GNI or GDP and per capita income measure the extent of a country’s economic growth and economic development but present it as an average value that doesn’t account for income and welfare inequalities present in the population. Consequently, countries may indicate high per capita growth rates as a result of few well-performing industries or people. For instance, India has been registering increases in its GNI but it still remains a developing country since its rate of unemployment is rising, its standards of living, education, and health are still poor, and a few people are the major contributors to the growing GNI. According to Todaro & Smith (2012), its inability to incorporate the degree of absolute poverty is one of many more factors that render GNI per capita an insufficient measure of the development of a country. 
On the other hand, just like GNI, per capita, income is also considered an indicator of economic welfare and hence economic development despite the fact that it has a number of limitations that render it unreliable (Singh, n.d). One of these limitations is that Per capita income neglects to indicate the distribution of GDP that is to say, whether or not it’s equally distributed. This means that per capita income cannot be referred to as an indicator of economic welfare if GDP increases but only goes to the rich thereby abandoning scores of people miserable. Another limitation is that it fails to reveal the types of goods and services that are manufactured and consumed in society, (Singh, n.d). This essay will delve deeper into the various reasons why the level and rate of growth of GNI and per capita income fail to provide sufficient measures of development of a country.
 

APA
Citation Here

MLA
Citation Here

CHICAGO
Citation Here