Table A1.
(1) |
(2) |
(3) |
(4) |
(5) |
(6) |
(7) |
(8) |
(9) |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number of villages | Reasons for reduction in panel size | ||||||||
Year 2003 | Year 2010 | Panel | Reduction in | More than 8 panel | Village population | Village population | Village not found | Other reasons | |
panel size | villages in district | less than 250 | more than 10,000 | in Census 2001 | |||||
Andhra Pradesh | 81 | 87 | 73 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 |
Assam | 98 | 87 | 77 | 21 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 10 | 3 |
Bihar | 94 | 84 | 84 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Chattisgarh | 85 | 80 | 76 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5 |
Gujarat | 82 | 88 | 74 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
Haryana | 81 | 81 | 75 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
Himachal Pradesh | 89 | 80 | 60 | 29 | 2 | 22 | 0 | 4 | 1 |
Jharkhand | 87 | 84 | 73 | 14 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
Karnataka | 91 | 89 | 84 | 7 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
Kerala | 83 | 83 | 43 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 0 |
Madhya Pradesh | 88 | 90 | 81 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
Maharastra | 85 | 91 | 80 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
Orissa | 92 | 87 | 79 | 13 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 0 |
Punjab | 78 | 82 | 75 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
Rajasthan | 91 | 98 | 85 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
Tamilnadu | 84 | 87 | 69 | 15 | 5 | 0 | 6 | 4 | 0 |
Uttar Pradesh | 114 | 113 | 104 | 10 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Uttaranchal | 80 | 72 | 57 | 23 | 6 | 14 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
West Bengal | 85 | 87 | 70 | 15 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 2 |
India | 1,668 | 1,650 | 1,419 | 249 | 69 | 60 | 69 | 36 | 15 |
Source: Authors' calculations. Notes: The upper population cutoff for all states was 10,000 as per the 1991 census, except Kerala where the cutoff was 20,000. The category others include: replaced because high Naxalite activity (6 villages), replaced because duplicate in 2003 sample (2 villages), replaced because district was replaced (2 villages) replaced because village too remote (1 village), replaced because name missing in 2003 list (1 village), replaced because of floods in village (2 village), replaced because village could not be located (1 village).