 67 64.9 57.7 62.5
11 Kerala 44 79 92 81 68.6 77.2 81.6
12 Madhya Pradesh 32 66 73 59 45.8 58.7 62.6
13 Maharashtra 67 86 82 85 71.0 75.9 78.4
14 Orissa 30 81 80 74 69.2 68.5 69.6
15 Punjab 36 74 79 56 63.2 59.0 53.5
16 Rajasthan 9 41 40 34 36.8 26.6 38.6
17 Tamil Nadu 22 44 58 47 47.1 61.4 46.6
18 Uttaranchal 59 53.9
19 Uttar Pradesh 23 55 69 56 49.9 49.9 53.5
20 West Bengal 31 66 82 68 45.2 55.0 48.9
India 29 61 64 57 54.5 53.3 57.2
Source: 1. NSS Report No.501, GOI (2005b); 2. NSS Report No.502, GOI (2006)

Table -6: Insitutional Borrowings

Avg Amount per H H(Rs.) Distribution of Borfrowings (%)
S.No States
Culti AgL Arti Oth NCs All Culti AgL Arti Oth NCs All
1 Andhra Pradesh 3220 281 60 1998 1064 1995 8.47 10.22 1.34 11.44 10.62 9.02
2 Assam 283 710 0 210 300 289 0.32 2.74 0.00 0.36 0.57 0.38
3 Bihar 322 30 600 151 116 241 0.97 0.92 3.35 0.40 0.66 0.89
4 Chhattisgarh 925 18 92 1803 860 909 1.09 0.09 0.07 1.11 0.93 1.05
5 Gujarat 1172 534 550 1114 857 1036 1.78 6.25 2.38 2.49 2.86 2.05
6 Haryana 9352 954 260 807 634 5759 7.40 2.45 2.16 0.74 1.01 5.75
7 Himachal Pradesh 2109 0 98 2027 1567 1975 0.81 0.00 0.11 0.68 0.57 0.75
8 Jammu&Kashmir 1285 0 0 1544 1219 1277 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.18 0.42
9 Jharkhand 268 35 222 6447 4340 1240 0.32 0.09 0.29 5.63 4.70 1.45
10 Karnataka 3881 197 1321 2788 1292 2779 6.66 3.67 7.90 4.60 4.74 6.17
11 Kerala 12583 1555 3261 6900 5526 9031 13.34 6.23 26.92 17.62 17.12 14.31
12 MP 2569 1423 319 691 1107 2059 6.82 34.31 0.95 1.21 4.54 6.23
13 Maharashtra 4059 109 108 4002 1923 3102 11.31 3.17 0.85 14.67 12.55 11.62
14 Orissa 648 75 39 3609 1860 1078 1.18 0.86 0.15 6.37 5.38 2.26
15 Punjab 12118 521 2523 1194 1263 7102 8.32 2.06 10.56 1.45 2.15 6.73
16 Rajasthan 1527 140 173 1030 718 1324 3.44 0.48 1.07 1.73 1.56 2.95
17 Tamilnadu 5022 899 1513 4055 2486 3371 8.25 27.56 34.90 20.21 21.97 11.78
18 Uttaranchal 423 1525 258 616 623 476 0.16 0.32 0.17 0.23 0.24 0.18
19 Uttar Pradesh 1367 52 341 1051 662 1192 9.72 0.95 5.42 4.83 4.48 8.37
20 West Bengal 1026 145 182 305 238 684 3.02 3.21 1.59 1.34 1.55 2.64
India 2647 384 732 2207 1362 2130 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Culti= Cultivators, AgL=Agricultural labourers, Arti=Artisans, Oth=Others and NCs=Non-cultivators
Source: NSS Report No.502, GOI (2006)

11
 Table-7: Non-Insitutional Borrowings
Avg Amount per H H(Rs.) Distribution of Borfrowings (%)
S.No States
Culti AgL Arti Oth NCs All Culti AgL Arti Oth NCs All
1 Andhra Pradesh 4989 2079 2842 1738 2035 3311 19.31 32.82 25.99 15.05 21.35 19.98
2 Assam 329 138 242 402 339 333 0.54 0.23 0.15 1.03 0.68 0.59
3 Bihar 802 474 133 1287 765 787 3.57 6.32 0.30 5.15 4.58 3.90
4 Chhattisgarh 733 133 121 774 433 660 1.27 0.30 0.04 0.72 0.49 1.02
5 Gujarat 1172 534 550 1114 857 1036 2.61 2.71 0.98 3.76 3.01 2.74
6 Haryana 4901 3540 1438 1203 1668 3568 5.71 3.95 4.90 1.67 2.81 4.76
7 Himachal Pradesh 1468 510 455 1889 1551 1488 0.83 0.02 0.21 0.96 0.59 0.75
8 Jammu&Kashmir 262 0 266 323 297 266 0.15 0.00 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.12
9 Jharkhand 122 182 226 123 146 128 0.22 0.21 0.12 0.16 0.17 0.20
10 Karnataka 2366 560 244 1094 723 1667 5.98 4.52 0.60 2.73 2.79 4.94
11 Kerala 2270 606 1852 2018 1803 2035 3.54 1.05 6.28 7.79 5.87 4.30
12 MP 1610 285 857 863 519 1229 6.29 2.98 1.04 2.29 2.24 4.96
13 Maharashtra 1089 323 1537 633 569 856 4.46 4.07 4.96 3.51 3.90 4.28
14 Orissa 526 301 273 440 369 470 1.41 1.49 0.44 1.17 1.12 1.32
15 Punjab 9386 1626 2106 2804 2408 6161 9.48 2.79 3.62 5.16 4.31 7.79
16 Rajasthan 2345 845 1443 1539 1409 2110 7.77 1.26 3.66 3.92 3.22 6.28
17 Tamilnadu 5160 1858 3491 4013 3162 3859 12.47 24.71 33.08 30.25 29.39 18.00
18 Uttaranchal 155 16944 44 197 1107 406 0.08 1.55 0.01 0.11 0.45 0.20
19 Uttar Pradesh 980 733 1525 1334 1201 1035 10.25 5.80 9.96 9.27 8.54 9.70
20 West Bengal 865 272 838 621 521 716 3.75 2.61 3.01 4.14 3.56 3.69
India 1799 885 1782 1459 1295 1596 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Culti= Cultivators, AgL=Agricultural labourers, Arti=Artisans, Oth=Others and NCs=Non-cultivators
Source: NSS Report No.502, GOI (2006)

Table-8: Total Borrowings - Insitutional and Non-Institutional together

Avg Amount per H H(Rs.) Distribution of Borfrowings (%)
S.No States
Culti AgL Arti Oth NCs All Culti AgL Arti Oth NCs All
1 Andhra Pradesh 8209 2360 2902 3736 3099 5306 12.85 25.98 18.82 12.88 15.85 13.71
2 Assam 612 847 242 612 639 622 0.41 0.99 0.11 0.63 0.62 0.47
3 Bihar 1124 504 733 1439 880 1028 2.02 4.68 1.19 2.29 2.57 2.18
4 Chhattisgarh 1658 151 213 2576 1293 1569 1.16 0.24 0.05 0.95 0.72 1.03
5 Gujarat 6207 555 757 2640 1731 4270 5.60 1.96 0.95 3.55 2.96 4.84
6 Haryana 14253 4494 1699 2010 2302 9327 6.71 3.50 4.10 1.11 1.89 5.33
7 Himachal Pradesh 3577 510 553 3916 3118 3464 0.82 0.01 0.18 0.79 0.58 0.75
8 Jammu&Kashmir 1547 0 266 1867 1516 1543 0.36 0.00 0.03 0.16 0.11 0.29
9 Jharkhand 390 216 448 6571 4486 1368 0.28 0.17 0.17 3.46 2.49 0.91
10 Karnataka 6247 757 1565 3883 2016 4447 6.39 4.26 2.73 3.86 3.79 5.64
11 Kerala 14853 2161 5114 8918 7329 11066 9.37 2.62 12.30 13.71 11.64 10.02
12 MP 4179 1708 1176 1554 1627 3289 6.60 12.46 1.02 1.64 3.42 5.69
13 Maharashtra 5148 432 1645 4636 2492 3957 8.54 3.80 3.76 10.23 8.34 8.48
14 Orissa 1174 376 313 4049 2228 1548 1.28 1.30 0.36 4.30 3.30 1.86
15 Punjab 21504 2147 4629 3998 3671 13263 8.79 2.57 5.65 2.93 3.20 7.18
16 Rajasthan 3872 985 1616 2569 2127 3434 5.19 1.02 2.90 2.60 2.37 4.38
17 Tamilnadu 10182 2756 5004 8067 5649 7231 9.96 25.56 33.62 24.20 25.59 14.45
18 Uttaranchal 578 18469 302 813 1730 882 0.13 1.18 0.06 0.19 0.34 0.19
19 Uttar Pradesh 2347 785 1866 2385 1863 2227 9.94 4.33 8.65 6.59 6.46 8.94
20 West Bengal 1891 417 1021 925 759 1400 3.31 2.79 2.60 2.45 2.53 3.09
India 4446 1269 2513 3666 2657 3726 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Culti= Cultivators, AgL=Agricultural labourers, Arti=Artisans, Oth=Others and NCs=Non-cultivators
Source: NSS Report No.502, GOI (2006)

12
 Table-9: Outstanding Loans as on 30-06-2002 Agency-wise by Household Type
Cultivator Non-Cultivator All Households (Cultivators + Non-Cultivators)

States Institutional Non Institutional Institutional Non Institutional Institutional Non Institutional
G+S+ G+S+ G+S+
Oth All LL AML PML Tr Oth All Oth All LL AML PML Tr Oth All Oth All LL AML PML Tr Oth All
B+R B+R B+R

AP 30.6 2.1 32.7 4.1 31.6 22.6 3.8 5.1 67.3 16.2 0.8 17.0 1.8 20.1 43.2 7.3 10.6 83.0 25.7 1.6 27.3 3.3 27.7 29.7 5.0 7.0 72.7
Assam 48.7 15.2 63.9 0.3 3.4 19.9 1.4 11.1 36.1 35.0 12.8 47.8 0.0 0.8 30.2 1.4 19.8 52.2 43.7 14.3 57.9 0.2 2.4 23.8 1.4 14.3 42.1
Bihar 42.9 1.1 44.2 0.9 16.8 20.8 1.3 16.1 55.8 19.9 0.7 20.6 1.5 22.7 42.4 1.4 11.5 79.4 35.5 1.0 36.5 1.1 18.7 27.8 1.4 14.5 63.5
CHHT 85.5 2.0 87.5 1.3 1.5 4.6 1.2 3.9 12.5 50.9 6.3 57.1 0.7 1.0 31.6 0.4 9.0 42.9 82.9 2.3 85.2 1.2 1.4 6.6 1.2 4.2 14.8
Gujarat 71.5 1.8 73.2 0.0 0.3 6.8 4.7 14.9 26.8 55.3 2.4 57.7 0.0 0.2 9.8 2.4 29.8 42.3 65.4 2.0 67.3 0.0 0.3 8.0 3.9 20.5 32.7
HRY 51.1 1.2 52.4 1.5 15.4 24.4 1.2 5.1 47.5 37.7 0.1 37.8 0.2 13.4 36.4 2.4 9.8 62.2 48.8 1.0 49.9 1.3 15.0 26.5 1.4 5.9 50.0
HP 71.3 3.5 74.7 0.2 0.2 3.6 0.6 20.7 25.3 62.3 5.3 67.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.2 32.3 69.9 3.7 73.7 0.2 0.2 3.0 0.5 22.4 26.3
J&K 73.6 0.0 73.6 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 25.6 26.4 54.9 0.0 54.9 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.7 44.1 45.1 72.6 0.0 72.7 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 26.5 27.3
JHRK 65.5 1.0 66.6 1.0 5.1 13.5 1.0 12.8 33.4 69.9 9.4 79.3 0.2 0.1 13.8 0.1 6.5 20.7 66.9 3.7 70.5 0.7 3.5 13.6 0.7 10.9 29.5
KRN 66.5 1.2 67.7 1.4 10.5 12.1 2.4 6.0 32.3 59.7 1.6 61.4 3.7 4.5 23.8 0.3 6.3 38.6 65.4 1.2 66.7 1.8 9.5 14.0 2.0 6.0 33.3
Kerala 74.7 8.4 83.0 0.0 0.0 5.6 0.1 11.2 17.0 72.1 5.0 77.2 0.0 0.4 12.8 0.2 9.5 22.8 74.0 7.3 81.3 0.0 0.1 7.8 0.1 10.8 18.7
MP 61.2 0.2 61.4 0.3 6.9 21.2 3.5 6.7 38.6 32.6 1.0 33.5 0.6 35.5 20.0 1.5 8.8 66.5 58.3 0.3 58.5 0.3 9.8 21.1 3.3 6.9 41.5
MHR 82.7 2.3 85.2 0.1 2.7 3.5 0.2 8.4 14.8 80.5 2.9 83.4 0.0 1.4 5.6 0.7 8.8 16.6 82.2 2.6 84.7 0.1 2.4 4.0 0.3 8.4 15.3
Orissa 68.1 6.9 74.9 0.0 4.7 17.6 0.2 2.7 25.1 48.8 23.3 72.0 0.3 3.6 19.8 0.0 4.2 28.0 62.5 11.5 74.0 0.1 4.4 18.2 0.1 3.1 26.0
Punjab 53.4 9.5 62.8 1.6 14.5 6.2 1.6 13.3 37.2 26.9 0.0 26.9 7.0 25.8 15.0 1.0 24.3 73.1 48.7 7.8 56.4 2.6 16.5 7.8 1.5 15.3 43.6
RJS 36.1 0.3 36.5 0.2 16.3 32.3 10.3 4.5 63.5 21.1 0.4 21.5 2.0 19.3 31.2 12.0 14.1 78.5 33.4 0.3 33.8 0.5 16.8 32.1 10.6 6.2 66.2
TN 50.6 2.4 53.0 0.6 3.9 37.6 0.8 4.1 47.0 35.2 3.8 38.9 0.6 4.5 48.0 0.3 7.7 61.1 43.8 2.9 46.7 0.6 4.2 42.2 0.6 5.8 53.3
UCHL 80.2 0.0 80.2 0.0 4.2 5.2 0.0 10.4 19.8 39.8 0.2 40.0 0.0 0.0 19.3 0.1 40.5 60.0 58.5 0.1 58.6 0.0 1.9 12.8 0.1 26.6 41.4
UP 59.8 2.5 62.3 0.2 6.4 18.2 1.5 11.4 37.7 26.0 5.3 31.3 1.4 20.3 28.2 1.5 17.3 68.7 52.8 3.1 55.9 0.5 9.3 20.2 1.5 12.6 44.1
WB 59.0 6.8 65.7 0.1 2.8 12.1 2.4 16.8 34.3 66.6 4.5 71.1 1.0 0.6 8.3 3.9 15.1 28.9 61.5 6.0 67.5 0.4 2.1 10.8 2.9 16.3 32.5
India 58.2 2.9 61.1 0.9 9.9 16.9 2.6 8.6 38.9 42.8 3.1 45.9 1.1 10.2 27.0 2.7 13.1 54.1 54.1 3.0 57.1 1.0 10.0 19.6 2.6 9.7 42.9
Source: NSS Report No.501, GOI (2005b)

13
 Table-10: Borrowings during 1-07-2002 to 30-06-2003 - Agency-wise by Household Type

Cultivator Non-Cultivator All Households (Cultivators + Non-Cultivators)

States Institutional Non Institutional Institutional Non Institutional Institutional Non Institutional
G+S+ G+S+ G+S+
Oth All LL AML PML Tr Oth All Oth All LL AML PML Tr Oth All Oth All LL AML PML Tr Oth All
B+R B+R B+R
AP 37.5 1.8 39.2 1.3 28.8 26.0 2.2 2.5 60.8 26.2 8.2 34.3 1.1 14.1 40.3 3.1 7.0 65.7 33.7 3.9 37.6 1.3 23.9 30.7 2.5 4.0 62.4
Assam 37.9 8.3 46.2 0.2 4.9 24.5 3.3 20.9 53.8 40.1 6.9 47.0 0.0 1.2 24.3 3.4 24.2 53.0 38.7 7.9 46.5 0.1 3.5 24.4 3.3 22.2 53.5
Bihar 27.4 1.3 28.7 1.0 13.9 27.7 4.5 24.2 71.3 12.5 0.5 13.1 2.2 12.2 20.9 0.9 50.6 86.9 22.3 1.0 23.4 1.4 13.3 25.4 3.3 33.1 76.6
CHHT 54.1 1.7 55.8 0.0 6.0 14.4 16.6 7.3 44.2 56.5 10.1 66.5 0.2 1.0 10.6 11.5 10.1 33.5 54.5 3.4 57.9 0.1 5.0 13.6 15.6 7.8 42.1
Gujarat 80.3 0.8 81.1 0.2 0.4 7.2 3.3 7.8 18.9 38.5 12.0 50.5 0.0 3.2 12.3 4.4 29.6 49.5 73.0 2.7 75.7 0.2 0.9 8.1 3.5 11.6 24.3
HRY 65.5 0.2 65.6 0.5 12.6 15.7 3.5 2.1 34.4 27.4 0.1 27.5 0.7 10.3 38.1 0.6 22.8 72.5 61.6 0.2 61.7 0.5 12.4 18.0 3.2 4.2 38.3
HP 52.3 6.7 59.0 0.4 1.6 1.3 1.8 36.0 41.0 48.3 2.0 50.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 46.2 49.7 51.4 5.7 57.0 0.3 1.2 1.0 2.2 38.2 43.0
J&K 82.3 0.7 83.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 16.1 17.0 76.6 3.9 80.4 0.0 0.0 12.6 0.0 7.0 19.6 81.7 1.0 82.7 0.0 0.6 1.4 0.1 15.1 17.3
JHRK 68.0 0.9 68.8 0.0 1.6 9.6 3.2 16.8 31.2 96.7 0.1 96.7 0.0 0.2 1.8 0.0 1.3 3.3 90.4 0.3 90.7 0.0 0.5 3.5 0.7 4.6 9.3
KRN 59.5 2.6 62.1 1.2 14.6 11.5 2.5 8.1 37.9 59.7 4.4 64.1 1.3 9.8 14.5 3.0 7.4 35.9 59.6 2.9 62.5 1.2 13.7 12.0 2.6 7.9 37.5
Kerala 77.6 7.1 84.7 0.0 0.2 6.9 0.5 7.7 15.3 70.0 5.4 75.4 0.1 0.3 13.2 0.3 10.6 24.6 75.1 6.5 81.6 0.0 0.2 9.0 0.4 8.7 18.4
MP 61.3 0.1 61.5 0.2 13.6 17.2 2.4 5.0 38.5 68.0 0.0 68.1 0.5 3.3 19.5 2.9 5.8 31.9 62.6 0.1 62.6 0.3 11.8 17.6 2.5 5.2 37.4
MHR 76.7 2.2 78.8 0.0 3.8 7.6 0.5 9.3 21.2 70.8 6.4 77.2 0.5 0.7 5.4 3.7 12.5 22.8 75.1 3.3 78.4 0.2 2.9 7.0 1.4 10.1 21.6
Orissa 53.6 1.7 55.2 0.2 0.8 34.7 0.4 8.7 44.8 76.5 6.9 83.5 0.0 0.3 12.2 1.1 2.9 16.5 65.4 4.3 69.6 0.1 0.6 23.2 0.8 5.8 30.4
Punjab 54.3 2.1 56.4 0.7 26.3 9.3 3.0 4.5 43.6 31.4 3.0 34.4 4.0 7.1 12.0 7.6 34.9 65.6 51.4 2.3 53.5 1.1 23.8 9.6 3.6 8.3 46.5
RJS 38.0 1.4 39.4 0.2 10.4 30.4 15.0 4.8 60.6 13.8 19.9 33.8 1.3 10.2 37.3 7.5 10.0 66.2 34.3 4.2 38.6 0.3 10.3 31.4 13.8 5.6 61.4
TN 44.7 4.6 49.3 1.7 5.1 38.4 0.3 5.3 50.7 37.2 6.9 44.0 0.2 3.0 45.6 0.7 6.5 56.0 40.9 5.7 46.6 0.9 4.0 42.0 0.5 5.8 53.4
UCHL 73.1 0.0 73.1 0.0 0.0 9.6 1.0 16.3 26.9 35.7 0.3 36.0 0.6 0.0 10.2 0.0 53.1 64.0 53.8 0.2 53.9 0.3 0.0 9.9 0.5 35.4 46.1
UP 54.8 3.4 58.2 0.3 5.5 18.5 2.6 14.8 41.8 33.2 2.4 35.5 1.5 12.2 26.3 2.8 21.6 64.5 50.3 3.2 53.5 0.5 6.9 20.1 2.7 16.3 46.5
WB 48.0 6.3 54.3 0.1 5.2 14.4 6.6 19.5 45.7 20.5 10.9 31.4 1.2 5.5 28.2 11.7 21.9 68.6 41.5 7.3 48.9 0.4 5.3 17.6 7.8 20.0 51.1
India 56.7 2.6 59.5 0.6 11.2 17.9 3.0 7.8 40.5 45.2 6.1 51.3 0.7 5.6 27.5 2.5 12.4 48.7 53.4 3.7 57.2 0.6 9.6 20.6 2.9 9.1 42.8
Source: NSS Report No.502, GOI (2006)

14