This is the introductory chapter of the forthcoming book by Laveesh Bhandari of Indicus Analytics.
This chapter provides an overview into the state of the Indian economy, its growth, expenditures by households, income distribution as well as issues of ineuqlity. This is followed by an overview of some of the broad areas covered in this volume.
The idea is to provide to the student and practitioner alike, a basic overview of the key demographic and macro-economic variables that affect consumer decisions in the short and long term. The discussion that follows then seeks to tie-in the key aspects that determine and reflect consumer behaviour in India.
High growth has contributed to greater incomes for Indian households which in turn has enabled Indian households to both save and spend more. We have in the past few years observed that household sector savings have in fact grown by far more than any of the other other macro-indicators. This is of course a desirable outcome. Greater incomes do imply greater expenditures in the short term, but greater savings (if translated into good quality investments) ensure long term growth of the economy, employment opportunities, and household incomes.
Even though India’s total household income and saving can be known from National Accounts Statistics, it does not provide the same information across economic groups. Therefore, the pattern of distribution of total income and saving across households with different economic status is not known. Thus, “What share of India’s total personal disposable income comes from the richest 10% of the households?” or “Do the poorest 10% of the households save anything at all?” – these questions remain unanswered from government data. Moreover, per household income or savings, for households with different economic status is also not known. This typically requires using data from household surveys. The problem with using survey data to estimate aggregates on a all India basis is that surveys – no matter how well they have been conducted – tend to under-report incomes and expenditures. As a consequence, we require various types of quantiatiative excercises to correct for this under-reporting.
8447779800, Low rate Call girls in Uttam Nagar Delhi NCR
Indicus Consumer Handbook for India
1. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
By
Laveesh Bhandari
Indicus Analytics
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 1
2. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
Introduction
This chapter provides an overview into the state of the Indian economy, its
growth, expenditures by households, income distribution as well as issues of
ineuqlity. This is followed by an overview of some of the broad areas covered in
this volume.
The idea is to provide to the student and practitioner alike, a basic overview of
the key demographic and macro-economic variables that affect consumer
decisions in the short and long term. The discussion that follows then seeks to
tie-in the key aspects that determine and reflect consumer behaviour in India.
The Macro Picture
During the post liberalization decade, from 1993-94 to 2003-04 the average
annualized growth rate of India’s Gross Domestic Product was a little above 6%
and has arguably since crossed the 8% mark on a long term basis. This has
brought about a considerable increase in India’s personal disposable income. As
a result, both saving and consumption expenditure in the household sector has
had considerable growth. During 2003-04, India’s total personal disposable
income was Rs. 2,358,503 crore and 24.6% of this income was directed into
savings by the household sector.
Table 1. Components of National Income at Current Prices,2003-04
Annualized
Economic Total Per Capita Growth Rate
Indicators (Refer between
Box 1 for Rs. US$ $ PPP $ PPP 1993-94 and
definition) Billion Billion terms Rs. US$ terms 2003-04
Gross Domestic
Product 27,600 599 3,036 25,356 550 2,789 6.18
National Income 22,520 489 2,477 20,690 449 2,276 6.41
Net National
Disposable Income 25,971 563 2,856 23,860 518 2,624 6.55
Private Income 25,296 549 2,782 23,240 504 2,556 6.73
Personal Income 24,219 525 2,664 22,250 483 2,447 6.59
Personal Disposable
Income 23,585 512 2,594 21,667 470 2,383 6.57
Domestic Saving of
Household Sector 5,799 126 638 5,328 116 586 9.77
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 2
3. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
Source: CSO and author estimates
High growth has contributed to greater incomes for Indian households which in
turn has enabled Indian households to both save and spend more. We have in
the past few years observed that household sector savings have in fact grown by
far more than any of the other other macro-indicators. This is of course a
desirable outcome. Greater incomes do imply greater expenditures in the short
term, but greater savings (if translated into good quality investments) ensure long
term growth of the economy, employment opportunities, and household
incomes.
Box 1: Definitions
Gross Domestic Product: Total value of goods and services produced by a
nation.
Net National Disposable Income :(Net value of all goods and services
produced in a nation's economy, including goods and services produced
abroad at market prices) + (Other net current transfers from rest of the
world)
Private Income: (Income accruing to private sector from domestic product)
+ (Interest on public debt) + (Current transfers from govt. administrative
departments) + (Other net current transfers from rest of the world) +
(Net factor income from abroad)
Personal Income: (Private income) – (Saving of private corporate sector net
of retained earnings of foreign companies) – (Corporation tax)
Personal Disposable Income: (Personal Income) – (Direct taxes paid by
households and miscellaneous receipts of govt. administrative
departments)
Domestic Saving of the household Sector: Financial saving and saving in fixed
assets by the household sector.
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 3
4. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
Income Distribution
Even though India’s total household income and saving can be known from
National Accounts Statistics, it does not provide the same information across
economic groups. Therefore, the pattern of distribution of total income and
saving across households with different economic status is not known. Thus,
“What share of India’s total personal disposable income comes from the richest
10% of the households?” or “Do the poorest 10% of the households save
anything at all?” – these questions remain unanswered from government data.
Moreover, per household income or savings, for households with different
economic status is also not known. This typically requires using data from
household surveys. The problem with using survey data to estimate aggregates
on a all India basis is that surveys – no matter how well they have been
conducted – tend to under-report incomes and expenditures. As a consequence,
we require various types of quantiatiative excercises to correct for this under-
reporting.
Using data from NSSO, CSO, National Data Survey on Savings Patterns of
Indians (NDSSPI), and a host of other databases, a team at Indicus Analytics was
able to estimate the distribution of incomes at an all India level. Income and
expenditure distributions rarely differ too much from each other.
Comparison with Other Data
We compare individual income such as National Sample Survey conducted by
CSO or the Market Information Survey of Household (MISH) conducted by
NCAER. In order to do that we estimated income across various quintile groups
generated on the basis of the following:
• Per capita income
• Per earner income
• Per household income
The comparative results are put below in Table 3. We find that whatever be the
unit, and whether economic classification of households is based on
expenditures or incomes, whether at the household level or per person level, the
distribution of Indian households across economic groupings are similar and
generally within 5 percentage range.
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 4
5. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
Table 2. Pattern of Income Distribution(%) in India: 1993 to 2004
Income Shares
Quintile1 Quintile5
Or Or
Bottom 20% Quintile2 Quintile3 Quintile4 Top 20% Top 10% Top 5% Top 1%
Per Capita
NDSSP
2003-04 5.2 9.5 15.1 20.0 50.3 34.4 23.1 9.0
NSS
1993 4.0 8.6 13.4 21.2 52.9 36.3 24.2 8.5
1999 3.8 7.5 11.8 19.6 57.4 41.0 28.4 10.7
NCAER - MISH
1993 6.3 10.1 14.2 20.8 48.6 33.7 23.4 10.4
1998 6.3 10.5 15.3 22.2 45.7 30.1 19.7 7.6
Per Earner
NDSSP
2003-04 4.6 8.2 12.3 20.1 54.8 38.1 26.1 10
NSS
1993 3.8 7.8 11.8 19.4 57.3 38.6 24.2 7.5
1999 3.5 6.6 10 17 62.9 43.5 28.7 10.3
NCAER-MIMAP
1994 4.4 7.4 11.9 20.9 55.5 34.5 22.1 7.5
Per Household
NDSSP
2003-04 6.1 10.5 14.9 21.9 46.5 30.6 19.6 7.3
NSS
1993 4.1 8.7 13.6 22.3 51.3 33.7 21.5 6.9
1999 4.0 7.9 12.2 20.6 55.3 37.9 25.1 8.9
NCAER-MIMAP
1994 5.7 9.4 13.4 20.7 50.9 34.6 22.7 8.0
Source: Bhalla, Surjit Singh. (2004), Reforming Personal Income Tax in India, Oxus Research & Investments,
New Delhi, India.. NCAER, NDSSP: National Data Survey on Saving Patterns, NSS: National Sample Survey,
NCAER-MISH: National Council for Applied Economic Research - Market Information Survey of Household
and Indicus Estimates
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 5
6. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
Changes in distribution over time
A study by Debroy and Bhandari (2007) supports the argument that inequality is
in fact increasing in India. The most used measure for inequality is the Gini
coefficient, the higher the value of the Gini, the greater the inequality levels. The
table below shows rural and urban inequality levels state-wise since 1983. The
broad insight is, that across almost all the states, ineuqlity levels have increased.
Table 3a: Gini Ratios based on per capita consumption
expenditure
States/UTs 1983 1983 1993-94 1993-94 2004-05 2004-05
Rural Urban Rural* Urban* Rural* Urban*
Andhra Pradesh 0.294 0.327 0.290 0.323 0.294 0.375
Arunachal Pradesh - - 0.306 0.279 0.280 0.248
Assam 0.192 0.276 0.179 0.290 0.199 0.320
Bihar/Jharkhand 0.256 0.301 0.225 0.309 0.213 0.355
Goa 0.287 0.297 0.313 0.278 0.322 0.419
Gujarat 0.256 0.172 0.239 0.291 0.273 0.310
Haryana 0.272 0.313 0.311 0.284 0.339 0.366
Himachal Pradesh 0.264 0.312 0.284 0.462 0.310 0.326
Jammu & Kashmir 0.222 0.238 0.241 0.286 0.247 0.249
Karnataka 0.303 0.334 0.269 0.319 0.266 0.369
Kerala 0.33 0.374 0.301 0.343 0.381 0.410
Madhya Pradesh/Chhattisgarh 0.295 0.306 0.281 0.331 0.277 0.407
Maharashtra 0.285 0.337 0.307 0.358 0.312 0.378
Manipur 0.269 0.169 0.154 0.157 0.160 0.177
Meghalaya - - 0.281 0.245 0.162 0.263
Mizoram 0.141 0.187 0.173 0.182 0.201 0.249
Nagaland - - 0.165 0.201 0.229 0.242
Orissa 0.267 0.296 0.246 0.307 0.285 0.353
Punjab 0.279 0.319 0.282 0.281 0.294 0.402
Rajasthan 0.343 0.304 0.265 0.293 0.250 0.371
Sikkim - 0.332 0.212 0.255 0.273 0.257
Tamil Nadu 0.325 0.348 0.312 0.348 0.322 0.361
Tripura - - 0.243 0.283 0.219 0.342
Uttar Pradesh/Uttarakhand 0.29 0.319 0.282 0.326 0.291 0.367
West Bengal 0.286 0.327 0.254 0.339 0.274 0.383
Andaman & Nicobar Islands 0.303 - 0.254 0.404 0.336 0.376
Chandigarh 0.254 - 0.246 0.468 0.253 0.360
Dadra & Nagar Haveli 0.244 - 0.259 0.325 0.355 0.301
Daman & Diu 0.287 0.297 0.261 0.212 0.264 0.261
Delhi 0.314 0.332 0.277 0.406 0.282 0.336
Lakshadweep - - 0.257 0.306 0.317 0.394
Pondicherry 0.275 0.383 0.304 0.301 0.348 0.316
All India 0.298 0.33 0.286 0.344 0.305 0.376
Source: * - Author Estimates from NSS 1993-94 & 2004-05 Consumption Expenditure Rounds.
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 6
7. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
This of course has many ramifications for consumer markets. Greater inequality
levels reflect that the higher economic segments are rising relatively faster than
the lower ones.
But it is not that the poorest segments are necessarily becoming worse off, as the
following discussion shows. For both rural and urban India, the highest increase
in average per earner income has been for the relatively poor (the bottom 20%)
and the relatively rich (the top 20%), with the middle (particularly the third
quintile) becoming squeezed. This is a trend that is more marked for urban India
than for rural India. Table 4b, which shows the shares of the quintiles in total
income, reinforces the picture. The share of the top 20% in total income has
increased, particularly sharply for urban India. However, subject to some
differences between rural and urban India, the squeeze in incomes has primarily
been for the second, third and fourth quartiles, not so much for the bottom
20%. The squeeze is also more for urban India than for rural India.
Table 3b: Average annual per capita income for wage and salary
earners
(in constant 2004-05 prices)
Quintiles 1993-94 2004-05 Annualized growth b/
w 1993-94 2004-05
Rural Income Quintiles
RQ1 – Lowest 20% in rural areas 4,226 11,808 9.8%
RQ2 8,347 21,562 9.0%
RQ3 12,262 31,032 8.8%
RQ4 17,203 44,496 9.0%
RQ5– Highest 20% in rural areas 43,827 129,945 10.4%
Total 17,172 47,767 9.7%
Urban Income Quintiles
UQ1 – Lowest 20% in urban areas 7,889 23,285 10.3%
UQ2 18,854 47,771 8.8%
UQ3 32,258 75,890 8.1%
UQ4 55,041 145,628 9.2%
UQ5 – Highest 20% in urban areas 109,979 378,040 11.9%
Total 44,802 134,113 10.5%
Source: Author Estimates from NSSO 1993-94 and 2004-05 Employment & Unemployment Rounds.
Notes: Since survey data typically under-report incomes and expenditures the reported incomes have been
appropriately adjusted using the ratio of reported aggregate expenditures in NSSO and total household
expenditures in NAS, as the adjustment factor. The percentage change pattern is not affected significantly due to
this adjustment though the quantum is. All figures are in 2004-05 prices calculated on the basis of CPI-AL for
rural and CPI-UNME for urban, at the state level. RQI/UQ1 refers to bottom-most quintile in rural/urban areas
and RQ5/UQ5 refers to upper-most quintile in rural/urban areas.
The point being made is that increasing inequality does not mean that poverty is
rising, there is incrotovertible evidence that poverty levels in India have been
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 7
8. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
falling in almost all the states. Currently, among the larger states, J&K, Punjab
and Himachal have the lowest poverty levels. Among the smaller states,
Meghalaya, Manipur and Mizoram follwed by Arunachal tend to have poverty
levels in the single digits. Orissa, Bihar, UP and MP have amongst the highest
poverty levels amongst the larger states. Note that these states also tend to have
low inequality levels, indicating that overall these states are poor with high levels
of deprivation.
Table 4: State-wise Poverty Ratios (%)
50th Round
States 61st Round Percentage point
(1993-94) (2004-05) change b/w 1993-94
& 2004-05
Large States
Assam 41.40 20.38 -21.02
Himachal Pradesh 28.63 9.83 -18.80
Bihar + Jharkhand* 54.92 41.98 -12.94
Tamil Nadu 35.45 22.79 -12.66
West Bengal 37.02 24.73 -12.29
Haryana 25.02 13.57 -11.45
Kerala 25.02 14.80 -10.23
Karnataka 32.89 24.34 -8.55
Jammu & Kashmir 13.18 5.06 -8.12
Uttar Pradesh + Uttarakhand* 40.79 33.03 -7.77
Gujarat 24.20 16.96 -7.24
Andhra Pradesh 21.82 14.79 -7.03
Maharashtra 36.99 30.59 -6.40
Rajasthan 27.46 21.44 -6.02
Madhya Pradesh + Chhattisgarh* 42.57 38.92 -3.65
Punjab 11.27 8.14 -3.13
Orissa 48.69 46.61 -2.09
Small States
Arunachal Pradesh 37.00 9.90 -27.10
Meghalaya 21.29 3.11 -18.18
Sikkim 29.38 14.33 -15.05
Manipur 15.54 3.35 -12.19
Goa 14.93 10.92 -4.01
Mizoram 4.26 1.69 -2.57
Nagaland 1.68 - -1.68
Tripura 21.29 30.52 9.23
All India 35.86 27.47 -8.38
Source: Estimates by Amaresh Dubey from NSS 2004-05 Consumption Expenditure Rounds.
Notes: * - Undivided States
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 8
9. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
A comparison of the State level GDP growth and poverty reduction shows that
indeed, those states that have had higher levels of growth have been able to
reduce poverty levels much more than those with lower GDP growth. This is an
important learning for policy and marketers alike. Indeed, greater growth is a
very good predictor of the rise in consumer buying power.
Figure 1: Poverty reduction and GSDP growth between 1993-94 and
2004-05 (Large States)
% Growth in GSDP
WB
7
Kar
HP
Guj Har
6
AP
Ker
Raj
Mah
5
TN
JK Bih
Ori
Pun
UP
MP
4
Asm
3
0 5
10 15 20
Percentage point reduction in poverty
Notes: Bihar includes Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh includes Chhattisgarh and Uttar Pradesh includes Uttarakhand.
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 9
10. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
The above data use state level insights. (See Debroy and Bhandari (2007)) But if
we bring occupation also into the analysis, a highly interesting set of insights are
derived. There is an interesting link between the percentage reporting
themselves as self-employed and the level of inequality. This is partly obvious
from the following figures. About 52% of the Indian work force reports itself as
self-employed. Table 6 below shows Gini coefficients across employment
categories. Gini coefficients are lower for the self-employed category. Stated
differently, self-employment is a dampener on inequality and it is also probably
the case that in countries where inequality has not shot up, a facilitating
environment has been created for self-employment to thrive and foster. This is
also true of India in the inter-State comparison, a proposition reinforced by
Figure 2, which plots the percentage of self-employed in States against the level
of inequality. In States where self-employment is high, inequality tends to be
lower. In other words, higher levels of inequality are observed when there is
greater dependence on wage based occupations.
Table 5: Gini coefficients across employment categories
GINI based on incomes of salaried/ wageearmers– 2004-05
Employment Categories
All India Rural 0.305
All India Urban 0.376
All India Total 0.363
Self Employed Rural 0.294
Self Employed Urban 0.362
Self Employed Total 0.333
Employed Rural 0.313
Employed Urban 0.384
Employed Total 0.394
Agriculture (self-employed+ employed)- Rural 0.281
Self employed agriculture- Rural 0.284
Employed agriculture- Rural 0.233
Source: Author estimates from NSS 2004-05 Employment & Unemployment Round.
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 10
11. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
Figure 2: Percentage Self Employed Households and Gini (based
on NSS 2004-05 Consumption Expenditure Round)
45.00
40.00
35.00
Gini (expenditure based)
30.00
25.00
20.00
30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 50.00 55.00 60.00 65.00 70.00 75.00 80.00
% Indiv. in Self Employed Households
Table 6: Average annual income growth across education categories for
wage and salary earners (in constant 2004-05 prices)
General Education 1993-94 2004-05 Annualized growth b/w
1993-94 & 2004-05
Not literate 13,171 32,362 8.5%
Literate below primary 18,220 42,709 8.1%
Primary 21,377 49,962 8.0%
Middle 28,144 62,271 7.5%
Secondary 46,634 103,602 7.5%
Higher Secondary 55,789 139,600 8.7%
Graduates & above 85,515 270,103 11.0%
Total 24,980 73,145 10.3%
Source: Author Estimates from NSSO 1993-94 and 2004-05 Employment & Unemployment Rounds. Notes:
Since survey data typically under-report incomes and expenditures the reported incomes have been appropriately
adjusted using the ratio of reported aggregate expenditures in NSSO and total household expenditures in NAS, as
the adjustment factor. The percentage change pattern is not affected significantly due to this adjustment though
the quantum is. All figures are in 2004-05 prices calculated on the basis of CPI-AL for rural and CPI-UNME for
urban, at the state level.
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 11
12. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
Table 7 shows the average annual income growth across education categories
and highlights the lack of education/skills as perhaps the single most important
source of income differentials. The impact of reforms in creating greater
opportunities is not the issue; the issue is related to the ability of the available
human resources to benefit from such opportunities. The poor educational
regime both at the primary and higher levels is aiding the other forces that push
towards increasing inequalities.
Differences in relative growth aside, it is quite apparent that economic growth
has led to high levels of income growth across the board. This has created
greater opportunitiesfor all kinds of marketers, whether oriented at the bootm of
the pyramid, or at niche commodities aimed at the higher income segments.
This Volume
This volume contains the following sections, each of which reflects an integral
and important aspect of consumer markets in India. These are briefly reviewed
.below
Consumption and National Accounts: The national accounts provide an overview of
the Indian economy and how it is growing over time. A good aggregate picture
is found in the estimates of India’s GDP, national income, and how these
translate into savings and expenditures. High growth enables households to
both save more and spend more, as the Indian experience since the 1990s has
shown. IN fact savings are growing more rapidly than any other macro-
indicator. However when compared with China, our achievements are not as
impressive.
Consumer Demography is the cornerstone around which most marketers build their
strategies. This section provides insights into age distribution and the famed
demographic dividend that India is enjoying, and going to benefit from in the
next few decades. It shows the historical growth of population and how India’s
population density is rising rapidly. For instance, India had a population density
that was about twice that of China in 1961, but is much higher now. Life
expectancy is also rising though slowly. The section also looks at family
structures, and marriage status, apart from the overall population break-ups to
provide a better overview of the state of Indian demography.
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 12
13. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
Education is an important aspect that reflects a range of insights on incomes and
expenditures. Greater education levels affect long term incomes, and the trends
there are quite apparent across time. Rural areas typically have lower education
levels and so do females. However, we find that among the younger age groups
the male-female differences have narrowed over time, having tremendous
implications on not only economic variables but also lifestyles. The youth will
drive the India of tomorrow and today’s youth are far better educated than the
older age groups.
The affluent and Income distribution is perhaps the most important determinant of
market potential. We find that though the lowest income groups are the largest
in terms of numbers, in terms of aggregate incomes it is the higher income
groups that together earn much more. This in turn impacts the range of
commodities that are available for the better off vis-à-vis the poor. Incomes also
affect the savings potential, and though all income groups have positive savings,
it is the highest income groups that not surprisingly save the most. The richest
Indians in terms of incomes tend to be located in a few metros – Mumbai and
Delhi being the most popular residences, and it is expected that if the IT boom
continues Bangalore will catch up very fast. The Affluent sections have the
highest incomes and the highest savings rate as well. They are more likely to be
in urban areas, and save as much as a third of their incomes. This is true across
both rural and urban areas. With greater economic growth, the number of
affluent will grow much faster than that of the lower economic classes. For
marketers of premium products, therefore the importance of this segment will
only rise.
Asset penetration and Activities and assets and Household Characteristics of a range of
household items are best understood through their usage of household amenities
including electricity and LPG. We find that hough a large number of households
do have this access, many remain uncovered. Whether it is toilets or access to
LPG or even basic electricity, there is a large segment of the population that is
yet to access these services. Moreover, few number of rooms, lack of a kitchen
also affect the ability of households to use many durables. As incomes gorw and
government programs deepen the spread of electricity, and as the relative prices
of durables reduce, such items will penetrate more and more into the Indian
market.
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 13
14. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
Expenditure on food and other items reflect how different types of household differ
in their consumption habits. It is well known that poorer households spend a
larger share of their total budget on food and within food on cereals. Specific
food items are consumed differently by different kinds of households; a large
proportion of the Indian population is non-vegetarian, a very large proportion
consumes green leafy vegetables on a regular basis, in some cases consumption
habits differ between men and women and are very similar in the case of some
items.
Finance and Investment is a critical aspect for better understanding savings
behaviour of Indian households. A large proportion of Indian households save
in banks, post offices, insurance linked schemes, informal instruments and so on.
The greater the education the greater the dependence on formal instruments
such as commercial bank savings accounts. Increasingly equity and mutual funds
are becoming more and more popular. The growth of these items is very well
reflected in the growth of the investments by these organizations.
Forecasts and Projections of economic variables provide a picture into how things
are going to unfold in the foreseeable future. This in turn helps us to better
understand the actions that need to be taken today for being well placed in the
future. India’s population will continue to grow before starting to stabilize in the
next few decades. Its GDP is also expected to continue its rapid upward
trajectory through the next few decades. International comparisons show how
India’s growth is expected to be vis-à-vis other large developing countries.
Indices are created by aggregating many different quantitative variables. Each
index seeks to reflect certain aspect of the state or city that it seeks to rate. We
find that certain locations are among the best to reside in, but are not necessarily
the best to invest in. Such ratings and rankings make it easier for the
decisionmaker to prioritise their actions.
Access to Media, Internet and Telecom usage is growing rapidly in the country, and is
expected to eventually penetrate into every household in the country. Greater
penetration of media, and telcom, it is well known changes households in many
ways and affects a range of household activities; households getting access to
internet for instance have been known to change their banking habits,
entertainment habits, social communications and networking as well as a range
of other lifestyle changes.
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 14
15. Indicus Analytics, An Economics Research Firm
www.indicus.net
Consumer markets can be reported in many different ways, size of the market in
terms of number of people or households, size of the market in terms of the
total or aggregate disposable incomes in those markets, or the aggregate
expenditure of people or households. Therev are 35 states and Union Territories
in India; among cities there are more than 5000 cities and towns, but the top 100
odd cities account for a large majority of the urban population and an even larger
share of household expenditures.
These and many more insights are available from a range of tables culled from
some of the most repected publications on Indian consumer markets.
Per Capita Income & Savings
300
250
Amount (Rs.Thousand)
200
150
100
50
0
14
40
1
7
21
28
34
46
53
59
66
72
78
84
90
96
-50
Household Percentiles based on economic status
Per Capita Income Per Capita Savings
Consumer Handbook - Introduction 15