Statistical Modelling for District-Level Development Planning

The Steering Committee for National Sample Surveys (NSS) constituted by the National Statistical Commission (NSC) recommended that MoSPI should undertake a pilot study on the feasibility for generating the model-based district-level estimates based on the Household Consumption Expenditure Survey (HCES): 2022-23 data. To explore the possibility of generation of district level estimates of Monthly Per Capita Consumption Expenditure (MPCE), a committee was formed under the Chairpersonship of Dr. Mausumi Bose, former Professor, Indian Statistical Institute (ISI), Kolkata with members from the NSS and DES, Uttar Pradesh. The Committee was mandated to estimate MPCE figures for the districts of Uttar Pradesh utilizing model-based techniques, more specifically, Small Area Estimation (SAE) methods. The district-wise MPCE Estimates (in Rs.) of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) using Model-based Small Area Estimation (SAE) Approach for Rural and Urban Sector are given in Annexure.

Model-based techniques, adopting the Fay–Herriot (FH) and Spatial Fay–Herriot (SFH) models under the Small Area Estimation framework to borrow strength from covariate data and neighboring districts was used to generate reliable estimates of MPCE for the districts of Uttar Pradesh. The detailed estimation methodology along with its benefits and use cases to other identical scenarios have been mentioned in the report available on the website of MoSPI at

https://new.mospi.gov.in/uploads/publications_reports/publications_reports1761641209612_6875c53f-d8eb-4458-be3e-1e12a9e528c9_Compiled_Report_final17092025.pdf

Using the methodology as adopted by the Committee, estimates of MPCE values at sub-state level for the state of Uttar Pradesh, including Baghpat District, have been generated. These estimates of MPCE figures, in turn, would provide an idea of the economic conditions of the households and thereby, facilitating policy decisions for implementation of developmental programmes.

The approach adopted in this study can be extended to other States and other socio-economic indicators. States have been encouraged to adopt similar approaches to fill data gaps and generate district-level estimates, especially where direct survey estimates are weak due to small sample sizes or are not available.

The report has been placed in public domain through MoSPI’s website and is freely accessible by Ministries/Departments and other users.

Annexure

Table: District-wise MPCE Estimates (in Rs.) of Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) using Model-based Small Area Estimation (SAE) Approach for Rural and Urban Sector
District MPCE (Rural) MPCE (Urban)
FH SFH FH SFH
Saharanpur 3692 4056 4935 5025
Muzaffarnagar 3967 4020 6081 6136
Bijnor 3892 3930 3581 3585
Moradabad 3572 3582 4096 4086
Rampur 3750 3478 4153 4144
Amroha 3661 3722 3052 3056
Meerut 4279 4272 5482 5484
Bagpat 4347 4306 6995 6999
Ghaziabad 4044 4092 5597 5631
Gb Nagar 4454 4353 9705 9477
Bulandshahr 3922 3962 4272 4287
Aligarh 3614 3626 4238 4254
Hathras 3559 3561 4447 4426
Mathura 3531 3578 4135 4125
Agra 3590 3566 4808 4809
Firozabad 3105 3182 4187 4190
Mainpuri 3509 3415 4161 4185
Badaun 2899 2955 4183 4179
Bareilly 3633 3545 4628 4624
Pilibhit 3135 3147 3915 3918
Shahjahanpur 3327 3275 4341 4279
Kheri 3087 3081 4416 4406
Sitapur 3099 3097 3698 3714
Hardoi 2831 2841 3864 3877
Unnao 3049 3032 4476 4462
Lucknow 3248 3206 6622 6593
Rae Bareli 2926 2931 3979 3981
Farrukhabad 3146 3144 4473 4458
Kannauj 2597 2667 3449 3456
Etawah 3310 3228 5440 5295
Auraiya 2884 2883 3581 3583
Kanpur Dehat 3094 3077 3823 3831
Kanpur Nagar 2929 2907 4934 4937
Jalaun 3464 3393 4305 4315
Jhansi 3777 3690 4644 4765
Lalitpur 3133 3186 4288 4300
Hamirpur 2896 2994 5053 5074
Mahoba 3999 3868 4832 4850
Banda 2865 2876 4335 4322
Chitrakoot 3510 3314 3924 3921
Fatehpur 2936 2935 3922 3941
Pratapgarh 2847 2853 3716 3698
Kaushambi 2971 2975 3568 3557
Prayagraj 2967 2948 5048 5034
Barabanki 3041 3050 5155 5180
Faizabad 2609 2639 4827 4859
Ambedkar Nagar 3019 2980 2653 2649
Sultanpur 2904 2893 3636 3618
Behraich 3340 3375 4761 4782
Shrawasti 4462 4118 4182 4089
Balrampur 3559 3572 5087 5211
Gonda 3636 3622 8133 7861
Siddharth Nagar 2666 2706 3060 3124
Basti 2961 2959 3371 3397
Sk Nagar 2943 2922 4505 4417
Maharajganj 2778 2770 4170 4142
Gorakhpur 2878 2883 5777 5763
Kushinagar 2739 2746 3545 3550
Deoria 3105 3079 3883 3877
Azamgarh 2885 2891 3163 3156
Mau 2814 2808 2937 2930
Balliya 2753 2765 2581 2575
Jaunpur 2713 2718 3429 3413
Ghazipur 2579 2579 2771 2738
Chandauli 2367 2353 3401 3398
Varanasi 2755 2697 4171 4148
Bhadohi 2446 2444 3499 3479
Mirzapur 2409 2393 3909 3910
Sonbhadra 2357 2337 5524 5094
Etah 3833 3776 4354 4351
Kasganj 3372 3366 4001 3993
Shamli 3976 4026 6021 6137
Sambhal 3569 3557 4087 4074
Hapur 4043 4065 5578 5582
Amethi 2916 2906 3828 3826

Note: FH denotes Fay–Herriot (FH) model and SFH denotes Spatial FH

 

This information was given by the Minister of State (Independent Charge) of the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation; Minister of State (Independent Charge) of the Ministry of Planning and Minister of State in the Ministry of Culture Rao Inderjit Singh in Lok Sabha today.

 

Share this post :

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Pinterest

Create a new perspective on life

Your Ads Here (365 x 270 area)
Latest News
Categories

Subscribe our newsletter

Purus ut praesent facilisi dictumst sollicitudin cubilia ridiculus.