The All-India Debt and Funding Survey (AIDIS) carried out by the Nationwide Pattern Survey Organisation (NSSO) and the Shopper Pyramids Family Survey (CPHS) carried out by the Centre for Monitoring Indian Financial system (CMIE) are two nationally consultant surveys that doc how households borrow, save, spend and make investments. Within the wake of the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MOSPI) releasing numbers from the newest (77th) spherical of AIDIS, we evaluate what each the surveys say concerning the participation in formal monetary providers by Indian households. We count on cheap similarity between them, on condition that each are thought-about nationally consultant, and the essence of the questions requested to elicit family monetary choices are essentially the identical. We acknowledge, nevertheless, that there are certain to be minor variations because the surveys differ of their design, sampling technique, sampled households, and due to this fact the responses elicited.
AIDIS is a cross-sectional survey that interviews a unique set of households roughly as soon as each ten years, whereas CPHS is a panel survey that interviews the identical set of households as soon as each 4 months. Since it’s a one-time survey, AIDIS collects detailed data on each family participation in and allocation in direction of a collection of monetary devices whereas CPHS solely captures the previous. AIDIS follows a two-stage stratified sampling technique whereas CPHS follows a multi-stage stratified sampling technique. AIDIS pattern includes extra rural than city households, whereas the vice-versa holds true for CPHS. Preserving these caveats concerning the surveys in thoughts, we proceed to take a look at how the numbers stack up vis-à-vis participation in formal monetary property first, and liabilities later.
Participation in formal monetary property
Desk 1 describes family participation in formal monetary property in line with the 2 surveys. Each the surveys report greater than 90 per cent of households proudly owning at the very least one checking account and roughly one-two % of households investing in mutual funds, shares and shares. However CPHS experiences considerably increased participation in put up workplace financial savings accounts, pension/PF accounts, life insurance coverage, and medical health insurance. A few of these variations might be attributed to the way in which during which the questions are framed, and knowledge is collected throughout the 2 surveys.
For instance, CPHS has a direct query on members’ protection underneath medical health insurance and we contemplate households with at the very least one member coated underneath medical health insurance to measure medical health insurance participation. Nevertheless, in AIDIS, we will solely use cost of premium for medical health insurance as a proxy for protection, thus doubtlessly excluding these coated underneath state and employer sponsored medical health insurance. This may increasingly clarify, at the very least partly, the considerably increased determine for medical health insurance in CPHS. For among the different monetary property nevertheless, the style during which the questions are requested and participation measured is broadly the identical, but massive variations prevail throughout the findings of the 2 surveys. Variations within the proportion of households with pensions, life insurance coverage and put up workplace account is greater than double throughout the 2 surveys. 
Participation in liabilities
Family participation in liabilities, each formal and casual, are compiled in Desk 2. Each surveys report a 3rd of the households to be indebted and one in 5 households to have a proper mortgage. However, CPHS experiences a considerably increased share of households having a casual mortgage (33%) than AIDIS (14%). On nearer evaluation, we discover this distinction to be primarily as a result of CPHS, not like AIDIS, additionally paperwork credit score taken from outlets underneath casual loans. The numbers converge once we exclude these loans whereas measuring casual mortgage participation in CPHS. Nevertheless, CPHS nonetheless experiences a considerably increased share of city households having casual mortgage(s) whereas AIDIS experiences a considerably increased share of rural households having formal mortgage(s).
Lastly, we test family participation in loans taken for various functions which might be documented in each the surveys. These numbers are compiled in Desk 3. Each surveys report moderately related share of households which have taken loans for housing enhancements, well being and schooling bills, and funding. CPHS experiences a considerably increased share of households which have taken loans for consumption expenditure, and right here once more, the numbers converge once we exclude credit score taken from outlets. AIDIS experiences a considerably increased share of households which have taken loans for investments in enterprise. This may be as a result of AIDIS probes its respondents on enterprise associated loans in larger element, underneath 4 separate classes of income and capital expenditure on farm and non-farm companies, whereas CPHS collects this data underneath a standard head of loans taken for enterprise funding. A better share of households report taking loans for repaying debt in CPHS (4.2%) than in AIDIS (0.8%).
To summarise the findings, we discover numbers on checking account possession in addition to incidence of indebtedness to be comparable throughout each the surveys. Nevertheless, CPHS experiences considerably increased participation in different formal monetary property like post-office financial savings, pension/PF accounts, and life and medical health insurance, in comparison with AIDIS. Whether or not this is because of any inherent limitation of the CPHS sampling technique as critiqued by Jean Dreze and Anmol Somanchi deserves additional investigation.
We hope this comparability allows survey designers and researchers to deliberate on what could make each CPHS and AIDIS richer sources of knowledge on Indian households than they already are. As an illustration, we see advantage in CPHS including questions concerning the participation in and utilization of e-wallets and different digital monetary providers, that AIDIS has captured on this spherical. Equally, CPHS has proven that outlets are a significant supply of casual credit score amongst Indian households, and this requires different surveys like AIDIS to think about outlets as a professional supply of casual credit score to get a extra complete and correct image of indebtedness amongst Indian households.
 AIDIS has collected family knowledge as on June 30, 2018. We use knowledge from the Could-August 2018 wave of CPHS to make the numbers comparable
 A family’s participation in an asset or a legal responsibility refers back to the family’s possession of the asset or uptake of mortgage, whereas a family’s allocation in direction of an asset or a legal responsibility refers back to the quantity the family has invested within the asset or the mortgage quantity that it has borrowed
 AIDIS follows two-stage stratified sampling the place the census villages/sub-units of villages are the First Stage Items (FSUs) in rural areas and blocks/sub-units of blocks are the FSUs in city areas. The Second Sampling Items (SSUs) are households located within the FSUs. The collection of the FSUs and SSUs is finished utilizing Easy Random Sampling With out Substitute (SRSWOR)
 CPHS follows multi-stage stratified sampling technique the place homogeneous areas kind the broadest stage of stratification. Homogenous areas are neighbouring districts with related agroclimatic situations, urbanisation ranges, and feminine literacy charges. CPHS divides India into 110 homogeneous areas. The villages and cities of 2011 Census then act because the Main Sampling Items (PSUs) inside these homogeneous areas. Households from these PSUs grow to be the Final Sampling Items (USUs)
 AIDIS interviewed 69,445 rural and 47,006 city households throughout go to 1, and 68,291 rural and 44,781 city households throughout go to 2. CPHS interviewed 53,337 rural and 95,823 city households in the course of the Could-August 2018 wave
 After making use of weights to the AIDIS pattern, we’ve a complete of 26.01 crore households all-India, with 17.24 crore rural and eight.77 crore city households. After making use of weights to the CPHS pattern, we’ve a complete of 29.37 crore households all-India, with 20.07 crore rural and 9.3 crore city households
 CPHS collects data on excellent financial savings in addition to financial savings made in the course of the knowledge assortment interval (Could-August 2018) throughout completely different financial savings devices, and we contemplate these for measuring participation in put up workplace financial savings accounts, pension/provident fund accounts, mutual funds and shares, and life insurance coverage
 For measuring participation in AIDIS, we contemplate households having a non-zero stability in financial institution accounts, put up workplace financial savings accounts, and mutual funds and shares. For pension accounts, we contemplate households with at the very least one member coated underneath Atal Pension Yojana, or which have made contributions to pension/PF accounts. For all times insurance coverage, we contemplate households which have paid premium for endowment/term-life insurance coverage, households enrolled underneath Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana (PMJJBY), households with at the very least one member having life insurance coverage, or if the sum assured underneath life insurance coverage is larger than zero for the family, as proxies
 Formal liabilities are loans taken from monetary establishments akin to banks, co-operatives, microfinance establishments, self-help teams, and so on. whereas casual liabilities are loans taken from moneylenders, employers, mates, family, and so on.
Cite this merchandise:
Niyati Agarwal, R. S. (2022). Evaluating Participation in Formal Monetary Providers throughout Two Nationally Consultant Surveys: CPHS vs. AIDIS. Retrieved from Dvara Analysis.
Niyati Agarwal, Rakshith S. Ponnathpur & Sahana Seetharaman. “Evaluating Participation in Formal Monetary Providers throughout Two Nationally Consultant Surveys: CPHS vs. AIDIS.” 2022. Dvara Analysis.
Niyati Agarwal, Rakshith S. Ponnathpur & Sahana Seetharaman. 2022. “Evaluating Participation in Formal Monetary Providers throughout Two Nationally Consultant Surveys: CPHS vs. AIDIS.” Dvara Analysis.