Social Science (087) — AI-generated practice question

The comparison shows that per capita income alone is an inadequate measure of development.

Although Haryana has a higher per capita income (₹2,64,729) than Kerala (₹2,34,405), Kerala far outperforms Haryana on social indicators — Kerala's Infant Mortality Rate is only 6 per 1,000 live births compared to Haryana's 28, and Kerala's literacy rate is 94% against Haryana's 82%.

This happens because money in one's pocket cannot buy all goods and services needed to live well — public health facilities, education, and collective services matter greatly. Kerala's low IMR is due to adequate provision of basic health and educational facilities.

Therefore, income must be supplemented by health and education indicators to get a true picture of development.

Source: Chapter 1 — Development, Sections: Per Capita Income; Public Facilities

---

• Examiner focus: They want to see you use the specific data from Tables 1.3 and 1.4 to support your argument — don't just make general statements.
• Key concept: Per capita income is necessary but not sufficient; collective public services (health, education) are crucial — this is the textbook's core argument in the "Public Facilities" section.
• Avoid: Saying per capita income is "useless" — the textbook says it is important but inadequate, not irrelevant.
• For 3 marks, aim for: one statement of the limitation → evidence from data → reason (public facilities argument) → conclusion.