text:
Data: Few States With Low Rate of Missing Persons Also Have Low Rate of Tracing
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 23, 2023
The NCRB’s CII reports provide data on registered cases of missing persons as well as the tracing rate (those who have been traced). Data indicates that the rate of missing persons in states like Bihar, Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh, Odisha, and Punjab is lower than the national average. However, the rate of tracing in these states is also below the national average.
Every year, lakhs of people are reported as missing in India, including women and children. In the first part of the story on missing persons in India, we looked at the data provided in the NCRB’s Crime in India (CII) reports which revealed that females constituted around two-thirds of all persons reported as missing in India. Further, children constituted 1 in 5 people reported missing. The data also showed that about 50% of all missing persons in the country were reported as traced. While the first part of the story focused on the gender and age of missing persons reported at the national level, we look at the trends in missing people normalized with population, and the rate of traced persons across states in this second part.
For this story, we use data provided in the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB)’s annual CII reports. We also use the annual projected mid-year population for states, as given in the Report of Technical Group on Population Projections (July 2020) National Commission on Population, MoHFW. The datasets are sourced from Dataful, a product of Factly.
15 states account for nearly 9 in 10 cases of reported ‘missing persons’
In the six years between 2016 and 2021 for which data is available, a total of 20.37 lakh persons have been reported missing. Maharashtra registered the greatest number of cases with over 3.46 lakh persons missing followed by West Bengal with 2.62 lakh and Madhya Pradesh with 2.51 lakh persons reported as missing. Most of the missing cases of women are reported from major urban areas like Mumbai, Thane, Pune, Kolkata, and Indore, according to previous analysis by NCRB.
Delhi, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, and Telangana had also reported more than 1 lakh cases each. Together, the 7 states alone accounted for 13.1 lakh cases or 64% of the cases registered in the country. The top 15 states with the greatest number of cases of missing persons contributed 89% of the cases.
To get a clearer picture of the cases of missing persons registered across states and for meaningful comparison, we have normalized the data by taking into account the projected population for each state. The projected population has been sourced from the report of the Technical Group established by the National Commission on Population (NCP) under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) which has generated population forecasts for each of the years 2011-2036. We have calculated the number of cases of missing persons reported per one lakh population based on the projected mid-year population for that year.
Except in 2020, more than 100 persons per lakh population reported missing from Delhi each year
Though Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, and West Bengal are on top of the list in terms of an absolute number of missing cases, Delhi has the highest number of cases of missing persons when normalized for population. Except in 2020, more than 100 persons have been reported missing for every one lakh persons in Delhi in each of the years from 2016 to 2021. This is roughly 4 times the national average. At the All-India level, 22 persons were reported missing per lakh population in 2016 which has increased to 29 in 2021. Apart from Delhi, no other state/UT has reported a three-digit number.
In 4 out of the 6 years, Chandigarh has reported the second highest number of cases per lakh population. States like Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, Telangana, and Chhattisgarh have reported about twice the national average during this period. Meanwhile, in the states of Kerala, Karnataka, and Tamil Nadu, this value is close to the national average. The number per lakh population has been less than the national average consistently in Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh, while Punjab and Assam have reported half the national average. Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand have reported less than 6 cases per lakh population each year. Bihar and the northeastern states of Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Meghalaya, and Manipur have reported less than 10 cases per lakh population in most years.
Huge variation across states in tracing missing persons
As already mentioned in the previous story, the percentage share of persons traced is calculated as the percentage ratio of the total number of persons traced in the year against the total number of persons missing in that year. That is, the number of persons traced includes even those persons reported missing in previous years and traced in that particular year. The total number of missing persons includes even those persons unrecovered from previous years.
The percentage recovery at the national level has been around 50% in the last five years. That is half the persons reported missing get traced. However, there is stark variation in recovery across states. For instance, the percentage recovery in Punjab has been around 16% in the last 3 years whereas the same in Kerala has been around 86%.
Despite reporting a high number of cases for its population, the percentage recovery in Delhi is only about 40%. It has only declined over the years. In 2021, only about 1 in 3 people that were reported missing were traced. The recovery is lower than the national average in the states of Bihar, Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh, Odisha, and Punjab. It should be noted that these are the states where the rate of cases reported is lower than the national average. In Uttar Pradesh, the recovery has improved from 20% to 39% between 2016 and 2021 while it has declined in Bihar and Punjab. The percentage recovery in West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh has also been less than 50% while in Gujarat, it has been between half to two-thirds.
On the other side, the recovery is above the national average in the South Indian states. While Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh have a recovery of about 60 to 70% in 2021, Telangana and Kerala recorded more than 85% recovery.
Reasons about why people go missing is not recorded by NCRB
NCRB does not record the motive/reason behind why people go missing as the real motive is normally not known and becomes clear only later during the investigation stage when the person is traced. Following the circulation of misinformation earlier, the DGP of Telangana Police had tweeted in 2019 that most of the registered missing cases in the city of Hyderabad were due to people’s individual problems such as family, love affairs, examinations failure, admonition by parents, etc. and that in more than 85% of the cases, the persons have been traced and in the remaining cases, necessary efforts are being undertaken to resolve them swiftly.
Apart from this, in states with low recovery, trafficking could also be a reason behind people going missing. It has to be noted that NCRB’s numbers are based on cases registered with the police and need not reflect the real figures.
The Central government as well as the Supreme Court have given SOPs, directions, and measures to be followed to identify areas where children and women are most vulnerable and take action when children and women go missing at various levels. States also have their own wings and portals to register missing persons.


text:
Data: Five States Account for Close to 60% of DPIIT-Recognized Startups
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
December 15, 2022
Of the more than 84,000 startups recognized by the DPIIT as of 30 November 2022, 58% are from the five states of Maharashtra, Karnataka, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, and Gujarat. The top-10 states on the other hand account for 82% of the recognized startups. Data also indicates that between 2016 & 2021, 89 startups were recognized at the national level for every 1000 companies registered in those years.
In the previous story, we looked at the eligibility criteria for companies to be recognized as startups in India and the different types of support extended by the Government of India to these startups. Startups recognized by the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) under the Ministry of Commerce and Industry are eligible to avail the benefits like as tax exemptions, self-certification, and relaxation in norms. Further, it was seen that the number of startups that gained recognition of DPIIT has increased by more than 50 times to almost 24,000 as of November 2022 from 452 in 2016 when the initiative was rolled out.  In this story, we look at the trends in startups recognized across states.
5 states accounted for almost 60% of the DPIIT-recognized startups
As of 30 November 2022, a total of 84,012 startups were recognized by DPIIT since the inception of the scheme, as per a Lok Sabha response from 07 December 2022. The data also reveals that there is at least one DPIIT-recognized startup from each of the 36 States and Union Territories.
The majority of the recognized startups, about 18.5%, were in Maharashtra. While Maharashtra had more than 15,000 recognized startups, Karnataka and Delhi had more than 9,000 recognized startups each and accounted for 11.8% and 11.4%, respectively. Uttar Pradesh had the fourth highest number of startups recognized with more than 7,500 (9.2%) followed by Gujarat with more than 5,800 startups (7%). The five states together accounted for 58% of the startups recognized by DPIIT.
Together with Tamil Nadu, Haryana, Telangana, Kerala, and West Bengal, the top 10 states with the greatest number of startups recognized by DPIIT together contributed to 82% of the total startups recognized in the country. Tamil Nadu, Haryana, and Telangana had more than 4,000 recognized startups each while Kerala had more than 3,700 and West Bengal had more than 2,700 recognized startups. Not far behind West Bengal, Rajasthan had more than 2,700 recognized startups as well.
Kerala, UP, and Haryana are among states without Tier-1 cities but in the top 10
Based on the decennial Census, the cities in the country are classified into X, Y, and Z for house rent allowance purposes. These are more commonly known as Tier-1, Tier-2, and Tier-3 cities, respectively. As per the classification, the eight metro cities- Delhi, Bengaluru (Karnataka), Mumbai, Pune (Maharashtra), Chennai (Tamil Nadu), Kolkata (West Bengal), Ahmedabad (Gujarat), and Hyderabad (Telangana) are ‘X’ cities or Tier-1 cities. The state-wise number of recognized startups reveals that all the seven states where Tier-1 cities are located are in the top 10. Uttar Pradesh and Kerala which are in the top 10 have a higher number of Tier-2 or ‘Y’ cities as compared to other states.
Huge variation among states in proportion of startups recognized by DPIIT against the companies registered
In the six-year period from 2016 to 2021, DPIIT recognized 60,239 startups. During this same period, a total of 6,76,635 Indian companies were registered in the country according to the data from Ministry of Corporate Affairs. That is, for every 1,000 Indian companies registered in the country during this period, 89 startups have gained DPIIT’s recognition.
It should be noted that not all companies registered may be startups. Further, startups need not apply for or get the department’s recognition in the same year of registration. One of the criteria for recognition as a startup is that the company should not have completed ten years from the date of registration. Other factors such as paid-up capital, turnover, etc. of the company are considered to determine if the company is a startup.
Across states, the proportion of startups that gained recognition is 45 for every 1000 companies between 2016 & 2021 in Bihar to 130 in Karnataka and 149 in Chhattisgarh. Among major states, more than 100 startups gained recognition for every 1,000 companies registered in the states of Chhattisgarh, Karnataka, Gujarat, Assam, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, and Haryana. Except for Karnataka and Gujarat, Maharashtra also has a proportion higher than the national average. The other states with Tier-1 cities such as Delhi, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, and West Bengal have fewer startups recognized per 1000 companies registered than the national average. The proportion is the least in Bihar, roughly one-third of that of the state of Chhattisgarh.
31 out of 36 States/UTs have their own startup policy
Of the 36 States and Union Territories in India, 31 of them have a dedicated Startup Policy. Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh are among those without a dedicated policy. 27 of these Startup Policies were developed after the launch of the Startup India initiative in 2016. Such policies at the state level are crucial as support in terms of state-level incentives & ease of norms becomes critical. Many of these policies talk about the holistic development of the startup ecosystem in the country by providing incentives to key startup stakeholders such as incubators, institutions of higher education like IITs, etc.
Ranking of States on Support to Startup Ecosystems is an exercise conducted by the NITI Aayog on an annual basis. It is a performance-based index aimed to facilitate the ease of setting up a business start-up and the creation of a conducive environment to create a facilitative ecosystem. It was initiated in 2018, consisting of 26 action points and a total score of 100. Out of these 26 action points, 8 points were based on the feedback received.
States are ranked into five categories – Best Performers, Top Performers, Leaders, Aspiring Leaders, and Emerging Start-up Ecosystems. The State Start-up Ranking Exercise aims to support states and union territories in developing their start-up ecosystem and learn from the best practices in each state and union territory.
The exercise carried out in 2021 identified Gujarat and Karnataka as the Best Performers in the category of States which included the NCT of Delhi while Meghalaya was the best performer among UTs and Northeastern states. While Kerala, Maharashtra, Odisha, and Telangana were identified as the Top Performers award among states, Jammu & Kashmir emerged as the Top Performer among UTs and NE states. Andhra Pradesh and Bihar from the States category and Mizoram and Ladakh from the UTs/NE States were clubbed under the Emerging Start-up Ecosystem.
Featured Image: Startup India

source: news-factly

created: December 15, 2022

license: Creative Commons - Attribution - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

author: Sai Krishna Muthyanolla


text:
Flood Forecast accuracy has decreased while number of forecasts increased
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
October 27, 2020
Accurate forecasts play an important role in mitigating the losses caused by floods. Government data indicates that while the number of level & inflow forecasts has more than doubled between 2015 & 2019, the accuracy has reduced from 98% to 86.6%.
Recent floods due to depression in Bay of Bengal wreaked havoc in the states of Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka & Maharashtra leading to loss of human life as well as property. Earlier, Assam was hit by floods which has now become an annual affair. It is estimated that around 2.25 lakh people were affected by these floods in the state of Assam.
Rains during the monsoon season and unseasonal rains in different parts of the country have over the years, resulted in immense loss to human life, crops, property etc.  Governments at the Centre and the States have developed mechanism to predict the floods and mitigate the potential loss. Despite all these measures, significant number of human lives are lost in addition to loss of property, and death of animals etc.  In this story, we take a look at the magnitude of losses caused due to floods in India.
More than 8,800 deaths are estimated to be caused due to floods between 2017 & 2020
Responding to a question in Lok Sabha in November 2019, the Union Minister for Jal Shakti provided the details of Death toll caused due to floods. The total losses due to floods was provided as a response to a different question in July 2019.
As per the information, in 2016-17, 1550 human lives were lost due to rain oriented natural calamities. This number increased in the year 2017-18, when a total of 2,494 deaths were recorded as caused due to floods across India. In the following  year of 2018-19, the number reduced slightly with 2,400 deaths being attributed to floods.  As per the available provisional estimates, there were around 2391 deaths that were cased due to floods in 2019-20 up to November 2019.
Over this four-year period, the highest number of deaths were reported in the states of Bihar & West Bengal. Both these states have recorded over thousand deaths each between 2017 & 2020.
While, the number of deaths in West Bengal have been consistently high in each of these years, the overall numbers of Bihar are skewed with 2017-18 along recording 649 deaths.
Madhya Pradesh reported around 674 deaths in 2019-20, while Kerala & Himachal Pradesh lost more than 400 people each due to floods in 2018-19.
Increase in numbers of Livestock lost and Houses Damaged in 2018-19, while there is a fall in crop area affected
In a response provided in July 2019, the union government states that the measures taken by Central & State governments have improved disaster management and reduced the causalities during natural calamities.
However, the data provided by the government in the same response, provides a contrasting picture. The latest data available for 2019-20 is only an estimate, hence only the information for the three-year period i.e. 2016-19 is considered for the analysis.
States with regular problem of floods lost fewer livestock in the last two years
The inconsistent nature of the occurrence of floods does not present an accurate picture to compare the trends over the years. For example, the increase in the number of livestock deaths in 2018-19, can be attributed to the large-scale floods that occurred in Kerala during that year. Out of the 1.22 lakh livestock deaths, 76.8 thousand deaths were in Kerala. Tamil Nadu which also had severe floods in 2018-19 reported more than 20 thousand livestock deaths. However, in the previous years, these states had significantly fewer deaths making it difficult to  understand effectiveness of disaster management.
However, improvement was observed in the case of Assam & West Bengal – two states which are regularly affected by the floods. The loss of livestock in 2018-19 was significantly less than in previous years in Assam. Similar was the case with West Bengal. Bihar did not report any loss of livestock due to foods in 2018-19, but the trends in previous years do point to a decline.
In most of the other states, the higher numbers are because of a higher number in a single year.
Similar trend observed in the case of Damaged houses
A similar trend was observed in the case of damaged houses, with Kerala & Tamil Nadu reporting a damage of 6.54 lakhs & 5.67 lakhs in 2018-19 out of the total 15.57 lakh houses damaged in that year.
Even the numbers for West Bengal, Bihar & Assam are inconsistent over the years and does not point to any specific trend. The variations in specific states, the severity of flood in those areas etc. makes it a challenging to compare the numbers across the years.
The fall in the area of affected crop land in 2018-19, can be attributed to minimal impact to crop land in the major flood affected states of Kerala & Tamil Nadu that year. Other states which usually are affected by floods did not witness severe floods in 2018-19.
Forecast accuracy falls over the years while the number of forecasts increases
The Central Water Commission (CWC) has established a flood forecasting network across the country. As per the update provided in Lok Sabha in September 2020, there are a total of 328 such network stations. Out of these, 198 are level stations i.e. they provide the forecast for the Villages/Town on the banks of rivers. The remaining 130 are inflow forecast stations for Dams & Barrages.
Bihar, Uttar Pradesh & Assam have the highest number of level stations with 40,39 & 30 respectively. Over the years, the number of forecasts issued by these stations has increased, but there is a fall in the accuracy of these forecasts.
For Level forecasts, if the forecasted level is +/- 0.15 m of actual level, it is considered as correct.  In 2015, 3500 level forecasts were made with an accuracy on 97.97%. In 2019, the number of forecasts increased to 6004, but the accuracy fell to 96.5%.
A much steeper fall in forecast accuracy can be observed in the case of inflow forecasts. In 2015, a total of 572 inflow forecasts issued with an accuracy of 98.25%. By 2019, the number of forecasts issued increased to 3750, but of these only 2678 were accurate forecasts i.e. an accuracy of only 71.41%.  For an inflow forecast, the forecasted inflow needs to be with +/- 20% of the actual inflow attained in the reservoir when the forecast is taken, for it to be considered correct.
In the five years between 2015 & 2019, out of the yearly average of 6,643 forecasts made by flood forecasting network (both level & inflow), a total of 6,157 were within the acceptable deviation i.e. accuracy of 94 %.  However, the accuracy has consistently reduced from 98.01% in 2015 to 86.64% in 2019 while the number of forecasts has increased.
Preparedness for unexpected floods remains a challenge
Recent trends of the last four years  (2016 to 2019) indicate that the major contributor to the loss in human life, livestock and property are the states which experienced unexpected floods during a particular year (as seen in case of Kerala & Tamil Nadu in 2018-19, Rajasthan, West Bengal in 2017-18 etc.).
On the other hand,  there seems to be an improvement in states like Assam, Uttar Pradesh & Bihar which face the problem nearly every year. However, it is too early to deduce any major conclusions based on the numbers of these four years.
The primary responsibility of disaster management lies with the State governments, with the Centre providing the required technical and financial assistance. The Government of India (GOI) launched Flood Management Plan (FMP) to provide financial assistance to State governments for taking up various works – river management, flood control, anti-erosion works etc.
Over the last three years (2017-20), the Central government has released over 2 thousand crores to various states as per the data share in the Lok Sabha.
While the Centre & States seem to be taking  proactive steps in forecasting floods, preventive actions etc. there seems to be a challenge in case of unexpected floods. Inconsistent rainfall, lack of proper drainage etc. results in occurrence of immediate flood situations which the authorities are unable to respond to quickly. These are more prominent in the urban areas.  Further, the decreasing forecast accuracy as observed from the data is also a cause for concern especially with regards to inflow of flood water, as this results in flooding downstream.
While there are larger institutional and policy challenges like – town planning, forest management, drainage development etc. which could help managing the flood situation, better forecast mechanisms could help mitigate the losses in the near term.
Featured Image: Flood Forecast

created: October 27, 2020


text:
Data: Food Security affected 30% of the World Population in 2020
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
July 24, 2021
The ‘2021 State of Food Security & Nutrition in the World’ report’ estimates that around 2.37 billion people did not have access to adequate food during 2020, which is approximately 1/3rd of the global population. The report also estimates that around 720-811 million people in the world faced hunger in 2020.
COVID-19 pandemic had a severe global impact and continues to affect various walks of life. The measures taken by countries to control the spread of infection through lockdowns, quarantines, curfews, etc. have caused a disruption to human & economic activities. Loss of lives & livelihoods, an increase of financial burden, etc. are a direct result of the impact on the economy, that has further pushed marginalized communities into poverty & hunger. The ‘2020 State of Food Security & Nutrition in the Word’ report estimated that the COVID-19 pandemic could push an additional 83 million -132 million into chronic hunger in 2020.
The ‘2021 State of Food Security & Nutrition in the World’ report (SOFI 2021) released on 12 July 2021, provides details on the impact of COVID-19 on food security in the world based on real-time global COVID-19 experience in 2020. In this story, we look at the trends related to ‘Global Food Security & Nutrition’, the initiatives taken by various countries to handle challenges of food security during the pandemic, with a focus on India.
Around 118 million more people are undernourished in 2020
The SOFI 2021 report estimates that around 2.37 billion people did not have access to adequate food during 2020. This is approximately 1/3 of the global population. There is an increase of 320 million people in 2020 alone, who did not have access to adequate food during the year.
While the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 is yet to be fully quantified, SOFI-2021 estimates that around 720-811 million people in the world have faced hunger in 2020. Considering the middle of the projected range it is around 768 million people.  In other words, 118 million more people faced hunger in 2020 compared to 2019. (161 million if the upper limit is considered). Since 2018, there has been a gradual increase in the number of people facing hunger, but the increase is steep in 2020.
The Prevalence of Undernourishment (PoU) has increased to 9.9 % compared to 8.4 % in 2019. PoU is the percentage of the population whose consumption falls below MDER (Minimum Dietary Energy Requirement). PoU is one of the indicators for Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 2.1.1). The estimated steep increase in PoU in 2020 may influence the progress towards achieving the SDG target of ending hunger by 2030.
While the impact is spread across the regions, around 100 million more are affected by hunger in Asia & Africa in 2020
The increase in the number of people who faced hunger in 2020 is across all the regions around the globe. For the first time since the FIES (Food Insecurity Experience Scale) Data is available i.e., 2014, ‘Food Insecurity’ has increased in North America & Europe. These two continents have most of the developed countries in the world. The rise of Food insecurity in even these continents is a reflection of the hunger situation influenced by COVID-19.
Around half of the undernourished population of the world in 2020 are in Asia, while Africa accounts for 1/3rd of the undernourished population in the world. It is estimated that Latin America & Caribbean region has around 60 million of the undernourished population in the world.
However, in terms of the proportion of the population, Africa has a  higher proportion of its population facing hunger in 2020.
While there is a slight increase in the absolute numbers, the stability of PoU in North America, Europe & Oceania indicates their economic stability in providing Food security even during a global pandemic. While on the other end, the steep increase in Africa & Latin America shows the vulnerability of the population living in such impoverished & poor countries.
The concerning factor in the case of Africa is the increase in the ‘Severe’ food insecurity category in 2020. The ‘Food Insecurity’ is categorized as ‘Moderate’ & ‘Severe’. In the case of Asia, the increase in Food Security is mostly in the case of ‘Moderate’ whereas, in Africa, those at a severe level of Food insecurity increased from 21.9% to 25.9%. Latin America has seen an increase in both levels during 2020.
Various factors influenced the rise in ‘Food Insecurity’, now exacerbated by COVID-19
SOFI-2021 report observes that the COVID-19 pandemic has been a key factor driving the increase in food insecurity across the globe. However, this increase cannot only be attributed to the pandemic since there are other factors also which are at play. The report observes that the pandemic-induced economic hardships have aggravated the existing inequalities in access to food. As per World Bank estimates, around 119-124 million people were pushed into extreme poverty in 2020.
The report further quotes other World Bank surveys that point to a decrease in income across both urban & rural households due to the COVID-19 crisis. This fall in incomes has a direct impact on the access to food, and importantly affordability of nutritional diet. Apart from economic slow-downs & downturns, conflict, climate variability & extremes are other factors that have an influence on mitigating hunger & malnutrition.
The report observes that the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on each of the drivers of food systems, thereby aggravating food insecurity. It highlights that the measures taken by governments to counter COVID-19 spread have dealt devastating blows to global food security & nutrition.
Apart from the factors triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic, climatic & environmental factors also had an impact on the food security across the countries.
A combination of these factors had an influence on Food security across the countries.
Estimates for 2021 indicate that all these factors along with COVID-19 have been instrumental in several countries facing food insecurity situations. The number of countries pushed into food insecurity increased because of each of these factors.
Continued assistance by Governments’ key in ensuring ‘Food Security’ in respective countries
SOFI-2021 report observes that there has been an unprecedented response by respective governments worldwide to implement social protection measures. However, the speed of implementation, coverage, duration of the social protection responses has varied across regions and countries. This has resulted in varied effectiveness of these measures in addressing poverty & food insecurity during the pandemic.
The report also highlights certain studies which stated that a majority of the assistance programs are short-lived with the average support lasting just over 3 months. Around 40 % of the programs consisted of one-time payments.
India has reported the second-highest number of COVID-19 cases and the impact of the pandemic is multifold. The nationwide lockdown at the beginning of the first wave between March & May 2020, and the varying levels of restrictive measures by States during the second wave between April & May 2021, have resulted in an immense strain on the economy of the country leading to job losses, loss of income, etc.
The Union government & the respective State governments have responded by providing assistance in various forms. Many such measures announced by the government were highlighted in our earlier stories. The measures include:
Responding to a question in the Lok Sabha, the government reiterated the measures taken by the Union government to ensure food security during the COVID-19 crisis under Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana (PMGKY) & Atma Nirbhar Bharat Program.
Under PMGKY, additional 5 kgs of food grains per person per month were provided under ‘Targeted PDS’ to around 80 crore persons. As per the government’s response, the migrants stranded between the States were provided 5 kgs of food grains per person per month for May & June 2020.  The assistance provided during COVID-19 is beyond the food security extended by the government as part of NFSA -2013 (National Food Security Act-2013).
In another response provided in Lok Sabha on 09 February 2021, the Union Government highlighted the impact of NFSA in ensuring Food security in the country.
The SOFI-2021 report and the data available with FAO (Food & Agricultural Organization) provides the country-wise data for 2020, to understand the impact on food security during the pandemic. As per the available data, the prevalence of undernourishment in India was 15.3% during 2018-20 compared to 21.6% in 2004-06. This indicates that initiatives like NFSA have been effective to an extent in providing food security.
However, as highlighted earlier, South Asia has been the major contributor to the increase in PoU in Asia during 2020 compared to 2019, when it increased from 13.3% in 2019 to 15.8% in 2020.
To deal with the second wave of COVID-19 in the country, the Union government approved the allocation of free foodgrains for a period of 5 months (July to November 2021) at 5 kg per person per month for about 81 crore beneficiaries.
Featured Image: 2021 State of Food Security & Nutrition in the World Report


text:
Data: For the First Time in Ten Years, Gross FDI Inflows Fell in 2022-23
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
June 9, 2023
In the last decade or so, India has become one of the attractive destinations for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). Data indicates that in 2022-23, the gross FDI inflows fell by 16% in 2022-23 compared to 2021-22. On the other hand, net FDI inflows fell by 27% in 2022-23.
In the last decade or so, India has become one of the attractive destinations for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). Liberalized investment norms, elimination of regulatory barriers, low cost of labour, diversification of market and similar other factors are behind the renewed interest for FDI in India. However, the FDI inflows for the fiscal year 2022-23 have fallen for the first time in the last decade. The global economic outlook and the uncertainties vis-à-vis geopolitical tensions are some of the pull factors behind the fall in FDI inflows.
In this context, we look into some of the trends in FDI inflows to India.
What goes into FDI?
Understanding FDI and its components is crucial to analyse the potential impact of the flow of capital. FDI primarily has three components- Equity capital, Re-invested capital, and other capital generally being intra-company loans or debts.
The equity component could be via government route through SIA (Secretariat of Industrial Alliance) or FIFP (Foreign Investment Facilitation Portal, which was earlier known as the Foreign Investment Promotion Board, FIPB)/ RBI’s Automatic Route/ Acquisition Route or through Equity Capital of unincorporated bodies.
FDI flows can be both inward and outward.  The cumulative sum of equity, reinvested earnings and other capital gives the Gross inflows of FDI.  The outflow of FDI could be either in the form of outbound FDI or disinvestment/repatriation. Disinvestment refers to the withdrawal or pulling out of direct investment.
The true level of FDI inflows is measured on a net basis. The net FDI inflows is the gross FDI inflows minus the disinvestment/repatriation. In simpler terms,
Net FDI inflows = Gross FDI – outbound FDI – Repatriation/disinvestment
Gross FDI falls for the first time, declined by 16% in 2022-23
The gross FDI declined for the first time in the last decade. A major contributor to this decline is the equity through the government/automatic/acquisition route. The re-invested earnings saw minimal positive growth while the equity and other capital also saw a major decline in 2022-23. On a yearly basis, the gross FDI fell by 16% in 2022-23 as compared to 2021-22. Prior to this, the gross FDI recorded positive growths of 3%, 10% and 20% in the last three consecutive fiscal years.
Net FDI fell by 27% in 2022-23, recording its second consecutive decline.
Despite the pandemic’s impact, gross FDI inflows increased between 2019–20 and 2021–22; however, net inflows decreased mostly due to repatriation or disinvestment by direct investors. The net FDI declined from USD 44 billion in 2020-21 to USD 38.6 billion in 2021-22, registering a decline of 12%. During 2022-23, it further declined by 27%, settling at USD 28 billion. While the decline in gross FDI is behind such a fall in net FDI, the disinvestment/repatriation proceeds have also grown during the last four fiscal years.
In 2021-22, the decline in net FDI is primarily due to FDI investments by India, whereas in 2022-23, it is mainly due to a fall in gross FDI.
Widening gap between net and gross FDI.
Gross FDI is more volatile than the net FDI and in the last ten years, the net FDI inflows has started to diverge from the gross FDI inflows. In fact, while the gross FDI has risen between 2016-2017 and 2017-2018, the net FDI has fallen in the same period. This is also the case with 2021-22.
An evaluation of relative movements of the net and gross FDI for the last decade reveal that the gap between them is widening. It grew by more than 230% from 13.89 billion USD in 2012-13 to 46.2 billion USD in 2021-22. During 2022-23, the gap fell by 7%, reaching to 42.9 billion USD.
Computer software and hardware remains the top sector attracting FDI Equity inflows.
A comparison of different sectors attracting equity FDI inflows shows that computer software and hardware is the top sector attracting the highest FDI equity inflows, followed by the services sector, and trading sector. Together, these three sectors account for almost half of the total FDI equity inflows. The share of these sectors grew from 33% in 2016-17 to a record highest of 56% during 2020-21. It fell to 49% in 2022-23.
In 2020-21, the computer software and hardware sector received its highest-ever FDI equity inflow in the last decade, most likely due to COVID-19. Its share gradually reduced during the next two fiscal years. In contrast, the share of the service sector in absolute terms fell in 2020-21, thereafter which it improved.
Mauritius, Singapore, and USA account for 60% of the total FDI Equity inflow
Mauritius remains the largest source of FDI equity inflows into India, accounting for more than a quarter of the total FDI equity inflows from April 2000 to March 2023. It is followed by Singapore with a share of 23.4%, and the United States of America with a share of 9.5% during the same period. Favourable tax regulations and lower tax rates are some of the primary reasons behind the top contributions from these nations. The amount of FDI received from the source nations is also dependent on the tax treaties between the nations.


text:
Data: Foreign Tourist Arrivals in 2021 reach the lowest in decades while NRI arrivals improve
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
October 14, 2022
As per the recently released India Tourism Statistics 2022, the Foreign Tourist Arrivals (FTA) in 2021 were the lowest in decades while the NRI arrivals improved on account of resumption of regular flight traffic. The number of FTA in 2021 was 15.2 lakhs, less than one-seventh of the same in 2019.
The Tourism sector accounted for 10% of the global GDP and provided employment to over 320 million people prior to the outbreak of COVID-19. The unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic severely affected the tourism sector worldwide, as countries resorted to unprecedented lockdowns & movement restrictions. All activities related to tourism such as eateries, aviation, hospitality, were drastically hit by the pandemic making 2020 and 2021 the most challenging years for the sector. The livelihoods and employment of millions across the globe were significantly affected. The UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) estimated a loss of USD 4 trillion to global GDP in 2020 and 2021 due to the losses incurred in the sector.
The situation in India is no different. The tourism sector is estimated to have directly contributed 2.7% to the GDP and 6.7% to the employment of the country in 2019-20. Including indirect contribution, the sector contributed to 5.2% of GDP and 15.3% of employment. According to the National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER)’s study published in September 2021, the tourism economy or  Tourism Direct GVA (TDGVA) fell by 42.8% in Q1 of 2020-21, 15.5% in Q2, and 1.1% in Q3. On the other hand, the overall economy fell by 20.1% in Q1, 5.1% in Q2, and grew at a positive rate of 4.3% in Q3. The study also estimated that as many as 14.5 million jobs were lost during Q1 of 2020-21 out of an estimated 34.8 million active jobs during the pre-pandemic period of 2019. Further, it also observed that the wage income fell by 41.6% in Q1 while non-wage income, that is, the income of the self-employed or business owners nosedived by 124.4%.
India Tourism Statistics 2022 was released recently
On World Tourism Day, 2022, Vice President of India Jagdeep Dhankhar released the ‘India Tourism Statistics 2022’ which provides data on key indicators related to the tourism sector for the calendar year 2021. Before looking at the statistics to understand the impact of the pandemic on the sector, some of the key terms used in this report & their definition are given below.
Foreign Tourists Arrivals (FTA): This refers to the number of arrivals of foreign tourists/visitors to India, and not the number of persons. For instance, if a person visits India more than once, each arrival is counted as a new arrival.
Foreign Tourist Visits (FTV): This is the number of foreign tourists who visit a State/UT.
Domestic Tourist Visits (DTV): This refers to the number of domestic tourists visiting a particular State/UT.
The data on Foreign and Domestic Tourist Visits is collated at the state level. It is seen that FTV is always greater than FTA as a foreign tourist might visit multiple states/UTs.
FTA in 2021 was the lowest in the last 3 decades
The FTA increased from 63.1 lakhs in 2011 to 109.3 lakhs or 1.09 crores in 2019, registering an increase of 89% in nine years. The FTA crossed 1 crore in 2017 and continued to increase until 2019. Despite touching an all-time high in 2019, the travel restrictions due to the pandemic resulted in the lowest FTA in India in 2021 since 1991. In 2020, the FTA dropped to 27.4 lakhs, a decrease of almost 75% as compared to 2019, and it dropped even further by 44.5% in 2021 to 15.2 lakhs despite relaxation in travel regulations and vaccination. In short, FTA in 2021 was roughly only one-seventh of what it was in 2019. To get a clearer picture, FTA recorded in India in the whole of 2021 was 15.2 lakhs whereas, in the month of December 2019 alone, the FTA recorded was nearly 12.3 lakhs.
US, UK, and Bangladesh were the source of 55% of the FTAs in 2021
The top 15 countries together contributed to 81% of the total FTA in India in 2021. More than 28% of the FTAs in 2021 were from the US, followed by 15.8% from Bangladesh, and 10.7% from the United Kingdom. In 1981, the three countries together were the source of 30.5% of the FTA which has continuously increased over the decades. In 2015, the 3 countries accounted for 40% of the FTA which has almost touched 55% in 2021. Until 2013, UK and US had more FTA than Bangladesh. However, in 2014, Bangladesh overtook the UK, and in 2016, it overtook the US. In 2021, FTA from the US was more than from Bangladesh. The FTA of the US in 2021 had dropped to 2003 levels, while that of Bangladesh and the UK had dropped to below 1991 levels.
In 2021, the fourth highest share of FTA was that of Canada with 5.3% followed by Nepal with 3.4%. Afghanistan, Australia, and the European countries of Germany, Portugal, and France had a share of around 2% each. Maldives, Sri Lanka, Russia, Iraq, and the Netherlands contributed below 2% each in 2021. The share of FTA from these 15 countries was 49.6% in 1981 which increased to 75.1% in 2019 and 81% in 2021.
Arrivals of NRIs increased by 52.6% in 2021 compared to 2020
The number of arrivals of Non- Resident Indians (NRIs) was around 54.3 lakhs in 2014 which had increased to 69.8 lakhs in 2019. In 2020, the number dropped to 35.9 lakhs, nearly half of that in 2019. Unlike in the case of FTAs, the NRI arrivals had increased by 52.6% to 54.8 lakhs in 2021, higher than that recorded in 2014. This could be because of the relaxation of travel rules and the opening of international borders to regular flights in 2021 which enabled NRIs visit their hometown after more than a year.
FTV dropped to 10.5 lakhs in 2021, lowest in decades
The Foreign Tourist Visits (FTV) increased from 182.6 lakhs in 2012 to 314.1 lakhs or 3.14 crores in 2019, an increase of 72% in the eight-year period. However, this number dropped by 77.2% in 2020 to reach 71.7 lakh because of the pandemic. In 2021, it dropped even further by 85.29% to 10.5 lakhs. This is the lowest in more than three decades. In 1991, the FTV was 31.46 lakhs.
On the other hand, Domestic Tourist Visits (DTV) witnessed an increase from 8,645 lakhs in 2011 to 23,219 lakhs in 2019, an increase of 2.7 times in 9 years. This growth was reversed by the pandemic when the DTV dropped by 73.7% in 2020. The DTV was 6,102 lakhs in 2020, the lowest since 2009. However, in contrast to the trend witnessed in the case of FTV, DTV climbed by 11% in 2021 to 6,776.3 lakhs.
UNWTO noted that domestic tourism has been growing since the pandemic
This trend in FTV and DTV is in line with global trends. According to the UN World Tourism Organization’s impact assessment of the pandemic on international tourism, domestic tourism has shown positive signs in many markets as people are exhibiting the tendency to travel closer by opting for ‘staycations’ or vacations close to home. Domestic tourism and travel close to home, as well as open-air activities, nature-based products and rural tourism are among the major travel trends that will continue shaping tourism in 2022, states the report.
The report also noted that international travel dropped by 72% in 2020 calling 2020 the worst year on record for tourism. The year witnessed 1.1 billion fewer international tourists worldwide putting the number of travellers back to levels of 30 years ago. Though there was a 5% increase in 2021, international arrivals were still 71% below the pre-pandemic year of 2019. It also added that the economic contribution of tourism in 2021 was estimated at USD 1.9 trillion up from USD 1.6 trillion in 2020, but still well below the pre-pandemic value of USD 3.5 trillion.
India’s foreign exchange earnings (FEE) from tourism between 2011 and 2019 saw a steady increase, crossing Rs. 2 lakh crores for the first time in 2019. In 2020, there was a significant drop to Rs. 50,136 crores. In 2021, the FEE registered a growth of 29.8% to reach Rs. 65,070 crores.
Inbound tourism will catch up to pre-pandemic levels only by 2026-27 or even later
According to the NCAER study cited earlier, it is expected that the tourism economy, in terms of tourism expenditure, will get back to the pre-pandemic level by 2024-25 and domestic tourism will help achieve this. With respect to inbound tourism, the pre-pandemic level will be reached only by 2026-27 in the assumed optimistic scenario (when more people are likely to travel, and conditions are favourable for inbound tourism). This can take even longer if things don’t go as assumed.
Meanwhile, the central government’s recent decision to discontinue the e-Tourist Visa facility for the UK and Canadian nationals (which are among the top source countries for tourists in India) has raised concerns that the travel and tourism industry in India will be further affected.
Featured Image: Foreign Tourist Arrivals in India

created: October 14, 2022


text:
Forest Cover in India increased by 22000 sq.km between 2011 & 2021
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
January 29, 2022
The ‘India State of Forest Report (ISFR)’ for the year 2021 was released recently by the Forest Survey of India (FSI). The total forest cover & tree cover in India is about 24.62% of the geographical area, much less than the 33% target set to be achieved by 2022. Between 2011 & 2021, the total forest cover increased by about 21,762 sq. km, roughly the size of the state of Mizoram.
Recently, the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change released the biennial ‘India State of Forest Report (ISFR) ’ for the year 2021 prepared by the Forest Survey of India (FSI) that assesses the forest and tree resources of the country periodically. The status of forest cover, tree cover, estimates of growing stock, the extent of trees outside forests, mangrove cover, bamboo resources, forest carbon stock, and forest fire monitoring are presented in the report. The first ISFR was published in the year 1987 and ISFR 2021 is the 17th report in the series.
Released the Forest Survey Report.
In 2021, the total forest and tree cover in India is 80.9 million hectares, which is 24.62% of the geographical area of the country.
Encouraging to note that 17 states/UTs have above 33% of the geographical area under forest cover. pic.twitter.com/lGgCuMqB7X
The findings of the report are mainly used for policy formulation, planning and management of forests and investments affecting forestry, and by researchers & students. The information in these reports is a source of input for global level inventories, and international reporting to organizations such as the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and for various conventions & commitments like the United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change (UNFCCC), and Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) to which India is a signatory.
FSI uses satellite data, digital analysis, and ground-truthing for assessing the forest cover mapping
The methodology adopted for the assessment of forest cover has been subjected to regular improvements over time. Satellite data is used by the Forest Survey of India for assessing the forest cover in the country. In the latest report, information has been compiled using mid-resolution Satellite data based on interpretation of LISS-III data from Indian Remote Sensing satellite data (Resourcesat-II) with a spatial resolution of 23.5 meters with the scale of interpretation 1:50,000 to monitor forest cover and forest cover changes at District, State, and National level. Ever since the first publication, there has been significant improvement in the scale and resolution of data. The interpretation of data has also gradually shifted from visual to digital.
Analysts with a good understanding of the topography, forests, and land-use-related aspects of the area, work on the satellite data for classifying the forest areas as per the adopted definitions. Following the interpretation of satellite data, extensive ground verification of the data is carried out which takes more than six months that helps in the classification of forest cover patches into the different canopy density categories. The necessary corrections are made based on the ground verification. Moreover, information from other collateral sources has also been used to improve the accuracy of the interpreted image.
The report has the inherent limitations of remote sensing data which affects the accuracy of the forest cover mapping. For instance, the land cover with less than 23.5m dimensions, young plants with less chlorophyll, or inadequate foliage need not get captured by the satellite. At the same time, cloud cover & shadows, and haze affect the interpretation. Furthermore, agricultural crops like sugarcane and cotton, and weeds like lantana within forest areas also affect the interpretation.
Forest cover in tiger reserves & mapping of climatic hotspots over India’s forest cover has been included in the 2021 report
Besides the status of forest cover, tree cover, estimates of growing stock, the extent of trees outside forests, forest fire monitoring, mangrove cover, and bamboo resources, in the latest 2021 report, the Forest Survey of India has included a new chapter related to the decadal assessment of the change in forest cover in the Tiger Reserves, Corridors and Lion conservation area of India, which helps in assessing the impact of conservation measures and management interventions that have been implemented over the years.
Additionally, the Forest Survey of India has collaborated with the Birla Institute of Technology & Science (BITS – Pilani), for a study based on ‘Mapping of Climate Change Hotspots in Indian Forests’ to map the climatic hotspots over the forest cover in India, using computer model-based projection of temperature and rainfall data in the years 2030, 2050 and 2085. This has also been included in the 2021 report.
Forest cover is calculated based on canopy and area, while forest area concerns the legal status
To gain a clear understanding of the status of forests and the findings of the report, it is important to understand the definitions of the terms such as forest cover, forest area, and tree cover.
Forest Cover – The term forest cover refers to the extent of land area that is covered by forest resources in the country. In the report, ‘forest cover’ includes all the land in the country, the area of which is more than 1 hectare, where the density of tree canopy is greater than 10%.
It should be noted that no distinction is made here on the grounds of land ownership, legal status, land use, ecosystem, or the type of trees. The green cover recorded by satellites as forest cover may be tree orchards, bamboos, palms and coconut trees, canal-side plantations, rubber, tea, and coffee plantations, which may be occurring in recorded forests, or government lands, or private community, meeting the aforesaid criteria. All such forest cover is considered for the calculation.
Meanwhile, those stretches of land which may be legally notified as forest by the government but do not have adequate green canopy may be omitted from the assessment whereas the dense foliage in private land may be covered in the assessment.
Recorded Forest Area – Those geographical areas are recorded as forests as per government records such as Reserved Forests, Protected Forests, and unclassified forests as mentioned under the provisions of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 or counterpart State Acts or local laws for governance is referred to as Forest Area. Unlike the definition of forest cover, forest area takes into consideration the legal status of the land. Those areas which may be classified as ‘Forest’ in the government revenue records may be blank, with tree canopy less than 10% such as wetlands, rivers, degraded lands, grasslands, glaciers, and cold deserts are covered in the ambit of Recorded Forest Area.
Tree Cover – The small patches of trees and isolated trees which are less than one hectare in area and outside Recorded Forest Areas refer to Tree Cover while Trees Outside Forest (TOF) refer to all trees outside Recorded Forest Areas irrespective of the size of the patch.
India set a target to bring one-third of its geographical area under forest or tree cover by 2022
Under the National Forest Policy 1988, India has set a target of bringing one-third or 33% of its geographical area under forest cover or tree cover. This is also one of the targets enlisted in NITI Aayog’s Strategy for New India @ 75 released in 2018 for achievement by 2022. However, according to the ISFR 2021, India’s total forest and tree cover is 8.09 lakh sq. km. (24.62%). India’s total forest cover is close to 7.14 lakh sq. km. (21.71% of India’s geographical area) while the tree cover is estimated to be 95,748 sq. km. (2.91%). In other words, India still has a long way to go before achieving the target set under the National Forest Policy in 1988.
Forest cover, roughly the size of Mizoram, has been added in the past decade
In the past decade, the forest cover in India has steadily gone up from 6.92 lakh sq. km. in 2011, to almost 7.14 lakh sq. km by 2021, recording an increase of about 21,762 sq. km in 10 years, or about 3.14%. This increase is roughly the size of the state of Mizoram. Similarly, the tree cover in the country has also witnessed a gradual increase over the last decade, from 90,844 sq. km. in 2011 to 95,748 sq. km in 2021, an increase of 4,904 sq. km (5.4%). However, the Forest Area in the country has more or less been around the 7.7 lakh sq. km mark between 2011 & 2021.
This increase in forest cover and tree cover may be attributed to the increase in tree plantations such as eucalyptus and orchards, and not because of the increase in the pristine forests which serve the ecological purpose. In the subsequent story, we would look at the individual states and analyse what has contributed to the increase in forest cover over the years.
Featured Image: Forest Cover in India

created: January 29, 2022


text:
Data: Fourfold increase in the number of Surrendered LIC policies in 2021-22
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
September 2, 2022
Life Insurance policies are usually surrendered in emergency situations when the policyholders need money or cannot afford the premium payment. Data of surrendered claims from the Insurers indicates that there is a fourfold increase in the number of surrendered claims in 2021-22 in the case of LIC.
A ‘Life Insurance’ policy (LIP) provides financial security to the immediate kin in case of death. It also provides financial support after the maturity of the policy. There are various LIPs offered by organizations that provide additional benefits during and post the policy period.  Hence, apart from providing financial security in the aftermath of a death, a LIP also acts as a savings plan as the Income Tax act also allows for the deduction of the insurance premium up to a certain limit.
While the intent of taking an insurance policy is that it comes to rescue in case of emergency, there could be situations where-in the policyholder intends to surrender or withdraw from the policy. The reasons could include the inability to pay premiums, the requirement of money due to emergencies, the shortfall in financial resources for survival, etc. Life Insurers provide the option to surrender the policy and claim the benefits, subject to certain agreed terms & conditions.
At a macro level, trends in new policy subscriptions, and surrender act as proxy indicators of the state of the economy, especially the status of insured households.  In this context, we look at the trends in ‘Surrendered’ or ‘With-drawn’ Life Insurance Policies over the last 10 years and analyse the correlation if any with various factors that could have influenced these trends.
The data is sourced from the Public Disclosures by the Life Insurance companies as available with the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI). There are 24 Life Insurance Companies in India that are authorised to provide Life Insurance Policy services, including Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC). For this analysis, we have considered top-10 life insurers in terms of surrendered policies.
Increase in the surrendered claims in recent years across most companies
“L-7- Benefits Paid Schedule” from the Public Disclosures of Life Insurers provides details of the benefits paid out by the companies through various policies. Apart from the benefits related to matured claims, claims on death, etc, the information also includes the benefits paid for surrendered or withdrawn policy claims.
There is a huge variance in the total value of the policies surrendered across the insurers, with few of them holding the major share in the market. Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) is the Public Life Insurer in the country and also the largest life insurer. This is also reflected in the quantum life insurance policies surrendered.
In 2013-14, the total value paid out by LIC for surrendered policies was Rs. 59.63 thousand crores. This reduced in the ensuing two years, followed by a year-on-year increase from 2016-17. The highest annual increase was in 2018-19 and 2021-22.
Among the Private insurers, ICICI Prudential, HDFC Standard & SBI Life are among the largest Life Insurance companies. These three insurers show varying trends over the past 10 years (2012-13 to 2021-22), but a common trend is the higher increase in the pay-out of surrendered policies in the year 2021-22.
ICICI Prudential paid out Rs. 20.4 thousand crores in 2021-22, compared to Rs. 16.2 thousand crores in 2020-21. However, unlike LIC, there was a fall during 2018-19, which broke a three-year increasing trend in the benefits paid for surrenders.
HDFC reported an exponential increase in the benefits paid from Rs. 8.86 thousand crores in 2020-21 to Rs. 13.7 thousand crores in 2021-22. In the case of SBI Life, it increased from Rs. 8.43 thousand crores to Rs.11.24 thousand crores during the same period.
A similar increase for 2021-22 is observed in most of the other insurers. India First Life, a comparatively smaller life insurer has a manifold increase in the pay-out for surrenders from Rs. 19.75 crores to Rs. 2.98 thousand crores between 2012-13 & 2021-22. Meanwhile, other Life insurers like Aviva and Reliance Nippon reported a considerable decline in the value of benefits paid out for surrenders. While these along with Bharti AXA, and Star Union Dai-Chi have had a lower surrender benefit in recent years, there is a visible increase seen during 2016-17 to the 2018-19 period.
While the trends across individual insurers vary, two specific trends were observed across most of the insurers. There is a higher increase in the value of benefits paid by the insurers post-COVID-19 pandemic i.e., after 2019-20. Prior to that, there is an increase in the surrendered benefits paid, during & post-2016-17. This could be an after-effect of Demonetisation. In the case of a few insurers, the increase is observed even prior to that, especially during 2014-15.
A fourfold increase in the number of Surrender Claims for LIC
While the value of the surrendered and withdrawn claims is influenced by various factors like the age of the policy surrendered, the value of the policy, the actual payout of the life insurer, etc, the number of claims surrendered provides a better understanding of the trend.
As was the case in the total value of benefits paid out for surrenders, there is an increase in the number of surrendered claims post the pandemic, especially in 2021-22. This is more evident in the case of LIC. While there is a considerable increase in the value of benefits paid by LIC for the surrendered claims in 2021-22, there is an exponential increase in the number of claims. In 2020-21, a total of 53.35 lakh surrendered claims were settled by LIC, which increased to 2.12 crores during 2021-22.
The Statement of Claims Data (L-40) submitted by the Life Insurers indicates an increase in the number of surrendered claims settled by a few of them during 2021-22.  In the case of the HDFC standard, it increased from 1.44 lakh claims in 2020-21 to 3.34 lakh claims in 2021-22. So is the case with Max Life.
However, in the case of ICICI, there was a fall in the number of cases settled in 2021-22, with 3.2 lakh surrendered claims compared to 5.26 lakh in 2020-21. It ought to be noted that the number of surrendered claims in 2019-20 and 2020-21 is in contrast to the declining trend in the number of surrendered claims for ICICI Prudential. Meanwhile, as highlighted earlier, there is an increase in the value of these claims during this period. The same is the case with SBI life, which reported a decreasing number of surrendered claims settled over the years.
Most of the insurers had an increase in the number of surrendered claims settled during 2016-17 & 2017-18, irrespective of the prevailing trend. Data across the life insurers indicated that nearly most of the surrendered claims received are settled.
Increasing trend of Average value per claim settled
The average value per claim is derived by dividing the total paid value of the surrendered claims by the total surrendered claims paid in the year by the respective insurers. Barring a few exceptions, a common trend that is observed across the life insurers is the increase in the average value per claim over the years.
In the case of LIC, it was Rs.70.6 thousand in 2012-13 which increased to Rs. 1.5 lakhs in 2020-21. In 2021-22, it fell to Rs. 44.76 thousand. The exponential increase in the number of surrendered claims in 2021-22 seems to have reduced the average value. While there could be various factors influencing this and there are no clear reasons highlighted, certain observations can be made. The increase in the average value over the years across most of the Life Insurers could be due to the increase in value of the surrendered claims due to a higher ageing of the policy or the higher value of the policy itself.
The fall in the value in the case of LIC could be due to a high number of new policyholders surrendering their policy due to the prevailing situation. However, this is not so evident in the case of Private insurers. The impact of COVID-19 could have been more pronounced in the case of households with lower earnings which is reflected in the huge increase in the number of surrendered LIC policies.
The trends for surrendered claims are influenced by various factors and is not entirely possible to zero down on specific reasons for these trends. However, certain broad influencing factors could be highlighted. One major influencing factor could be the economic slowdown resulting in the surrender of policies by households with lower earnings, especially in the case of LIC policyholders.  The years in the aftermath of Demonetisation, as well as the COVID-19 pandemic, reported an increase in surrender claims.
Featured Image: Surrendered LIC policies.

created: September 2, 2022


text:
Data: Share of Female Workers Fell in IT/BPO & Financial Services While Total Employment Increased by 3.5 Lakh as per 4th QES
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
October 17, 2022
The fourth edition of the Quarterly Employment Survey (QES) for the period January to March 2022 was released recently by the government. While the total employment increased by 3.5 lakhs compared to the previous quarter, data indicated that the share of female employees fell in IT/BPO & Financial Services sectors.
The Ministry of Labour & Employment recently released ‘Fourth Round of Quarterly Employment Survey’ (QES) report.  The report is for the January 2022 to March 2022 period. The first round of this report covered the period of April 2021 to June 2021. This report is part of the All-India Quarterly Establishment based Employment Survey (AQEES).
AQEES aims to provide quarterly updates about employment related parameters across selected 9 sectors from non-farm economy. As per the 6 Economic Census (EC), these 9 sectors account for around 85% of the total employment in non-farm units with 10 or more workers. Therefore, the trends in employment across these sectors are expected to be indicative of the larger employment scenario of the economy. The nine (9) sectors are- Manufacturing, Construction, Trade, Transport, Education, Health, Accommodation & Restaurants, Information Technology (IT) & Business Process Outsourcing (BPO), and Financial Services.
Factly’s analysis of the earlier rounds of QES can be read here – Q1, Q2 & Q3.
Information collected for 10.9 thousand units out of 12 thousand allotted samples
A total of 12,038 units were selected for the survey based on ‘Stratified Simple Random Sampling’. These units remain the same across the different rounds of QES.  Out of these units that were selected as sample, 11,732 establishments were visited as part of the 4 round of survey. However, out of these, 823 units were found either closed or non-existing. Therefore, the information was collected from only 10.9 thousand units. Even among these units, 52 units were found to be outside the coverage of the survey.  The total number of units visited in the earlier three rounds of QES were 10,867, 11,503 & 11,612 respectively.
As was the case with Q3, the number of units for which samples were collected for the sectors – Construction, IT/BPO & Financial Services in Q4 is lower than those surveyed in Q2. This also implies a lesser coverage in the survey in these sectors compared to the allocated sample units for the respective sectors.
Estimated total employment increased by 3.5 lakhs in Q4, with IT/BPO sector being the main contributor
As per the survey, the total estimated work force in Q4 was 3.18 crores across 5.31 lakh establishments.  This is 3.5 lakhs more than the Q3 figure, where in the estimated work force was 3.145 crores in slightly higher number of establishments. The increase is smaller compared to Q3, where in 4.5 lakh workforce was added compared to Q2.
There is a fall in the number of workers estimated to be working in the Manufacturing sector, which employs the highest number of workers.  In Q4, an estimated 1.22 crores workers were engaged in this sector, while in Q3 it was nearly 1.24 crores i.e., around 1.45 lakh more than the Q4 estimation for those working in manufacturing sector.
Despite the fall in the number of workers in this major sector, the overall increase in the estimated workforce is due to the increase in IT/BPO sector. In Q3, the estimated workforce in this sector was 34.56 lakhs across 4650 establishments. This increased to 38.31 lakhs across 4719 establishments in Q4.  The Health Sector is estimated to have added around 0.94 lakhs to its workforce during Q4. The proportionate change in other sectors is lesser, with a fall in estimated workforce in Education and Construction sectors. The share of employees in Manufacturing out of the total estimated work force fell by 0.9% while it increased by 1% for IT/BPO sector.
An increase in the Proprietary ownership among IT/BPO establishments
The share of different types of ownership of the establishments surveyed remained nearly the same during Q4. The greatest proportion of the ownership is proprietary with 29.97%, followed by Private Ltd. Ownership, which is 21.3%. Another 20.6% of the establishments surveyed were categorised as Government/PSUs.
The proportion of ownerships is varied and differs from sector to sector. Manufacturing units have 42.7% of ownership as Propriety, while 35.2% are Private Ltd. Companies, and 14.75% is in the form of Partnerships.  Other sectors which have a higher proportion of their ownership as Proprietary include Trade, and Accommodation & Restaurants.
In the case of Education establishments, 43% are Government/PSUs while 31.8% are run as Non-Profit Institutions. Health Sector also has a significant share of ownership as Government/ PSUs, and NGOs. However, the highest proportion of ownership is Proprietary with 31.7%.
Construction, Trade, Transport sectors are among those with a major portion of the establishments as Private Ltd. Companies. The highest share though is in the case of IT/BPOs with 79.8% of the ownership as Private Ltd. While the share of ownership across the sectors has largely remained same in Q4 compared to Q3, there is a sizeable increase in the share of Proprietary ownership for IT/BPOs from 11.7% in Q3 to 14.7% in Q4, while there is a fall in the share of Private Ltd. ownership.
In case of Financial Institutions, ownership of majority of them is categorised as Government/ PSUs, with a sizeable share of Private ownership & as Cooperative societies. Uniquely, this sector also has a considerable portion of ownership categorised as “others including SHGs.”
Fall in share of Female workers in IT/BPO & Financial Services sectors
The share of female workers in the estimated workforce slightly increased from 31.59% in Q3 to 31.77% in Q4. The share of female workers varies across the sectors. It is the least in Transport Sector, with Females being around 12.46% of the estimated workforce.  Manufacturing sector, which has the highest share of estimated employees has female workforce at 22.08%.
Construction, Accommodation & Restaurants and Trade are the other sectors, where-in the share of female employees is less than a quarter of the total. Each of the sectors except for Health Sector has more male employees. In Health Sector, Females make up 51.99% of the total. Education, Financial Services & IT/BPO sectors also have a better share of female employees.
While the share of females has improved in most of the sectors in Q4, there is fall in IT/BPO and Financial services sectors compared to Q3. In Q3, females made-up 38.7% of the workforce, but in Q4 they constitute 35.8% in the IT/BPO sector. Similarly, in case of financial services sector, it fell from 42.23% to 41.02%.
The share of self-employed females fell to 0.63% in Q4, compared to 0.76% in the previous quarter. There has been an overall fall in those who are self-employed from 2.1% to 1.96%.
One of the significant figures in Q3 was that self-employed females in Financial Services with 8.44% which fell to 5.67% in Q4.
Increase in the share of Regular Employees in Q4
Q3 marked an increase in the share of Contractual and Fixed term employees in total estimated workforce. However, in Q4, there is an increase in the share of regular employees. They constituted 85.33% of the estimated workforce in Q3, which increased to 86.42% in Q4.
The increase in Regular employment is seen in most of the sectors, with IT/BPO being the most prominent. During Q3, regular employees constituted 86.3% of the estimated workforce in this sector. This increased to 94.69% in Q4. There was a fall in the share of contractual employees, but a steeper fall was for those employees on a fixed term. Their share fell from 7.85% to 0.02%.
Nearly 10% of the vacancies in Manufacturing sector are due to non-availability of required skilled workers
The number of available reported vacancies fell in Q4 compared to previous quarter. As per the latest QES, around 1.51 lakh vacancies were reported compared to 1.85 lakhs in Q3.  Out of these vacancies, 80.1% of them are in the process of being filled up, 15% of positions are vacant since there need is now not felt and another 3.95 % of vacancies are not filled due to non-availability of those with required skills.
Vacancy due to this reason is especially high for Manufacturing sector, where-in 9.83% of the vacancies are not filled up due to non-availability of requisite skilled workers. In case of trade sector, it is 6%, Accommodation/Restaurants around 4% and Education 3.43%.  Vacancies because the need is not felt now is especially high in Q4 compared to previous quarters. It increased to 15% in Q4 from 6.28% in Q3.
Featured Image: Quarterly Employment Survey

created: October 17, 2022


text:
Data: From 2019-20 Levels, Number of Chinese Students in USA Down 22% in 2021-22 While the Number of Indian Students Back to Pre-Pandemic Levels
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
November 22, 2022
The Open Doors Report-2022 was released recently. The report provides data on places of origin, sources of financial support, fields of study, host institutions, academic level, and rates of growth of the international student population in the USA. The data for 2021-22 indicates that the number of Chinese Students in USA is down 22% while the number of Indian Students is back to pre-pandemic levels.
The Open Doors Report on International Education Exchange is a definitive annual survey that provides comprehensive information and data on international students studying in the United States of America (USA). The report, funded by the US Department of State, also provides data on places of origin, sources of financial support, fields of study, host institutions, academic level, and rates of growth of the international student population in the USA. The report also provides information on the economic impact of international students on the state where they study and the country in general. The data from the report is used by US Embassies, the Departments of State, Commerce, and Education, and other federal, state, and local organizations for policy decisions. The Open Doors Report -2022 was released recently on 14 November 2022, during International Education Week. The 2022 data provides insights into the enrolment of international students in the USA for education after the pandemic and related restrictions subsided.
The number of international students in the US has increased by 4% in 2021-22, still much less than the pre-pandemic years
As per the latest report for the academic year 2021-22, the number of international students in higher education institutions in the US was about 9.49 lakhs from more than 200 places of origin. This is the second lowest since 2014-15. The lowest in this period was recorded in 2020-21 when the number of international students fell to 9.14 lakh because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared to 2020-21, the number of students has gone up by 3.8% in 2021-22. In each of the years between 2015-16 to 2019-20, there were more than a million international students in the US. The year 2018-19 recorded the all-time highest number of international students in the US with nearly 1.1 million or close to 11 lakh international students.
The report also noted that international students enrolled for the first time at a U.S. college or university increased by 80% year-over-year to reach almost 2.62 lakh students in 2021-22 and rebounded to pre-pandemic levels.
7 out of 10 international students in the USA are from Asia
Students from Asia continue to account for lion’s share of international students in the US. The share of students from Asia has increased from 66.1% in 2014-15 to 69.5% in 2021-22. However, the share was more than 70% between 2018-19 and 2020-21 which dropped to 0.5 percentage points below 70% in 2021-22. Meanwhile, the share of students from Europe which had declined to 7.4% in the pandemic year, has increased to 8.8%, back to pre-pandemic levels. The share of students from the Middle East and North Africa has dropped from 10.4% in 2015-16 to 5.6% in 2021-22.
Number of International Students from China drops 22% in 2021-22, compared to 2019-20
In each of the years since 2014-15, the top 25 places of origin of international students in the USA account for an average of 83% of all international students that year. In 2020-21, the share of top 25 countries had decreased compared to 2019-20. However, in 2021-22, of the top 25 places of origin, the number of students from 15 countries including India, Canada, and Mexico, has either fully or nearly rebounded to pre-pandemic levels. Notably, the number of students from Nigeria was the highest since 1984-85, and Bangladesh, Pakistan, Spain, and Colombia reached a record number of international students in the USA.
China and India together accounted for more than 50% of the international students since 2016-17. Even in 2021-22, the two countries together accounted for 52%. China continues to be the place of origin for the greatest number of international students in the USA. From 31%, the share of students from China has increased to 35% in 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2020-21 despite the 14.8% decline in the number of students in 2020-21. However, in 2021-22, the share has dropped to 30.6%. In terms of numbers, more than 3 lakh students in the USA were from China between 2014-15 and 2020-21 which dropped by 8.6% in 2021-22 to 2.9 lakh students. In fact, compared to the 2019-20 number of 3.72 lakh, the number of students from China in 2021-22 dropped by more than 22% in 2021-22.
India is the place of origin for the second-greatest number of international students in the USA. Following a record of more than 2 lakh students from India in the USA in 2018-19, the number has declined since then- by 4.4% in 2019-20 and by 13.2% in 2020-21. However, in 2021-22, the number has gone up by 18.9% to 1.99 lakhs, accounting for 21% of all the international students in the USA. Students from India constituted around 18% in the preceding 4 years.
Apart from India and China, 10 other countries were the places of origin for more than 11,000 students each in 2021-22. The trend in the number of students from these 12 countries is indicated in the following chart.
For the first time, Math and Computer Science surpassed engineering as the leading field of study
In terms of the field of study of international students in the USA, more than 21% of the international students in the US were pursuing Math and Computer Science followed by 19.9% in engineering-related courses and 15.5% in business and management courses. Since 2014-15, the share of students in engineering has dropped below 20% for the first time. This is also the first time that math and computer science surpassed engineering as the leading field of study.
STEM-related courses include engineering, health professions, math and computer science, and physical and life sciences. The share of international students pursuing STEM-related courses has increased from 42.8% in 2014-15 to 52.6% in 2021-22. Among Indian students, the share of students pursuing STEM Courses has declined from 80% until 2018-19 to 75.5% in 2021-22. In 2021-22, the share of Indian students pursuing either of the two courses (Math & Computer Science, and Engineering) dropped to 66.4% as compared to nearly 73% in 2017-18. On the other hand, the share of Indian students pursuing business and management courses, social science, and other fields of study is increasing.
However, the share of Indian students pursuing math and computer science and engineering-related courses continues to be higher than the global average of international students pursuing these courses. The share of Indian students pursuing other major courses is much less than the global average share of all international students pursuing those courses. For instance, in 2021-22, more than 36% of Indian students were pursuing math and computer science in the USA compared to 21.1% among all international students.
Majority of the international students were pursuing graduate courses
The number of international graduate students grew by 17% and surpassed the number of undergraduate students (3.45 lakhs) for the first time in a decade. The total number of graduate students was over 3.85 lakhs, higher than the pre-pandemic total.  This growth, particularly at the master’s level, was likely due to increased student interest and pent-up demand from the previous year. Simultaneously, undergraduate enrolments continued to decline. Additionally, there were 1.84 lakh students on OPT (optional practical training) and 34,131 were pursuing non-degree courses in 2021-22.
Optional Practical Training (OPT) is a temporary employment that is directly related to a student’s major area of study. Eligible students can apply to receive up to 12 months of OPT employment authorization before their student visa expires. Students who earned a degree in certain science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields may apply for a 24-month extension of OPT. In other words, those students who pursue STEM courses can opt for three years of OPT or temporary employment before their student visa expires.
Among Indian students, contrary to the trend in previous years, the share of students in OPT dropped to 34.2% in 2021-22, from 43.9% in 2020-21. In 2020-21, the share of Indian students on OPT had surpassed that of graduate courses. At the same time, there has been a rise in the share of students pursuing graduate courses from 41% in 2020-21 to 51.2% in 2021-22. The trend in the share of Indian students in undergraduate courses and others has not changed visibly.
More than 30% of the international students hosted by New Jersey and Arizona were of Indian origin
While California and New York continue to host the highest and second-highest number of international students (more than one lakh each), New York continues to be the most preferred destination for Indian students. More than 22,000 Indian students were in New York followed by 20,000+ in California, in 2021-22. Texas, which was the most preferred state for Indian students between 2014-15 and 2018-19, was the third most preferred in 2020-21 and 2021-22.
In terms of the share of international students hosted by the state, more than 30% of the students in Arizona and New Jersey were of Indian origin. The same was more than 25% in Texas, Illinois, Missouri, and Indiana, and more than 20% in Massachusetts, Michigan, Arizona, Ohio, and Georgia.
The primary source of funding for 55% of the international students was ‘Personal or Family’ funding
The primary source of funding for 55.4% of the international students in the US in 2021-22 was personal or family funding. 20.2% of the students were funded by US colleges or universities. Current employment was the source of funding for 19.8% of the students. Foreign governments or universities funded a further 2.4%. Only 0.5% of students were funded by a foreign private sponsor in 2021-22. Other sources of funding including foreign private sponsors, the US government, US private sponsors, international organizations and other sources was the source of funding for 1.7% of the students.
The trend since 2015-16 indicates that the ‘personal and family funding’ as a source of funding for international students has decreased from 66.5% in 2015-16 to 54% in 2020-21 and increased again to 55.4% in 2021-22. The sponsorship of foreign governments also decreased from 7.4% to 2.4% during the same period. Current employment as the source of funding increased from 6.6% in 2015-16 to 22.7% in 2020-21 and dropped to less than 20% in 2021-22.
Study abroad trend picks up for Indian students after the pandemic years
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the number of Indian students in the USA has reduced. However, in line with the US Embassy and Consulates in India’s announcement in August 2021 that it has approved more student visa applications in 2021 than ever before, it is observed that more Indian students are pursuing studies in the USA in 2021-22. UNESCO’s survey conducted in 2021 also revealed that post the pandemic outbreak, students across India started re-evaluating their choices and are moving to countries like New Zealand, Germany, and Ireland instead of the popular choices like the US, UK, and Canada.

created: November 22, 2022


text:
Data from Compliance Reports of Technology Platforms Show Varied Reasons for Grievances Filed
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
July 21, 2023
The IT Rules of 2021, mandate big technology companies or the SSMIs to publish a monthly compliance report which includes the details of complaints from users via grievance mechanism and action taken on them. Data from the last 24 months indicates that the reasons for which these grievances are filed vary from platform to platform.
For more than a decade, social media platforms have gained mainstream prominence in sharing and dissemination of information. The significant reach of various social media platforms is found to have a bearing on shaping public discourse. There have been calls from various sections of society to set up controls and have accountability norms for such platforms through greater transparency.
The Information Technology Rules 2011 were replaced with, Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (IT Rules, 2021) in an effort to ensure greater transparency from the big technology platforms, referred to as Social Media Intermediaries (SMIs) in these rules.
IT Rules, 2021 requires additional due diligence to be observed by SSMIs
The IT Rules, 2021 are primarily aimed at placing additional obligations on these Social Media Platforms, referred to as Social Media Intermediaries (SMIs) to ensure an open, safe, and trusted internet.
SMI is defined as an intermediary which primarily or solely enables online interaction between two or more users and allows them to create, upload, share, disseminate, modify, or access information using its services.
Two important components of IT Rules, 2021 are:
The IT Rules, 2021 lay out clear guidelines on the due diligence to be followed while discharging their duties, including – prominently publishing user agreements, privacy policies, etc. on their website, not displaying or hosting objectionable or defamatory content, copyright or trademark infringes, etc.  These rules required the intermediary to have a Grievance redressal mechanism in place.
Any complaint relating to the content on the social media platform can be lodged and the same needs to be acknowledged within 24 hours and disposed within 15 days.  Another important aspect of IT Rules 2021 is the condition of additional due diligence to be performed by SSMIs or Significant Social Media Intermediaries. Any SMI with more than 50 lakh registered users in India is considered an SSMI.
One of the important rules as part of this additional due diligence performed by SSMIs is Rule 4(1). SSMIs are required to publish a monthly compliance report which includes the details of complaints from users via grievance mechanism and action taken on them, as well as information related to any proactive monitoring efforts under the IT Rules.
There are 7 SSMIs that publish these monthly reports – WhatsApp, Google, Twitter, Meta, Snapchat, ShareChat, & Koo. Reports published by Meta include information for both Facebook and Instagram. Consolidated datasets of the information available in these monthly compliance reports by SSMIs are available on Dataful.
In this story, we look at the trends in grievances submitted by the users and the action taken across various SSMIs. This is the first of two-part series, in which we cover the trends in grievances and complaints received by WhatsApp, Twitter, Koo & Google.
10-fold increase in the number of reports received by WhatsApp
WhatsApp is the most popular messaging app in India. It is specifically built for private messaging and is used mostly to communicate with people we already know. Grievances on WhatsApp are received through two methods – e-mails sent to the grievance officer regarding violations of WhatsApp terms of service, questions about accounts, etc., and e-mails sent to the India Grievance Officer via post.
During May 2023, a total of 3912 grievances were received. Comparatively, a total of 4,720 and 4,377 grievance reports were received in March & April 2023 respectively. These three months have received the greatest number of grievances since compliance under these rules began in May 2021, and the first monthly compliance report was published by WhatsApp. In fact, the monthly average number of grievances reported in these three recent months is 10-fold the number of grievances reported in the initial months. The number of grievances in each of the last six months (December 2022 to May 2023) has been more than 1000.
Most of the reports received were related to the ‘Appeal of Account Ban’. In May 2023, 89% of the grievances were Ban related to Appeals. So is the case in the earlier months as well, where-in most of the grievances received were appeals related to bans.  Account support, Product Support, and Safety were the other reasons for which grievances were reported.
75% of the Grievances received by Twitter are related to Abuse and Hateful Conduct
As per the monthly transparency reports submitted by Twitter, around 12.8 thousand grievances were received for the period June 2021 to May 2023. Unlike in the case of WhatsApp, there is a fall in the number of grievances received in recent months.  The greatest number of grievances received by Twitter was in May 2022, when more than 1.5 thousand grievances were received. However, since then, there has been a fall in the number of grievances reported to Twitter.
Out of the total grievances reported to Twitter, the greatest proportion are related to Abuse/Harassment. Since June 2021, around 61% of grievances filed with Twitter were related to Abuse/Harassment. With 14% of the total grievances received, ‘Hateful Conduct’ is the second highest reason for which grievances were received by Twitter.
One of the main reasons for the higher number of grievances received in the initial months and the recent reduction in the numbers can be attributed to the fall in the number of grievances related to ‘Abuse & Harassment’.
Koo, which is an India-based Microblogging and Social Networking platform akin to Twitter had more than 1.28 lakh Koos reported during this period. The greatest number of reported Koos in a month was in November 2022 when more than 14 thousand Koos were reported. Koo does not provide details of the reason why a particular Koo was reported by the community.
95% of the complaints received by Google were related to Copyrights.
Since April 2021, Google has received more than 8.32 lakh complaints. Monthly trends do not indicate any specific variation in the number of complaints received. The greatest number of complaints in a month was in December 2022 when 42.8 thousand complaints were received. Since then, there is a decline in the number of complaints. On average, the number of complaints in recent months is lesser than the general average of complaints received in the earlier months. An overwhelming 95% of the total complaints received by Google were related to Copyrights. The next highest number of complaints are related to Trademarks.
In the second part of the series, we will look at the trends in Facebook & Instagram which are part of Meta along with Snapchat & ShareChat. We also will review the trends relating to the banning of accounts and proactive action taken by these SSMIs.