Income poverty is now widely accepted to be an inadequate indicator of actual conditions of life, as it does
not capture various other forms of deprivation, including the fulfilment of various social and economic rights.
The concept of human poverty is wider, and many of its elements are worth considering in this context.
The most important alternative indicator to consider is that of nutrition and calorie intake. Income
poverty estimates in both China and India are implicitly based on calorie intake, since the poverty lines are
derived from the income/consumption expenditure level associated with the ability to purchase sufficient
food to meet some specified calorie intake. In both countries, the per capita requirements on which the
original poverty lines were based were 2400 kcal per day in rural areas and 2100 kcal per day in urban areas,
and these lines have been subsequently adjusted with consumer price indices.
The extent of “food poverty” has generally been higher than income poverty, and the divergence
has grown over time. Using household survey data from rural areas of 19 provinces in 1995, Zhu (2001)
found that while official poverty incidence was only 5 per cent, the proportion of the rural population with
calorie intake below 2400 kcal per day was 28 per cent, and that receiving less than 2100 kcal per day was
17 per cent. Using a much lower norm does obviously reduce the extent of apparent nutritional deprivation,
but the debate still rages on as to whether this is justified by the nutritional requirements for a healthy rural
life. Even so, there is clear evidence that calorie intake has improved over time and the extent of severe food
deprivation has fallen. FAO (2000) estimated that the share of China’s population with insufficient calorie
intake (based on a lower norm of 1920 kcal per day per capita) fell from 30 per cent in 1979–1981 to 17 per
cent in 1990–1992 and 11 per cent in 1996–1998.