Round 5 Longitudinal Poverty and Intergenerational Change Fact Sheet

This fact sheet presents findings from the fifth round of the Young Lives survey of children in United Andhra Pradesh in 2016. Young Lives is a longitudinal study on childhood poverty that has followed two cohorts of children born seven years apart. It has been collecting household and child-level survey data from 3,000 households in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana since 2002. This fact sheet presents preliminary findings on changes that have taken place in household poverty in urban and rural locations as well as in different caste groups. The analysis shows a definite increase in wealth – as measured by a composite index of consumer durables, access to services, and housing conditions – of the Younger Cohort households in 2016 compared to 2002 (Round 1 survey), with the highest percentage change in wealth over that period among Scheduled Tribes, households where mothers had no formal education, and households in rural locations. However, inequalities remain.

Key Findings:

Overall there is an increase in average wealth over time with the highest percentage change between Rounds 1 and 5 for Scheduled Tribes households. While differences in household wealth based on location and caste have reduced over time, substantial inequalities persist between Other Castes on the one hand and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes on the other. The highest percentage change in access to services is seen among Scheduled Tribes, in rural households, and in households where mothers had no formal education. The largest change is seen in the average access to consumer durables, particularly among Scheduled Tribes, Scheduled Castes, households from rural areas, and where mothers had no formal education. By 2016, access to safe drinking water and electricity is near universal across all locations. Only half of households have access to sanitation. Although there have been improvements since 2002, access to sanitation facilities remains at 30% among Scheduled Tribes compared to 55% for the other three caste groups, and 31% in rural areas compared to 95% in urban areas. More households report vulnerability to economic shocks in 2016 than in 2006.