Talk:List of Indian cities by GDP per capita

Bengaluru GDP

The Bangalore per-capita 2012 report by the New Indian Express, which puts per-capita GDP of Bangaluru at Rs 3,25,000 due, doesn't state the source of the data, and it pre-dates the Brookings report upon which this article is based. Because of the size of the disparity it might be using Purchasing power parity. For these reasons I don't believe the New Indian Express report can be used. Batternut (talk) 10:45, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Where did Brookings got the report. From some Indian medias. So This is a 2012 report and considering atleast 35% increase in three years the latest figures will be INR 420000 or above. You said brookings is a later report. Then why they are showing a complete wring information. The Brookings report is completely wrong because Karnataka states per capita is stated as Bangalore cities per capita. It is same for all other cities. Indian express is a nationwide newspaper which doesnt reports false information. So I can prove the big blunder in brookings report stating all the state per capita and cities per capita as same. And last for your kind information we dont use PPP in per capita income denoting economic wealth of cities. Study Economics before commenting rubbish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.241.87 (talk) 14:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

The Brookings Institution seems to be a pretty highly-rated organisation that spends a lot of time studying metropolitan areas - it is quite a serious accusation for you to say their information is completely wrong. Please read their report - page 4 'Data and Methods' might help you understand their figures. We may assume that the New Indian Express accurately reported what T V Mohandas Pai said. The question is how do the Manipal Universal Learning figures quoted by Mohandas Pai compare with those given in the Brookings report? It is entirely possible that both are right - the difference might relate to the boundaries of the areas being considered: Brookings considers the whole metropolitan area, whereas Manipal Universal Learning just considers the city. The Brookings report does describe its methods though, whereas we just have a bare per-capita figure from Manipal Universal Learning without further description. Batternut (talk) 17:13, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

It is clear that the Brookings report discusses metropolitan areas. I have updated the article to state this. The Manipal Universal Learning figure for Bangaluru clearly relates to just the city, not including the surrounding areas. Batternut (talk) 18:37, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Brookings as a foreign agency could not be taken as a credible source and please check Karnataka states per capita income. It is shown as same as bangaore cities income in Brookings report. How can be Bangalores cities and Karanataka states per capita income be the same. Bangalore provides 50% of the economy for the state. Can you see the great blunder in Brookings report. This is same for other cities too. So considering the simple fact that Brookings did a very bad research and stating Karnatakas per capita as Bangalore citkes per capita, we cannot take Brookings as anywhere credible. One more thing Banagalore cities per capita is not mereley 87000 RS, it is much more. Indian express is much more credible. So for Bangalore I have to change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.241.87 (talk) 10:45, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Firstly, thank you, 115.188.241.87, for engaging in this Talk page. Can I suggest that you create a user account? It is very easy, and facilitates better communication - better for you indeed as you can be notified when there is a change in this or any page you are interested.

Secondly, being a foreign agency doesn't imply being not credible - see the List of countries by GDP (nominal) as an example - it uses the United Nations, the World Bank etc, all foreign agencies.

Thirdly, where does the Brookings report mention Karnataka? I don't see it anywhere.

Fourthly, do you understand the difference between city GDP and metropolitan area GDP? This I think is crucial in the difference in the figures. Batternut (talk) 11:05, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

http://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/india/percapitaincome.htm. Check this. Karnatakas per capita income is here. How can it be same as Bangalores per capita inome. I am saying it again, brookings report is completely wrong. Bangalores per capita cannot be that small. It is the IT capital of India. I give a credible source of Indian express here. Still, if you don't trust it and is trying to find small small things is not the right way. Previously you even said it is ppp, that was a joke. Please read my words in the above paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.241.87 (talk) 11:04, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

mapsofindia.com quotes its source as the Central Statistics Office - this we can trust. So per-capita GDP of Karnataka for 2013-14 of INR 84709 (US $1320 approx) we can agree on!

The New Indian Express article quotes Manipal Universal Learning - who are they, and is their figure for Bangalore city, or for Bangalore metropolitan area?

Batternut (talk) 11:32, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Its Bangalore states figure. Bangalore metropolitan area is inside Bangalore state. Bangalore metropolitan areas per capita wont be same as Karnataka states per capita. It will be many times higher. Manipal university is the most accredited university in Karnataka. Its very funny that you are asking 'who are they". I have provided credible information here and you are changing it all the time. What is the problem with you. Why cant you accept the figures. Does it affect you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.241.87 (talk) 00:07, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Another problem here is that for all state per capita is shown as cities. For Maharashtra, Tamil nadu, Andhra pradesh and Karnataka, it is shown like that. And Delhi is a state and city at same time. So luckily it is right, orelse for that also the figures will be wrong. Mumbai, Chennai and Hyderabad's per capita will be much higher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.241.87 (talk) 00:11, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Here's another trust-worthy source to consider: https://data.gov.in/catalog/district-wise-gdp-and-growth-rate-current-price2004-05#web_catalog_tabs_block_10 - get the "Districtwise GDP and growth rate based at current price (2004-05) from 2007-08 to 2010-11 - Karnataka" data. It shows Bangalore Urban GDP as 1,28,197 Crore Rupees during 2010-2011. By a rough calculation, divide that by the population of 8,425,970 -> per capita GDP = ₹152,162 (US$1,800) - less than half the Manipal Universal Learning figure. I don't think it doubled from 2011 to 2012. Batternut (talk) 19:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

At 2004 - 2005 Bangalore population was way lesser than 8 million. You have to divide by 4 million. Then you will get at least 4000 dollars. Calculate it with growth of the Bangalore city for 10 years. You will get atleast 7500 to 8000 dollars or more. For you please study economics terms such as GDP nominal, GDP per capita, per capita income nominal and GDP etc. By reading your posts I can clearly understand that you are unfamiliar with this things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.62.29.184 (talk) 00:37, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Regardless of the accuracy or otherwise of your maths, calculating your own GDP per capita figure is not allowed: Wikipedia articles must not contain original research (please read Wikipedia:No original research). Your calculation above is bad though: you take the gov.in GDP figure for 2010-2011 and apply 10 years growth to it! And you need to use the population of 2011, which the 2011 census gave as precisely 8,425,970.

You might like to read Gross national income to understand the difference between GDP per capita and per capita income.

You asked above "Does it affect you?" It does not affect me, I have no particular interest in these figures. I simply wish to keep this article neutral and informative. Who are you and what is your interest? Have the courage to create yourself a Wikipedia account! Batternut (talk) 06:12, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Here is another reliable source for you @Samsam111 - http://des.kar.nic.in/docs/sip/State%20and%20District%20Domestic%20Product%20of%20Kar%2014-15.pdf - page 4 gives Bengaluru Urban per capita income as 202340 Rs for the year 2012-13. That's 38% less than your favourite Manipal Universal quote, and it is more recent too. Do you trust the Government of Karnataka's Directorate of Economics and Statistics? Perhaps you reckon that including the suburbs of the metropolitan area will improve the figure? I doubt it. Batternut (talk) 15:30, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Also, @Samsam111, please read WP:NPOV - we wikipedia editors must keep a neutral point of view. The value of this page is to be able to compare the larger metropolitan areas of India - using a new methodology to update the figure for one city only produces a biased table. Batternut (talk) 15:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

So you know that Bangalores per capita is not a mere 1400 dollars. So why are you changing to that. In 2012 its percapita was much higher. So the latest figures will be much higher. This is disrict per capita not cities. You should change the wiki headline as per capita of indian disricts then put around 4500 dollars as bangalore districts percapita. Still it is the highest in India. I cant understand the 1400 dollar figure and why brookings figure ia a super blunder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.163.116 (talk) 23:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

The Brookings figures are for metropolitan areas. Bangalore's metro area seems to include Bangalore Rural and Ramanagara, for which des.kar.nic has per capita income as 109380 Rs and 70095 Rs respectively. And then we have the subtle differences between per capita income and per capita GDP. The article will no longer be neutral (see WP:NPOV) if one city centre is compared with whole metro areas for the other cities. Batternut (talk) 08:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

You have given here a good reference from Karanataka state. So it is more credible than Manipal University lerning In that it is shown that per capita of Bangalore in 2012 financial year is 0.2024 million rupees. Considering Bangalore growth rate of 16 to 17 % a year, there will be almost 50 % increae in per capita and we can caculate the latest per capita as 0.305 million. That gives us a figure of 5000 dollars per capita for Bangalore.

Calculating your own figures is original research, which isn't allowed. Batternut (talk) 11:32, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I know. But we have to show the near real information, until the exact and latest figures of these cities are available. Or else agencies like brookings will search wiki and create wrong information stating the cities and states per ca pita as same, as what they did in their report. You can check and see that these cities per ca pita income is almost same as the whole states per ca pita in brookings report. It is unreal and absolutely absurd.

The pib.nic.in figure for per capita income for Karnataka 2012-2013 is 76578 Rs, ~ $1200. That is indeed close to Brookings' $1420 figure for per capita GDP for Bangalore metro. As mentioned several times before, the Brookings figures are for the metropolitan area, not just Bangalore city, and per capita income is not the same as per capita GDP (although likely to be similar, and the two are often confused). Batternut (talk) 08:28, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Don't talk about neutrality here. You are showing delhis figure as 3500 and Bangalores as 1400. In reality Bangalore figure is much higher than delhis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.163.116 (talk) 10:40, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Bangalore's figure might be higher than Delhi's now, I have no idea. You are welcome to find an up-to-date reliable source that shows figures for these cities. Updating one to 2015, leaving the rest at 2013 is not neutral. Batternut (talk) 11:32, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

... and why do you keep changing the Delhi figure from $3,580 to $3,500, ie $80 less? You appear to bear a grudge against Delhi. Batternut (talk) 11:36, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry, I might have done it by mistake. Why do I have anything against Delhi. When editing is possible I myself will change it into 3580 $. It is the right figure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.163.116 (talk) 04:50, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

If you include whole Bangalore rural hundreds of kilometer away from the CBD then I have to make delhis report showing the all small towns and villages in rural delhi and NCR then Delhis per capita will land below 2000 dollars. Do you want me to do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.163.116 (talk) 10:56, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Doing that would be original research, which isn't allowed. Batternut (talk) 11:32, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I also seriously doubt the brookings figures for other cities. It cannot be that less. Mumbai is the financial and commercial capital of India. It wont be so low for Mumbai and other cities including Kolkata, Hyderabad and Chennai. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.163.116 (talk) 11:03, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

You are absolutely welcome to find a reliable source that shows other figures. Batternut (talk) 11:32, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Should GDP per capita figures be sourced only from comparative studies?

Initially this page had figures taken only from the Brookings Institution report "Global Metro Monitor An Uncertain Recovery 2014". Currently in dispute is whether an alternative source for Bangalore should be used in place of the Brookings figure. Options to resolve the dispute could be:

1. Allow sources for individual cities.

2. Restrict sources to comparative studies covering many cities.

3. Delete this page, as it's too contentious and actually of little use.

Batternut (talk) 09:12, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

• Option 2 as proposer. Batternut (talk) 09:12, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

The datas should be updated for other cities also. Updating only bangalore's data will not serve the purpose. Indianfox (talk) 11:19, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I am going to update each cities per capita separately with source and later everyone can discuss and edit it. I will add the data of a single financial year for all cities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.163.116 (talk) 08:53, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2015

Hi this is Sam. Please verify and fix the wrong information that is shown in page per capita of Indian cities. Bangalore is a city which provides 50% of Karnataka states revenue. Here the figure shown, 1380$ is the per capita of Karnataka state and not the Bangalore cities. You can verify it by yourself by looking at the state government reports here. 1380$ is almost equal to 89545 RS that is the Karnataka state per capita in 2012 financial year. in 2014 financial year the state per capita is 101594 RS. So even the total states per capita is more than 1380$. Bangalore city per capita is much higher than 1380$ shown in the wiki page. There are many reports that show this. I am adding three of such, one from Bookings and other from the most credible university in India (Manipal university learning) and one from the state government itself. Please verify those and fix the mistakes. Bangalore cities per capita is correctly shown in Bookings report as 3963$ in 2012 figures. All of these shows the correct nominal per capita figures and should be done according to the reports rather than showing wrong information which may misguide the people who are taking it as a credible information.

This information is wrongly given according to the wishes of some individuals and doesn't comply to the Wikipedia honesty policy. Please verify this and make necessary corrections.

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Multimedia/Interactives/2013/tentraits/Bangalore.pdf

http://planning.kar.nic.in/docs/economic_survery_2014-15/English/9%20Chapter%20State%20Income%20&%20Prices.pdf

http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/karnataka/article535589.ece Samforprospe (talk) 20:33, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

• Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details.
• That was your tenth edit and you should now be autoconfirmed. As such, it is preferred that you edit the page yourself. --Stabila711 (talk) 00:58, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Bangalore

Samforprospe, what do you want? Filpro (talk) 02:05, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

What is your problem. i am not changing Delhi's figure and I like it to show it correct. But you want to show Bangalore's figures to a very less amount. why you are playing with it. It wont affect you. I am not changing your cities figures and I have correct source and figures and I am not assuming anything here. Respect other cities too rather than trying to showcase your city even though it i not up to the mark.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samforprospe (talk • contribs) 02:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC) 

Getting this to Featured List status

So I recently came across this list because I was fighting vandalism. I know next to nothing about the subject. I do, however, have experience turning a poorly maintained list into a featured one. I found that doing so has helped to maintain the integrity of that page. While it's only a sample size of one, I believe that it's worth doing here. By turning this into a featured list, I believe that the integrity of the page will be easier to maintain.

I'm not Indian. I've never even been to India. I'm certainly not an economist. I'm willing to work on this, but I'll need a lot of help. Ideally someone else takes the lead.

The featured list criteria detail what needs to be done. If you're willing to help, please join this discussion. NYCRuss ☎ 16:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Sources (please add)

These may help:

• India’s economic geography in 2025: states, clusters and cities NYCRuss ☎ 17:02, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

@NYCRuss: That report has an pertinent graph on page 19, but actual GDP per capita figures are not shown so it will be pretty difficult using this info in our text-based format. Batternut (talk) 19:10, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 October 2016

Ning Shen zhu (talk) 11:30, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

This article is wrong according to many reports. The reference shown in this article is wrong and it contradicts with other reports like Mckinsey report.http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/08/07/the-most-dynamic-cities-of-2025/.

@Ning Shen zhu: More sources would be great, as this article is solely dependent on a single set of figures (which makes it pretty useless). Alas your FP/McKinsey report lists only 3 Indian cities and doesn't provide GDP per capita figures. Could be derived from their population figures though that might be WP:OR. Batternut (talk) 18:41, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Hyderabad and Bangalore figures

Check the karantaka Governemnt website about the per capita of Bangalore and compare to the wrong figures shown here. You can easily calculate the per capita by dividing population with GDP and even the per capita is shown in government website. The brookings report is wrong and cannot be taken as a valid source. Need at least two sources to back the figures or else it is better to delete the figures rather than showing wrong figures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:D201:3E1C:7921:C3AA:36D0:FB2D (talk) 09:54, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/bengaluru-urban-tops-state-in-per-capita-income-kalaburagi-last/article8376124.ece

https://c24215cec6c97b637db6-9c0895f07c3474f6636f95b6bf3db172.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/framed/~/media/multimedia/interactives/2013/tentraits/bangalore.pdf

Check these two reports and these two shows entirely different and much higher per capita for Bangalore from the brookings report the wiki uses presently. How many proof you guys want to show the mistake in present wiki reference from brookings. It is better to delete the figures rater than adding wrong information. The most trustable report is the government report and in that the per capita of Bangalore is much higher. So this report from brookings cannot be taken credible atlest fro some cities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:D201:3E1C:7921:C3AA:36D0:FB2D (talk) 10:02, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2017

137.97.58.100 (talk) 14:44, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

The reference shown in here cannot be trusted. There should be two or more reference from different sources. reference from a single source cannot be taken into wiki page like this.

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. 🔯 Sir Joseph ^🍸(talk) 15:17, 3 January 2017 (UTC)