CHALLENGES OF SC/ST HOUSING CONDITION AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOAL PROGRESS IN INDIA,

100 CHALLENGES OF SC/ST HOUSING CONDITION AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOAL PROGRESS IN INDIA, 1991-2012 Vandana Tamrakar 1 &Imtiyaz Ali, 2 Abstract Earlier studies documented housing condition in India at across states. This study attempts to estimate housing condition of Schedule Caste or Schedule tribe (SC/ST). The SC/ST constitutes about 16.8 or 8.6 % of national population respectively. There are few states like Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Lakshadweep and A&N Islands no SC population. Similarly Punjab, Chandigarh, Haryana, Delhi & Pondicherry do not have ST. Both groups are social and economically weaker sections in India since the independence. The analysis explained challenges of drinking water and sanitation of these two vulnerable groups of people in India. Using two data sets are from the Census of India (1991, 2001 & 2011) & various rounds of the National Sample Survey (49, 58, 65 & 69). To calculate the Actual annual rate of progress & required annual rate of progress for sanitation & safe drinking water (UNDP 2005). These rates assess the housing condition of the country with comparison between all social groups and SC/ST. The states have high proportion of SC/ST population associated with the insufficient progress of Millennium Development Goals (MDG-7). Slow progress of MDG-7 which now shifted to Sustainable Development Goal-6 (SDG-6). Key Words: Housing Condition, Millennium Development Goal, Schedule Caste, Schedule Tribe. 1 Research Scholar,Jawaharlal Nehru University,New Delhi, 2 International Institute for Population Sciences,Mumbai,Maharashtra,India

101 INTRODUCTION The United Nation proposed eight goals to be achieved by 2015 that respond to the world s main challenges (WHO, 2004). These goals promote basic human rights and focus the world community s attention on equality, significant improvement in people s lives. The one of the main important goal (MDG-7) that the especially emphasizes to ensuring environmental sustainability through reducing half of the proportion of population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and sanitations. As the economy expands, access the basic amenities, which is determinant of life chances and socio-economic equity (drinking water, toilet facility, drainage arrangement, bathroom facility, separate kitchen, electricity) have been major concerns in our planning process but almost half of the population had no access of latrine facility. Availability and access to safe drinking water and toilet facility is not only an important measure of the socioeconomic status of the household but is also fundamental to the health of its members. Historically, caste and tribe highest are deprived section in society. In India, Castes and Tribes both are economically weakest and historically subjected to discrimination and deprivations were identified in a government schedule as a target group after reservation policies. Health inequality and Basic facility still lacked behind members of historically disadvantage groups ((Frisbie, 2004), (Burgard S., 2002), (William, 1995), (Hummer, 1993)). In particular, inter-group disparities in socio-economic attainments disfavor the marginalized social groups identified as Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) (Gita Sen, 2009). A GENERAL PICTURE

102 After the 67 years of independence and the way of globalization that is embarrassment for India in pathetic condition of toilet and safe drinking water facility. According to NSS 69 (2012) only 54.94 percent India households populations have access to improved toilet facility (Figure 1).India has access to safe drinking water (Tap/Hand-pump/Tube well/protected well/ protected spring/ reserved drinking water/bottled water) in the household from 71.12 percent in 1993 to 90.14 percent in 2012 (Figure 2). But, over the period of time this gap has also declined to 24.62 % point in 1993 to only 6.89 % point (Figure-1) in 2012. Percent 100 80 60 40 20 0 Figure1:Improved latrine faciltiy in rural and urban household in India, NSS (1993-2012) 65.57 23.56 8.69 81.14 38.82 21.95 86.85 49.07 33.18 1993 2002 2008 2012 Years Rural Urban Total 89.65 54.94 38.87 89.32 71.12 Data Source: Author own calculation based on various NSS rounds (49 th, 55 th, and 65th, 69 th ). Percent 100 80 60 40 Figure 2:Access to safe drinking water in Rural and Urban households in India, (1993-2012) 64.7 93.42 83.5 79.54 96.67 95.25 91.55 93.06 90.54 88.36 1993 2002 2008 2012 Years Rural Urban Total DATA SOURCE Present study based on two sets of secondary data Census of India (1991, 2001, and 2011) and the unit level data of various rounds of National Sample Survey (NSS), (49 th ; 1993), 55th; 2002), 65 th ; 2008) and 69th; 2012). Census is also unique in the sense that it provides information based on complete enumeration of all households unlike sampled households survey (NSS, NFHS). Census gives better understanding the socio-economic conditions among all Social groups, SCs and STs Population. H- Series data used to assess the level and trend of Drinking Water and Toilet Facility (within premises) for SC, ST and All India. The National Sample Survey is a nationally representative, large-scale and multi-round survey. NSS rounds conducted by Indian

103 Government Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. It collects socio-economic information annually and data on housing condition in India. METHODOLOGY AARP and RRAP (Actual Annual Rate of Progress and Required Rate of Annual Progress) one of the selected indicators is positively linked to development while other is negatively related. The indicator which is negatively related to development, the desirable value is close to 0 while it is 100 for other. The indicators for which the desirable value is close to 0 are no latrine facility while for drinking water, it is 100. The methodology used for computing the AARP for those variables where the desirable value is 0 is; where, for NSS data t0 is the base year 1993 (or year closest to 1990 for which data are available) t1 is the most recent year 2012 for which data are available, and Xt0 (1993) and Xt1 (2012) are the values of the indicator for base year and end year respectively. Similarly, for census data base year t0=1991 and end year t1=2011. SAFE DRINKING WATER NO TOILET FACILITY ARAP = (Xt1 Xt0) RARP = (Xtmdg X0) ARAP = (Xt1 Xt0) RARP = (Xtmdg X0) 100 (100 Xt0) (t1 t0) 100 (100 Xt0) (tmdg t0) 100 Xt0 (t1 t0) 100 Xt0 (tmdg t0) Note: In 2000, Govt. of India made three new States from Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar and their name are Uttaranchal, Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand.I have not taken it separately and calculated as a state before 2000. We have not separate calculation for these states. Note: Census based calculation base year is 1991 and current year is 2011 and for NSSO calculation consider base year is 1993 and current year is 2012.

104 OBJECTIVE The objective of this paper is to access the progress of safe drinking water and toilet facility of the country and states of India and association with how far away to Millennium Development Goal (MDG) targets. And it is association with social disparity (SC/ST) to achievement of MDG-7 targets. RESULT AND DISCUSSION According to the 2011 Census the population of ST is 10 crore and SC 20 crore in the country, which is 8.6 percent and 16.6 Percent of the total population of the country. The highest percentage of SC population is observed in Uttar Pradesh and highest ST in Madhya Pradesh to the total population of the country. The EAG (Empowered Action Group) States constitute 45 percent of the total population. Similar, 47 percent and 50.3 percent SC and ST population lives only EAG States. SC and ST are highest concentration on central and east region. North- east and west regions are also constitute 18.77, 9.15 percent population respectively. There are no SC list exists for Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Lakshadweep and A&N Islands. And Punjab, Chandigarh, Haryana, Delhi and Pondicherry do not have Scheduled Tribes (Figure 1 and 2). Table 1: Region-Wise comparison of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe population, 2011 Region % Schedule Caste % Schedule Tribe Central 27.80 23.28 East 24.43 23.85 South 20.77 10.98 North 16.66 10.95 West 8.63 18.77 North East 1.49 9.15 UT 0.10 0.03 India 16.6 8.6 Data Source: Census of India, 2011 FIGURE 3 & 4

105 Figure 3 State-Wise Percent share of Schedule Caste Population to Total Population, Census 2011 Figure 4 State-Wise Percent share of Schedule Tribe Population to Total Population, Census 2011 Source: Prepared from Census of India, 2011 data. INTERSTATE VARIATION OF MDG IN INDIA The progress on these two indicators is assessed by computing the actual annual rate of progress (AARP) and required annual rate of progress (RARP). On increases in safe drinking water, it is found that the RARP is 5.59 percent (Figure 6) while the actual rate of progress is 3.54 percent for the country, during 1993-2012 (Table 2). If this trend continues, the target of safe drinking water might be achievable for the country. But, the regional dimension of safe drinking water showed that while EAG states are successful increases the safe drinking water ratio faster others failed to do so. On open defecation front, it is observed that increase of toilet facility is lower than the required rate in India and most of the state. According to NSS 1993, 71.46 per cent of India s population had No Latrine facility in their households and practicing Open defecation. To achieve the MDG (7) in this regard India would have to achieve 35.73 per cent households with no latrine facility to reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to basic sanitation facility at the end of year 2015. RRAP to achieve the MDG target regarding this indicator during 1990-2015 is 2.08 percent. (Figure 5). North- central region continued insufficient progress in safe drinking water and toilet facility. FIGURE 5 & 6

106 Figure 5 State-Wise Actual Annual Rate of Progress in percentage of households covered with safe drinking water in India and states, 1993-2012. Figure 6 State-Wise Actual Annual Rate of Progress in percentage of households uncovered with No latrine facility in India and states, 1993-2012. Source: Author own calculation prepared through ARC-GIS software based on NSSO data. SOCIAL DISPARITY AND MDG ACHIEVEMENT IN INDIA According to Census 1991, 76.30 per cent of India s population had No Latrine facility in their households and practicing Open defecation. To achieve the MDG in this regard India would have to achieve 38.15 per cent households with no latrine facility to reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to basic sanitation facility at the end of year 2015. Required Rate of Annual Progress (RRAP) to achieve the MDG target regarding this indicator during 1990-2015 is 2.00 percent per annum. Table shows that India with only 1.74 percent of annual rate of progress during 1991-2011 is close to achieve the MDG target to reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to basic sanitation facility. India, Odisha, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh Bihar with less than 1.5 percent of annual rate of progress during 1991-2011 with associated higher percentage share in SC/ST also. The SC/ST is MDG progress much lower than the overall India. REGIONAL AND SOCIAL DISPARITY FOR SAFE DRINKING WATER

107 Table 4 shows that the regional level North region sufficient progress for all states expect for Delhi and Rajasthan might be reasonable Delhi inadequate urbanization, Central region Uttar Pradesh state shown sufficient progress but Madhya Pradesh insufficient, East region only West Bengal shown sufficient progress but not for Odisha and West Bengal (all Social groups, SC/ST). North-East regions all states are shown insufficient progress. Manipur among ST negatively progress. West region shows that sufficient progress Gujarat and Goa except for schedule tribe population in Goa and Maharashtra. Among South region Kerala well performing states and Andhra Pradesh and Tamilnadu sufficient progress except schedule tribe in Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, Union Territory region sufficient for all union Territory but not sufficient for Lakshadweep and A& N island in all social group. Importantly, A & N island ST in sufficient progress. REGIONAL AND SOCIAL DISPARITY FOR OPEN DEFECATION Table 5 shows that the regional level North region sufficient progress for all states expect for Rajasthan, Central region no state shown sufficient progress, East region only West Bengal shown sufficient progress but not for schedule tribe group. North-east region shown sufficient progress except Arunachal Pradesh or Assam for Schedule tribe group, West region shown sufficient progress except for schedule tribe population Gujarat and Maharashtra, South region sufficient progress but not for schedule caste in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamilnadu and similar not for sufficient schedule tribe in Karnataka, Tamilnadu, Union Territory region sufficient for all but not sufficient Pondicherry in SC and Dadar & Nagar Haveli in ST. Nevertheless Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh the socio-economically well-off states was also lagging behind to achieve the target at the end of 2015 with present insufficient rate of progress and there are also true some socio-economically developed states to achieve the MDG target at the end of 2015 but more than 20 percent open defecations exists in Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and Gujarat. The figure 7 to 12 leading summarize remark the SC/ST are still lagging behind from the safe drinking water and toilet facilities. However, these insufficient progresses of states mainly lead to high proportion of SC/ST population. These states are high infant/child mortality, maternal mortality and burden of disease, water borne disease. India had highest percent of under- five children die each year due to diarrheal disease. FIGURE 7& 8

108 FIGURE 9 & 10 FIGURE 11 & 12

109 Figure 7- State-Wise Actual Annual Rate of Progress in percentage of households uncovered with No latrine facility/open defecation in All India and states, 1991-2011 Figure 8- State-Wise Actual Annual Rate of Progress in percentage of households covered with Safe drinking water in All India and states, 1991-2011 Figure 9- State-Wise Actual Annual Rate of Progress in percentage of households uncovered with No latrine facility/open defecation in All India (Schedule Caste) and states, 1991-2011 Figure 10- State-Wise Actual Annual Rate of Progress in percentage of households covered with Safe drinking water in All India (Schedule Caste) and states, 1991-2011 Figure 11- State-Wise Actual Annual Rate of Progress in percentage of households uncovered with No latrine facility/open defecation in All India (Schedule Tribe) and states, 1991-2011 Figure 12- State-Wise Actual Annual Rate of Progress in percentage of households covered with Safe drinking water in All India (Schedule Tribe) and states, 1991-2011 Source: Author own calculation prepared through ARC-GIS software based on Census data. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION The objectives of this paper is unequal improvement to access the progress of safe drinking water and toilet facility of the country and states of India, SC/ST population how far away to MDG targets. The analysis shows that SC/ST population less actual annual rate of progress (AARP) for safe drinking water and sanitation facility within premises as compared to total population. However, the adverse effect of unsafe source of drinking water and improved toilet diminishes after adjustment for demographic and socio-economic factors. Open defecation and lack of sanitation are leading causes for water- borne disease like diarrhea and stunted growth in children. As a result, last two decades less improvement drinking water and sanitation facility among SC/ST. If this trend continues, the target of Millennium development goal might be slow progress in achievable for the country.

110 States which are generally regarded to be relatively well-governed and less poor such as Kerala, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu have sufficient progress but not far Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, poor northern states associated with SC/ST population. In contrast, the northeastern states which are poor and marked by governance challenges, but are in some ways culturally dissimilar to the Indian mainland have much sufficient progress of open defecation and safe drinking, such as Sikkim, Manipur, Mizoram. The slow progress of MDG is now shifted to SDG which is aimed to by 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all and access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all and end open defecation. REFERENCE Bartram, J., Lewis, K., Lenton, R., & Wright, A. (2005).Focusing on improved water and sanitation for health. The Lancet, 365(9461), 810-812. BurgardS. (2002). "Does race matters? children's height in Brazil and South Africa". Demography, 39(4), 763-790. Frisbie, W. S. (2004). "The increasing racial disparity in infant mortality: respiratory distress, sydrome and other causes". Demography, 41(4), 773-800. Gita Sen, A. I. (2009, november ). A methodology to analysis inter sections of Social Inequalities in Health". Journal of Human Deveopment and Capabilities, 10(3). Hummer, R. (1993). "Racial Differential in infant mortality in The United State: An examination of social and health determinants". Social Forces, 72(2), 529-554. Kumar, A., & Das, K. C. Drinking Water and Sanitation Facility in India and Its Linkages with Diarrhoea among Children under Five: Evidences from Recent Data. Ram, F., Mohanty, S. K., & Ram, U. (2009).Progress and prospects of millennium development goals in India. International Institute for Population Science: Mumbai, India. Sharma, S. S. (2006). Women s needs, women s action: toilet development in urban and rural communities of India (Doctoral dissertation, Drexel University). UNICEF (2008). Progress on drinking water and sanitation: Special focus on sanitation. In Progress on drinking water and sanitation: special focus on sanitation. WHO/JMP. UNICEF (2008). WHO 2008 Progress on drinking water and sanitation-special focus on sanitation. UNICF New York and World health organisation, Geneva.

111 WHO (2004). "Meeting the MDG drinking water and sanitation target: amid term assessment of progress". World Health Organization. WHO (2004). Meeting the MDG drinking water and sanitation target: amid term assessment of progress. World Health Organization. WHO (2011). "Faster, Sustainable and More Inclusive Growth: An Approach to the 12th Five - Year - Plan". Government of India. Planning Commision. William, D. (1995). "US socio economic and racial difference in health: Patterns and explannations". Annual Review of Sociology, 21(1), 349-386. APPENDIX Table 2: Actual Annual Rate of Progress in percentage of households covered with safe drinking water in India and states, 1993-2012 Required Annual Rate of Progress =5.59 States /UTs 1993 2002 2008 2012 AARP(1993-2012) India 71.12 83.5 93.06 90.54 3.54 North Delhi 100 98.39 97.39 95.79 NA Haryana 79.62 89.3 98.41 92.45 3.31 Himachal Pradesh 82.34 85.94 91.86 96.52 4.23 J& K 61.6 80.34 88.71 84.87 3.19 Punjab 97.19 98.95 99.94 99.57 4.46 Rajasthan 65.17 84.01 87.6 80.79 2.36 Uttarakhand NA 90.51 87.82 94.22 NA Central Chhattisgarh NA 80.86 94.23 94.57 NA Madhya Pradesh 57.5 72.78 92.32 87.2 3.68 Uttar Pradesh 70.93 90.15 97.37 97.18 4.75 East Bihar 67.27 90.73 98.2 97.9 4.93 Jharkhand NA 48.13 67.66 69.85 NA Odisha 51.63 70.77 85.13 84.33 3.56 West Bengal 86.09 91.91 96.41 94.97 3.36 North East Sikkim 82.66 59.96 73.22 88.62 1.81 Arunachal Pradesh 74.56 84.63 94.4 96.72 4.58 Nagaland 97.52 77.66 75.77 91.45-12.88 Manipur 63.6 58.51 65.17 62.62-0.14 Mizoram 36.33 44.1 45.8 91.12 4.53

112 Tripura 60.85 68.79 81.09 89.59 3.86 Meghalaya 43.93 58.67 75.82 75.31 2.95 Assam 62.14 65.45 84 86.07 3.33 West Goa 78.72 67.01 91.83 92.08 3.3 Gujarat 78.08 93.44 95.85 92.04 3.35 Maharashtra 77.55 84.05 91.77 91.22 3.2 South Andhra Pradesh 69.81 85.93 94.36 93.83 4.19 Karnataka 80.71 89.55 97.52 95.53 4.04 Kerala 22.75 21.59 74.14 37.25 0.99 Tamilnadu 77.35 91 97.51 94.41 3.96 UT's Chandigarh 100 100 100 100 NA Daman Diu 97.74 97.99 99.06 90.51-16.84 Dadra& Nagar Haveli 56.39 89.1 93.21 94.14 4.56 Lakshadweep 17.48 9.28 29.42 46.66 1.86 Pondicherry 94.06 98.73 99.86 94.52 0.41 A& N Island 76.99 84.28 91.99 89.22 2.8 Source: Author own calculation based on NSS 49, NSS 55, NSS 65 and NSS 69 (Schedule 1.2) Table 3: Actual Annual Rate of Progress in percentage of households uncovered with No latrine facility in India and states, 1993-2012 Required Annual Rate of Progress = 2.08 States /UTs 1993 2002 2008 2012 AARP(1993-2012) India 71.46 59.75 49.24 43.38 2.07 North Delhi 29.1 6.58 1.65 0.03 5.26 Haryana 76.28 58.77 33.73 16.71 4.11 Himachal Pradesh 80.88 63.09 42.31 22.12 3.82 J& K 82.43 38.9 30.37 35.79 2.98 Punjab 57.13 37.55 24 15.59 3.83 Rajasthan 77.63 72.14 63.55 57.23 1.38 Uttarakhand NA 51.53 42.48 16.08 NA Central Chhattisgarh NA 82.35 72.89 65.72 NA Madhya Pradesh 85.31 76.58 70.25 60.68 1.52 Uttar Pradesh 79.42 71.91 64.98 60.22 1.27 East Bihar 84.61 78.73 74.16 67.37 1.07 Jharkhand NA 75.52 74.71 73.9 NA

113 Odisha 92.2 79.83 78.72 71.91 1.16 West Bengal 65.92 53.1 32.42 29.43 2.91 North East Sikkim 34.46 9.37 2.12 0.14 5.24 Arunachal Pradesh 35.4 23.22 12.73 10.03 3.77 Nagaland 1.09 2.47 2.63 0.03 5.12 Manipur 12.82 4.62 0.71 1.27 4.74 Mizoram 1.47 2.03 0.69 0.34 4.05 Tripura 5.92 5.15 2.94 1.15 4.24 Meghalaya 44.43 27 9.26 3.63 4.83 Assam 24.38 12.64 12.07 11.99 2.67 West Goa 46.44 21.67 22.95 6.73 4.5 Gujarat 67.29 50.54 43.59 34.4 2.57 Maharashtra 67.38 54.81 36.36 33.51 2.65 South Andhra Pradesh 74.7 61.74 47.93 38.68 2.54 Karnataka 72.24 60.56 51.45 44.82 2 Kerala 28.65 8.63 4.31 2.31 4.84 Tamilnadu 71.84 61.53 46.63 41.09 2.25 UT's Chandigarh 18.17 6.56 1.72 1.48 4.83 Daman Diu 61.29 23.71 23.06 3.03 5 Dadra & Nagar Haveli 88.73 60.75 41.99 42.35 2.75 Lakshadweep 19.83 6.72 0.4 1.17 4.95 Pondicherry 35.03 42.36 25.64 21.1 2.09 A& N Island 51.81 50.04 28.79 19 3.33 Source: Author own calculation based on NSS 49, NSS 55, NSS 65 and NSS 69 (Schedule 1.2) Table 4 Actual Annual Rate of Progress in percentage of households covered with Safe drinking water in India and states, 1991-2011 Required Annual Rate of Progress = 3.44 Over all SC ST States /UTs 1991 2011 ARAP 1991 2011 ARAP 1991 2011 ARAP India 62.3 85.5 3.08 63.6 88.7 3.44 43.2 71.4 2.48 North Delhi 95.8 95.07-0.85 93.8 94.11 0.23 NST NST NST Haryana 74.3 93.47 3.73 72.3 93.77 3.87 NST NST NST Himachal Pradesh 77.3 93.59 3.59 72.9 91.57 3.44 72.2 94.34 3.98 Jammu Kashmir NA 76.72 NA NA 81.29 NA NA 50.46 2.52 Punjab 92.7 97.61 3.36 90.1 96.3 3.12 NST NST NST Rajasthan 59 78.11 2.33 59 78.83 2.42 48.8 72.9 2.35

114 Uttarakhand NA 91.99 NA NA 88.64 NA NA 92.6 NA Central Chhattisgarh NA 86.44 NA NA 92.3 NA NA 77.19 NA Madhya Pradesh 53.4 78.03 2.64 55.6 80.9 2.85 42.1 70.68 2.47 Uttar Pradesh 62.2 95.09 4.35 55.2 94.52 4.39 67.3 90.53 3.55 East Bihar 58.8 94 4.27 55.4 92.52 4.16 31.2 86.65 4.03 Jharkhand NA 60.21 NA NA 62.7 NA NA 53.44 NA Odisha 39.1 75.26 2.97 42.7 80.5 3.3 34.7 69.77 2.69 West Bengal 81.9 92.21 2.85 80.2 91 2.73 56.1 78.63 2.56 North East Sikkim 73.1 85.12 2.23 66.8 81.43 2.2 71.9 83.26 2.02 Arunachal Pradesh 70 78.75 1.46 NSC NSC NSC 71.7 76.77 0.89 Nagaland 53.4 53.94 0.06 NSC NSC NSC 53.7 54.09 0.04 Manipur 38.7 44.99 0.51 27.5 38.8 0.78 47.4 45.25-0.21 Mizoram 16.2 60.07 2.62 21.6 60 2.45 16 59.82 2.61 Tripura 37.2 67.62 2.42 40 79.6 3.3 18.1 37.02 1.16 Meghalaya 36.2 44.84 0.68 48.7 61.1 1.21 32.2 40.45 0.61 Assam 45.9 69.97 2.22 45.3 67.7 2.04 34.8 56.69 1.68 West Goa 43.4 86.24 3.78 44 88.7 3.99 33.3 76.97 3.27 Gujarat 69.8 90.33 3.4 73.7 93 3.67 41.3 80.62 3.35 Maharashtra 68.5 83.4 2.37 69.5 86.1 2.72 49.1 71.24 2.18 South Andhra Pradesh 55.1 90.5 3.94 57.6 91.5 4 50.1 82.86 3.28 Karnataka 71.7 87.53 2.8 78.6 91.1 2.91 74 88.17 2.72 Kerala 18.9 33.48 0.9 23.5 38.6 0.99 15.6 25.99 0.61 Tamilnadu 67.4 92.51 3.85 70.9 95 4.13 48.7 84.14 3.45 UT's Chandigarh 97.7 99.57 4.05 97.4 99.32 3.68 NST NST NST Daman Diu 71.4 98.67 4.77 82.9 100 5 66 100 5 Dadra & Nagar Haveli 45.6 90.51 4.13 71.4 100 5 34.9 81.22 3.56 Lakshadweep 11.9 21.3 0.53 NSC NSC NSC 12.9 21.57 0.5 Pondicherry 88.8 97.74 4 88.3 99.8 4.91 NST NST NST A& N Island 67.9 86.07 2.83 NSC NSC NSC 20.3 77.5 3.59 Source: Author own calculation based on Census 1991-2011. (NA= not available, NSC= No schedule caste, NST= No Schedule tribe) Table- 5 Actual Annual Rate of Progress in percentage of households uncovered with No latrine facility/open defecation in India and states, 1991-2011 Required Annual Rate of Progress = 2.00 Over all SC ST

115 States /UTs 1991 2011 ARAP 1991 2011 ARAP 1991 2011 ARAP India 76.3 49.82 1.74 88.84 62.12 1.5 92.78 74.66 0.98 North Delhi 36.62 3.24 4.56 68.85 6.57 4.52 NST NST NST Haryana 77.55 30.25 3.05 92.71 42.98 2.68 NST NST NST Himachal Pradesh 87.61 29.6 3.31 94.04 34.84 3.15 80.29 37.42 2.67 J& K NA 45.92 NA NA 75.52 NA NA 71.15 NA Punjab 66.82 19.44 3.55 83.96 32.68 3.05 NST NST NST Rajasthan 80.43 64.28 1 89.38 71.84 0.98 96.9 91.65 0.27 Uttarakhand NA 33.15 NA NA 54.12 NA NA 52.91 NA Central Chhattisgarh NA 73.82 NA NA 80.39 NA NA 84.67 NA Madhya Pradesh 84.93 69.86 0.89 93.73 78.33 0.82 97.79 90.81 0.36 Uttar Pradesh 81.98 62.95 1.16 93.13 77.56 0.84 75.77 62.77 0.86 East Bihar 88.25 75.81 0.7 95.01 88.34 0.35 96.67 86.03 0.55 Jharkhand NA 77.01 NA NA 86.59 NA NA 90.71 NA Odisha 90.19 76.55 0.76 96.18 85.24 0.57 98.4 91.19 0.37 West Bengal 68.49 38.51 2.19 83.39 49.19 2.05 92.17 72.38 1.07 North East Sikkim 65.03 9.87 4.24 73.18 14.29 4.02 64.83 10.86 4.16 Arunachal Pradesh 52.58 35.18 1.65 NSC NSC NSC 56.56 39.06 1.55 Nagaland 62.51 16.77 3.66 NSC NSC NSC 65.94 18.12 3.63 Manipur 56.87 9.01 4.21 59.57 9.09 4.24 77.05 16.77 3.91 Mizoram 29.27 6.33 3.92 18.75 2.5 4.33 29.67 6.28 3.94 Tripura 32.07 11.66 3.18 24.74 4.03 4.19 62.76 30.7 2.55 Meghalaya 68.89 34.8 2.47 53.21 27.78 2.39 74.8 36.88 2.53 Assam 62.57 33.29 2.34 66.05 31.83 2.59 87.46 54.26 1.9 West Goa 59.35 16.34 3.62 79.13 13.48 4.15 75 39.43 2.37 Gujarat 69.31 40.42 2.08 76.86 39.88 2.41 94.58 73.08 1.14 Maharashtra 70.44 33.95 2.59 83.19 38.4 2.69 92.99 59.85 1.78 South Andhra Pradesh 81.6 47.99 2.06 93.34 63.35 1.61 96.5 77.81 0.97 Karnataka 75.87 44.82 2.05 90.76 62.97 1.53 91.1 66.33 1.36 Kerala 48.72 3.73 4.62 70.67 10.65 4.25 86.15 27.8 3.39 Tamilnadu 76.87 45.96 2.01 90.16 65.46 1.37 88.63 60.64 1.58 UT's Chandigarh 29.2 2.74 4.53 52.12 6.15 4.41 NST NST NST Daman Diu 73.43 11.65 4.21 86.1 12.5 4.27 96.38 55.56 2.12 Dadra & Nagar 84.58 43.08 2.45 70.77 37.5 2.35 96.74 79.28 0.9

116 Haveli Lakshadweep 28.98 3.7 4.36 NSC NSC NSC 32.29 2.94 4.54 Pondicherry 65.12 26.54 2.96 86.9 58.59 1.63 NST NST NST A& N Island 63.12 26.43 2.91 48.88 NSC 5 87.22 15 4.14 Source: Author own calculation based on Census 1991-2011. (NA= not available, NSC= No schedule caste, NST= No Schedule tribe) ABBREVIATIONS USED AARP: Actual Annual Rate of Progress MDG: Millennium Development Goal NA: Not Available NFHS: National Family Health Survey NSC: No Schedule Caste NST: No Schedule Tribe RARP: Required Annual Rate of Progress SC: Schedule Caste ST: Schedule Tribe UNICEF: United Nations Children s Fund WHO: World Health Organization