Analysing India’s Cycle of Deprivation and Affluence: Structural Drivers of Income Mobility (2014–2025)
(UPSC GS Paper III – Inclusive growth and issues arising from it; GS Paper I – Indian Society: Poverty and developmental issues; Social empowerment)
Context (Introduction)
Income mobility analysis for 2014–2025 shows that downward movement across income groups has outpaced upward mobility, especially in rural and socially disadvantaged segments. This signals structural constraints in India’s growth model beyond what poverty and inequality ratios reveal.
Key Data Trends (2014–2025)
- Share of households experiencing downward mobility nearly doubled from 14% (2015) to 26.8% (2025).
- Households remaining in the same income group fell from over 70% to below 50%.
- Upward mobility rose modestly from 14.1% to 23.5%, but consistently lagged behind downward shifts.
- By 2025, nearly 29% of rural households were worse-off relative to 2014.
- Downward mobility increased across caste groups, particularly among OBC and SC households, while upward mobility among SCs remained muted.
- The data indicate that more households are slipping down the income ladder than climbing up, pointing to structural economic and social constraints.
Main Reasons Behind Rising Downward Mobility
- Rural and Informal Sector Distress: Nearly 29% of rural households were worse-off in 2025 relative to 2014. With over 80% of India’s workforce informal (Periodic Labour Force Survey), shocks such as demonetisation, GST transition, and COVID-19 disproportionately affected small enterprises, agriculture and migrant labour.
- Unequal Post-Pandemic Recovery (K-shaped Growth): Organised, capital-intensive sectors recovered faster post-2020, while informal employment lagged. PLFS data show urban unemployment and labour force participation fluctuations during 2020–22, indicating fragile recovery among lower-income groups.
- District-Level Income Dispersion Statistical findings indicate that higher district-level inequality correlates with greater downward mobility. Concentration of growth in select urban districts restricts mobility in lagging regions.
- Structural Social Barriers: SC and OBC households experienced sharper downward mobility; Muslim households exhibited weaker upward mobility. Historical asset deprivation, occupational segmentation and unequal access to credit continue to constrain advancement (NSSO and SECC patterns).
- Low Employment Elasticity of Growth: Economic growth has been driven by capital-intensive sectors (infrastructure, digital services), generating limited broad-based employment. Manufacturing’s share in employment has not expanded proportionately despite policy focus.
Way Forward
- Boost Employment-Intensive Manufacturing (Economic Survey, PLI Framework): The Economic Survey repeatedly emphasises labour-intensive manufacturing (textiles, food processing, electronics assembly) for job creation. Expanding Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) schemes with explicit employment targets and linking incentives to job creation metrics can improve mobility.
- Strengthen Rural Incomes through Agriculture Diversification (NITI Aayog, Doubling Farmers’ Income Reports): NITI Aayog and Ashok Dalwai Committee reports stress crop diversification, value addition and Farmer Producer Organisations (FPOs). Scaling up FPO coverage (currently over 10,000 FPOs targeted) and improving agri-value chains can stabilise rural incomes.
- Expand and Modernise Social Protection (World Bank, ILO Recommendations): The World Bank’s State of Social Protection Report highlights the need for adaptive safety nets. Strengthening MGNREGA with timely wage payments (as CAG flagged delays), expanding urban employment pilots, and universalising portable social security under e-Shram (covering 29+ crore workers registered) can cushion downward shocks.
- Invest in Human Capital (NEP 2020, National Health Policy 2017): India’s public health expenditure (~2.1% of GDP as per Economic Survey) remains modest. Increasing health spending to 2.5% GDP (National Health Policy target) and improving foundational learning outcomes (ASER reports show learning deficits) are critical for long-term mobility.
- Reduce Regional Inequality (Aspirational Districts Programme): The Aspirational Districts Programme (112 districts) uses real-time monitoring in health, education and agriculture. Expanding this model to “Aspirational Blocks” and linking fiscal transfers to outcome-based indicators can reduce spatial mobility gaps.
- Improve Access to Credit and Assets (RBI Financial Inclusion Data): Jan Dhan coverage exceeds 50 crore accounts, but credit penetration remains unequal. Strengthening Mudra lending transparency, improving SHG-bank linkages (NRLM), and expanding digital credit infrastructure can help lower-income households invest productively.
- Strengthen Labour Market Data and Mobility Tracking: Institutionalising panel-based income mobility tracking (through NSSO/PLFS augmentation) can help policymakers identify vulnerable groups early and design targeted interventions.
Conclusion
The rise in downward income mobility between 2014 and 2025 reflects structural vulnerabilities in employment, regional development, and social equity. Evidence from labour surveys, district inequality patterns, and sectoral performance suggests that inclusive growth requires employment-centred industrial policy, robust social protection, and sustained investment in human capital to restore upward mobility and social stability.
Mains Question
- The rise in downward income mobility in India during 2014–2025 reflects structural constraints in the growth process. Analyse the key economic and social factors responsible and suggest evidence-based policy measures to strengthen inclusive mobility. (250 words, 15 marks)
Source: The Hindu