SOPHIE MITRA, USHA SAMBAMOORTHI

D

Estimates of disability prevalence in India vary depending on definitions and data sources. According to the Census of 2001, 21.9 million persons in India have disabilities, which accounts for almost 2 per cent of the population. The 2 per cent prevalence estimate is significantly lower than the global prevalence estimate of 10 per cent of the United Nations (1990) as well as the prevalence estimates for specific disabilities in India. For instance, Reddy and Chandrashekar (quoted in Khandelwal et al (2004)) estimate a prevalence rate of 5.8 per cent only for mental and behavioural disabilities.

The problems faced by PWDs are multifaceted and require coordinated efforts on social, economic and political levels. Because poverty is the cause as well as the consequence of disability [Mitra 2005], understanding the economic experiences of PWDs is critical for disability advocates and policy-makers. Poverty can be a cause of disability, for instance, through malnutrition. Poverty can be the consequence of disability through the loss of employment or the reduction in work earnings following the onset of disability for the individual and household. Therefore, employment is a key to understanding and dealing with the economic challenges of households with PWDs.

For both labour demand and supply reasons, we speculate that the employment rates of PWDs will be lower than that of persons without disabilities. PWDs will experience a higher cost of working due to greater efforts needed to secure employment compared to persons without disabilities. As a result, the reservation wage of a person with disability (i e, the lowest wage at which a person is willing to work) is expected to be higher than that of a person without a disability. At the same time, a disability may make a person less productive, especially if the workplace environment is not accommodating, or it may be that the person is perceived as being less productive, and is thus likely to be offered a lower market wage. Both these factors, a higher reservation wage and a lower market wage lead to lower probability of employment among PWDs. There is also some empirical evidence supporting this proposition. For example, according to a recent study, in 19 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, the average employment rate of PWDs is just over 60 per cent of those of persons without disabilities [OECD 2003:34].

In India, in 1995, the government passed the Persons with Disabilities Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation Act (PWD Act thereafter), which mandates reservation for persons with disabilities in the government sector. Yet, 10 years later, there has not been any systematic study evaluating the policy initiative and its impact on employment of PWDs, and general studies on employment and disability remain scarce. To our knowledge, there is only one study conducted by Erb and Harriss-White (2001) in three villages in Tamil Nadu. These authors found that a majority (about 60 per cent) of persons with disabilities worked and concluded that in an agrarian economy, only extreme disability was a barrier to employment.

This study also revealed the two-way link between disability and poverty. Over half the households with disabled men and over a third of households with disabled women were set on a track of downward economic mobility as a result of the loss of earnings of the incapacitated person. While Erb and Harris-White made a seminal contribution to understanding the employment experience of PWDs in an agrarian context, a systematic evidence is needed on employment for PWDs across states and across the urban and rural sectors.

The main contribution of the current paper is to analyse the employment of PWDs based on recent nationally representative data, compare them to the employment rates of the overall population and understand the determinants of employment among PWDs.

The data source is two rounds of the National Sample Survey (NSS), which is a nationally representative survey of the all-India non-institutionalised population. We use employment data from schedule 26 of the 58th round of the NSS, which was administered to households with at least one PWD in 2002. The schedule 26

Economic and Political Weekly January 21, 2006 of the 58th round follows a stratified sample working for wages or salaries, self-em-the employment rates are three times higher design with weights. In this schedule, a ployment and casual employment. We cal-for men than women (51 per cent vs 16.1 person is considered to have a disability culate the employment rate or worker to per cent) and higher in rural areas comif he or she has restrictions or a lack of population ratio as the proportion of the pared to urban areas (38.4 per cent vs 34.9 abilities to perform an activity in the manner working age population who are working. per cent). Persons with hearing disability or within the range considered normal for Working age population consists of indi-have the highest employment rate (58.8 a human being. The types of disability viduals who are in the age group 15 to 64. per cent), followed by those with speech covered include mental retardation, men-Table 1 summarises the employment disability (49.8 per cent), locomotor distal illness, visual, hearing, speech and rates of working age PWDs in 2002. Among ability (41.7 per cent), multiple disability locomotor disabilities. Persons with more all working age PWDs, we found that 37.6 (33.3 per cent), visual disability (21.7 per than one disability type are considered as per cent were employed. The rates of cent) and mental retardation (15.6 per having a multiple disability. It is important employment significantly vary by gender, cent). Those with mental illness had the to note that the 58th round of the NSS was sector and disability type. In general, lowest rate of employment (9.6 per cent). the first attempt to collect data on the prevalence of mental retardation and mental Table 2: Distribution of the All-India Working Age Population by Usual Activity Statusillness. Earlier rounds of the NSS that had (15 to 64 Years Old) in 1999-2000 disability modules (e g, 47th round) did All Male Female Rural Urban not have such data.

Employed 62.5 83.9 40.4 67.0 50.4

To estimate employment rates of work

Self-employed, as an own account work 18.5 30.0 6.6 19.8 15.2ing age population at the all-India level, Self-employed, as an employer 0.6 0.9 0.2 0.5 0.6 we also use data from schedule 10 of the Self-employed, as helper 13.3 11.1 15.4 16.3 5.0

Regular wage/salaried employee 9.1 15.1 3.0 4.8 20.6

NSS 55th round. This round has a large

Casual labour in public works 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1

sample size that provides reliable employ-

Casual labour in other types of works 20.9 26.6 15.1 25.5 8.8

ment data for the “all-India population”.

Unemployed 1.5 2.2 0.7 1.0 2.6 Not in labour force 36.0 13.9 58.9 31.9 47.0 Educational institutions 8.0 9.9 6.1 6.4 12.3

Domestic duties 17.1 0.3 34.5 13.7 26.2Employment Rates of the Domestic duties and free collection of goods 7.5 0.1 15.2 8.7 4.4 Disabled Working Age Population Rentiers, pensioners, remittance recipients 0.6 0.7 0.4 0.4 1.0 Not able to work owing to disability 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.6 0.6 We use the “principal usual activity” Beggars, prostitutes 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Others 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.4

status of the NSS to anchor our analysis.

A person is considered employed if he/she N 5,01,981 2,56,843 2,45,138 3,01,331 2,00,650 reports work as their principal usual acti-Note: All estimates are weighted. vity status. Here work is defined as Source: Author’s calculations based on the NSS, schedule 10 of 55th round.

Table 1: Distribution of Working Age Persons with Disabilities by Usual Activity Status (15 to 64 Years Old) in 2002

Others 5.7 5.5 6.0 5.9 5.6 6.3 5.1 5.0 5.2 11.9 11.0 9.6 4.4 5.8 4.1 5.7 N 46,731 29,004 17,727 30,076 18,693 11,383 16,655 10,311 6,344 2,318 4,395 4,392 4,255 2,140 24,291 4,940

Note: All estimates are weighted. Source: Author’s calculations based on the NSS, schedule 26 of 58th round.

Economic and Political Weekly January 21, 2006 Turning to the type of employment, 21 per cent of the working age population with disabilities is self-employed, 11.8 per cent are casual labour and 4.8 per cent are salaried-waged employees.

III Comparison to the All-India Working Age Population

To understand the magnitude of these rates, we compare the employment rates of PWDs to the all-India working age population, derived from the NSS 55th round. Table 2 displays employment rates for the all-India working age population. In 1999-2000, 62.5 per cent of the working age population reported being employed, which is 24.9 percentage points higher than the employment rate for those with disabilities (37.6 per cent) in 2002. Among the working age population, 32.4 per cent are self-employed, 21 per cent are casual labour and 9.1 per cent are wage/salaried employees. Based on results in Tables 1 and 2, we find that the employment rate of PWDs accounts for 60.2 per cent of that of the overall population. In addition, among the employed only, PWDs appear to be more self-employed than the overall population.

Rates of employment by state and urban/ rural sectors are set forth in Table 3. State variations in employment rates for PWDs are very wide ranging from a minimum of

18.4 per cent in Lakshadweep to a maximum of 46.8 per cent in Sikkim. Except in Lakshadweep and Andaman and Nicobar Islands, employment rates of PWDs are higher in rural than in urban areas. This finding confirms an earlier result for the entire country.

The employment ratio is a measure of the degree of integration of PWDs in the labour market relative to the all-India population. It is calculated as the employment rate of PWDs divided by the employment rates of the all-India population and is presented in Table 3 at the state level. We observe wide variations in the employment ratio across states, as evidence by the range (36.9 per cent in Lakshadweep to

79.1 per cent in Sikkim).

IV Determinants of Employment among Persons with Disabilities

To better understand the subgroup differences in employment rates, we analyse the determinants of employment among PWDs. Our descriptive analysis does reveal vocational training, aid/appliance, correcthat among individuals with disabilities, tive surgery and a government or semiwomen are less likely to be employed than government job. men. Such a finding could be due to dif-Coefficients and standard errors from ferences in human capital (example: lower probit regressions of employment among educational levels; vocational training). PWDs are displayed in Table 4. In order Therefore, to assess the contribution of not to confound the impact of gender or demographic, social, human capital (edu-sector related barriers to employment, we cation, age), disability type and other also present results on subsamples of urban characteristics on the probability of being males, urban females, rural males and rural employed, we estimate a probit model of females. Column (1) gives results for the being employed that accounts for the strati-entire sample while columns (2) through fied sample design with weights of the (5) give results for subsamples. NSS 58th round. In column (1), being a male and living

Potential determinants of employment in the rural sector are associated with higher included the following: demographic employment probabilities, which confirms (gender, marital status, household size, results reached earlier in Table 1. Being state, rural/urban sector), disability charac-married has a large and significant effect teristics (type of disability, disabilityatbirth), on employment, but as expected, the social status (caste) or human capital direction of the effect is opposite across characteristics (education, vocational train-gender. Being married strongly increases ing, age, age squared (a proxy for work a man’s probability of being employed experience)). We also include indicator while it reduces that of a woman’s. The variables to represent whether the indi-household size variable has a negative vidual has received any aid from govern-coefficient: the effect of the household mental and non-governmental sources. The size is strong for females but weak for government aid includes aid for education, males. Being part of a SC/ST or other

Table 3: Employment Rates of Persons with Disabilities by State/Union Territory

Source: Authors’ calculations from the Schedules 26 of 58th round of NSS and Schedule 10 of 55th round of NSS.

Economic and Political Weekly January 21, 2006 backward class has a positive impact on employment, in particular for the subsample of rural females.

Across all subsamples, the educational level dummies have coefficients that are close to zero, with the exception of having a postgraduate education. Vocational training is positively associated with the probability of employment, but the result does not hold across subsamples. Age has a quadratic effect on the probability of employment: the latter increases with age but at a decreasing rate.

Types of disability (hearing, speech or locomotor disability) are associated with a higher probability of employment. Persons with a mental disability (mental retardation or mental illness) are less likely to be employed and this is more the case in the urban sector than in the rural sector for both males and females. The positive sign of the coefficient of the multiple disability dummy in the rural subsamples is surprising and illustrates the heterogeneity of the rural and urban settings. The dummy indicating if individuals have had a disability since birth is positively associated with the probability of employment. Finally, the dummies indicating whether an individual has received government and non-government aid have negative coefficients that are statistically significant for the overall sample.

Among all working age PWDs, only

37.6 per cent are employed in 2002 compared to 62.5 per cent for the all-India population in 1999-2000. It is important to note that because the all-India working age population also includes PWDs, the comparison made in this paper between PWDs and the all-India population understates the differences in employment rates between persons with and without disabilities.

Our findings with respect to the employment rates of PWDs and the all-India population are consistent with the international experience mentioned in the introduction. However, the situation is very different in India in that we find a considerable variation across different subgroups. For example, in OECD countries, gender differences in employment rates are insignificant [OECD 2003:36], while in India men with disabilities are three times more likely to be employed than women with disabilities. This variation makes drawing the employment picture for PWDs a complex exercise.

The cross-state variations in employment rates for PWDs are very wide. Potential explanations of cross-state variations include different levels of disability prevalence, urbanisation, unemployment rates, poverty levels, the types of jobs available, industry profiles. Our findings underscore the need for further research in this area. A study using aggregate state data on employment rates for PWDs could be a first step in this direction. In addition, it would be important to determine if state level institutional factors play a role in the cross-state variations, including the work disincentive effect of state level disability pensions or the implementation at the state level of the PWD Act of 1995.

Regarding the determinants of employment among PWDs, we find that they may face different obstacles to employment based on gender and rural/urban sectors. Therefore, policies promoting employment

Table 4: Probit of Employment among Persons with Disabilities

Notes: Standard errors are in parenthesis. ***, **, * indicate statistical significance at the 1, 5 and 10 per cent levels.

Economic and Political Weekly January 21, 2006

opportunities for PWDs need to tailor the programmes for specific gender and rural/ urban sectors.

Surprisingly, education has a limited effect on the probability of being employed for PWDs. Although vocational training was associated with a higher probability of employment, this finding is not consistent across samples. These findings together with the significant effect of household and individual characteristics suggest that employment among PWDs is influenced by household and individual characteristics rather than human capital characteristics. More research is needed to compare the rates of return of education of PWDs to their counterparts without disabilities. In addition, the government aid does not have the anticipated effect of promoting employment, suggesting that these aids act as a work disincentive for PWDs.

We find that type of disability also affects the probability of employment. Persons with mental disabilities are disproportionately out of the labour force when compared to persons with other types of disability. Persons with hearing, speech and locomotor disabilities have the highest employment rates. Outreach efforts toward persons with other disabilities need to be made so that the schemes can reach a more diverse group of PWDs. This finding also suggests the need for systematic research on understanding the reasons for high employment rates among PWDs with hearing, speech or locomotor disability and draw lessons for policies and programmes.

One could offer several possible explanations for the low employment rate of PWDs compared to the all-India population. These include the constraints placed by the disability on the amount and type of work a person can do, societal attitudes including low expectations for PWDs or discrimination and finally an unfavourable policy environment with respect to the employment of PWDs. There are various laws and programmes that are designed, at least in part, to have a positive effect on the employment of PWDs.

For example, the PWD Act of 1995 is the most important legislation regarding the employment of PWDs. The PWD Act gave a statutory recognition to the policy of 3 per cent reservation in government employment, which had been in place since the Seventh Five-Year Plan (1985-86 to 1989-90) [Ram and Harris White 1995]. It has to be noted that there are no sanctions for failing to meet the reservation quota. To our knowledge, there is no published scientific research on the extent to which the PWD Act has fulfilled its intent regarding the employment reservation policy. Although a comprehensive review of the institutional background on employment and disability is beyond the scope of this paper, this piece of evidence suggests that there is an urgent need to evaluate the laws and programmes at the central and state government levels that attempt to encourage the employment of PWDs, including the PWD Act.

A disadvantage of the data from schedule 26 used in this paper is that it only covers PWDs, and makes it therefore impossible to compare the labour market experience of persons with and without disabilities at a given point in time. In the rounds of the NSS that collect employment data for large samples (e g, 55th round), PWDs are not identified. As a result, some issues that are essential to understanding the labour market experience of PWDs cannot be tackled with existing data. Is there any discrimination in access to employment against PWDs? Is there any discrimination in wages? Is there any underemployment among PWDs? Adding questions to identify PWDs in selected rounds of the NSS could go a long way in giving researchers the data needed to try and deal with these issues.

EPW

Email: mitra@fordham.edu

[We have benefited from insightful comments on an earlier version by Daniel Mont and Philip O’Keefe and from research assistance by Sri Prabhu. All errors or omissions are those of the authors. The funding support of the World Bank for the conduct of this study is gratefully acknowledged. The views expressed should not be attributed to the World Bank.]