Recalibrating socio-economic markers in order to better suit regional differences or terrain can have both positive and negative impacts on the accuracy of statistical estimates. Some potential consequences include:

• Positive impact: By accounting for regional differences, recalibrating socio-economic markers can improve the accuracy of statistical estimates and provide a more nuanced understanding of socio-economic conditions in different parts of the country.
• Negative impact: However, recalibration may also create inconsistencies and inaccuracies when comparing statistics across different regions or time periods. This can make it difficult to identify and track changes in socio-economic conditions over time.
• Positive impact: This approach can help policy makers to formulate more focused policy interventions at local levels and hence improve the overall socio-economic conditions of the country.
• Negative impact: There is also a risk of politicization of the recalibration process as recalibration can be used to show favourable socio-economic indicators based on political interests, rather than the reality on the ground. Political uncertainty can act as a deterrent for investors and investments.
• Positive impact: In order to update social classification of households for benefits and entitlements after Census 2021, recalibration may help them identify the social and economic placement of these households.
• Negative impact: The methodology of recalibration is left to the discretion of the states; this could give rise to non-uniform recalibration methods and possibly create disparities between states.

Therefore, the exercise of recalibrating socio-economic markers should be undertaken with caution, balancing the need for regional accuracy with the need for consistent and standardized statistical estimates across different regions and time periods.