INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue XI, November 2025
income-based growth.
Limitations of GDP as a Development Metric
Critiques of GDP have highlighted its inability to capture inequality, human agency, and environmental sustainability (Stiglitz, Sen
& Fitoussi, 2009). Although GDP measures the value of goods and services produced, it does not reflect how that wealth is
distributed or how it affects people’s lives. Scholars and policymakers alike have called for broader frameworks that go beyond
income to assess true human progress.
Alternative Indices of Development
Several multidimensional indices have been proposed to address the shortcomings of GDP:
Human Development Index (HDI) – introduced by UNDP, combines life expectancy, education, and income. However, it is still
limited in scope and does not account for agency or empowerment.
Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) – measures acute deprivations in health, education, and living standards (Alkire & Santos,
2010).
Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) – developed by UNDP, focuses on gender- based inequalities in political and economic
participation.
While these indices offer valuable insights, they tend to focus on deprivation or inequality and often lack a holistic empowerment
perspective that includes voice, access to decision- making, and digital inclusion.
Empowerment as a Development Paradigm
Empowerment is increasingly recognized as a key dimension of sustainable development. Kabeer (2005) defines empowerment as
the process by which people gain the ability to make strategic life choices in a context where this ability was previously denied.
Empowerment is both a means and an end of development—closely tied to agency, access, dignity, and participation.
In the Indian context, schemes such as Digital India, Beti Bachao Beti Padhao, PM Awas Yojana, and Skill India have embedded
empowerment goals into development strategy. However, there remains a gap in the availability of a composite metric that
evaluates the actual level of people’s empowerment across sectors and social groups.
Towards a GEP (Gross Empowerment of People) Framework
The emerging idea of a GEP-centric model represents a paradigm shift—placing human empowerment at the center of governance
and policy. Recent speeches by the Indian Prime Minister emphasize "empowered citizens, not just enriched ones", reflecting
the urgency to build an index that values agency, access, and dignity alongside income.
Despite its conceptual appeal, no standardized or empirically tested GEP Index exists as of now. This gap highlights the need
for a comprehensive framework that is empirically grounded, multidimensional, and tailored to the Indian context.
Proposed GEP Index for India
The proposed Gross Empowerment of People (GEP) Index is a comprehensive, multidimensional tool designed to assess the
actual empowerment and well-being of individuals beyond the narrow confines of income or economic output. Unlike GDP, which
measures the quantity of economic production, the GEP Index is rooted in the belief that development is meaningful only when
people gain real freedoms, agency, and equal opportunities to lead fulfilling lives. This index has been carefully framed to
reflect the Indian socio-political context, incorporating dimensions that align with national priorities, policy goals, and lived realities
of diverse communities. It draws inspiration from established multidimensional indices such as the Human Development Index
(HDI), Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI), and Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM), while expanding their scope to include
emerging domains of empowerment.
The index comprises five key dimensions: Economic Empowerment, Social Empowerment, Political Participation, Digital
Inclusion, and Psychological and Cultural Empowerment. Each dimension is broken down into specific, measurable
indicators—for instance, economic empowerment includes employment status, access to credit, and livelihood security; social
empowerment measures access to education, healthcare, and social welfare; political empowerment looks at voter turnout,
representation, and participation in local governance; digital empowerment tracks access to the internet, mobile usage, and digital
literacy; while psychological and cultural empowerment examines self- perception, freedom from discrimination, and cultural
expression.
The framework for the GEP Index has been developed through a triangulated approach: reviewing global best practices in
measuring empowerment, analyzing Indian policy documents such as NITI Aayog reports and flagship schemes (e.g., Digital India,
Skill India, Beti Bachao Beti Padhao), and consulting available secondary data from government surveys (NFHS, NSSO, Census,
etc.). Each indicator within the GEP Index is normalized on a 0–1 scale, weighted according to relevance and data availability,
and then aggregated to produce composite scores at state or district levels. This methodological design ensures flexibility,
comparability, and policy relevance, allowing the GEP Index to be adapted to local contexts while maintaining a standard evaluative
Page 4