Indian women aged 60 can expect an average of 19 more years of life, but only 5.7 years meet the study's criteria for a 'good life', compared with 8.2 years for men.
The gap is particularly wide between rural women, who can expect just 4.6 years of good life after 60, and urban men, who can expect 10.2 years.
The study assessed quality of life through four measures: freedom from poverty, physical functioning, cognitive health and life satisfaction.
Cognitive health accounted for 46% of the variation in women's years of good life between states, while physical functioning was a more significant factor for men.
Based on data from more than 66,000 people, the findings highlight inequalities in ageing across gender, geography and states.
Women in India can expect to live longer than men, but spend fewer of their remaining years in good health, financial security and independence, according to a new study.
At age 60, Indian women have an average remaining life expectancy of about 19 years, compared with 17.5 years for men. Yet women can expect only 5.7 years of what researchers describe as a "good life", against 8.2 years for men.
The findings highlight a gap between longevity and quality of life, particularly among older women and people living in rural areas.
Researchers from the International Institute for Population Sciences in Mumbai, the University of Vienna and Princeton University used a measure called Years of Good Life to examine the conditions in which older Indians spend their remaining years.
Rather than considering life expectancy alone, the measure takes into account poverty, physical functioning, cognitive health and life satisfaction.
The findings, published in the journal Social Indicators Research, suggest that living longer does not necessarily mean spending more years free from financial hardship, physical limitations or cognitive difficulties.
The differences become more pronounced when gender and place of residence are considered together. At age 60, an urban man can expect an average of 10.2 years of good life, while a rural woman can expect just 4.6 years, a gap of 5.6 years.
Yet their remaining life expectancies are relatively similar.
Urban men aged 60 can expect to live another 19.1 years, compared with 18.5 years for rural women.
This means rural women can expect to spend about a quarter of their remaining lives meeting the study's criteria for a good life, compared with more than half for urban men.
The findings suggest that the disadvantages experienced by rural women extend beyond differences in how long they live.
The researchers used the Years of Good Life index to assess quality of life across four dimensions.
A year counted as a good year only when a person met all four conditions: being free from poverty, having no significant limitations in performing everyday physical activities, having no substantial cognitive difficulties, and reporting satisfaction with life.
The measure therefore goes beyond conventional assessments of health or income.
For example, a person who is financially secure but has substantial difficulty bathing, dressing, walking or getting out of bed would not meet the index's criteria for a good year.
Similarly, someone who is physically healthy but living in poverty or experiencing significant cognitive difficulties would not qualify.
The index is designed to capture how these different aspects of well-being overlap, rather than treating them as separate measures.
The researchers analysed information from 66,606 people aged 45 and above who participated in the Longitudinal Ageing Study in India (LASI) in 2017–18.
They combined these findings with age-specific mortality data from India's Sample Registration System for 2015–19.
The analysis covered 21 major states because sufficiently detailed mortality data were not available for every state and union territory.
The researchers used these datasets to estimate how many years people could expect to live after age 60 and how many of those years would meet the four criteria for a good life.
The study found that the factors associated with differences in years of good life varied between men and women.
Among men, functional health – the ability to perform everyday physical activities – accounted for approximately 45 per cent of the variation in years of good life between states.
Cognitive health accounted for about 31 per cent.
Among women, the pattern was reversed. Cognitive health accounted for approximately 46 per cent of the variation between states, while functional health accounted for about 31 per cent.
The researchers also identified substantial differences in cognitive health between rural women and urban men.
About 96 per cent of urban men met the study's criteria for cognitive health, compared with 69 per cent of rural women.
The researchers suggested that historical inequalities in women's access to education and lifelong learning opportunities could be associated with these differences.
They also linked relatively favourable outcomes for women in some southern Indian states to long-term investment in girls' education.
However, the findings establish associations rather than proving that differences in education directly caused the observed differences in cognitive health.
The study also found substantial differences between Indian states.
Men in Punjab had the highest estimated number of years of good life after age 60, at 12.9 years. This represented approximately 63 per cent of their remaining life expectancy.
By comparison, men in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh could expect between 6.5 and 6.8 years of good life.
Among women, some southern states recorded more favourable outcomes.
Rural women in Kerala could expect an average of 10.1 years of good life after turning 60, equivalent to about 46 per cent of their remaining life expectancy.
In West Bengal, women could expect an average of 3.8 years of good life.
The figure was even lower for rural women in Maharashtra, at just 2.7 years, or less than 14 per cent of their remaining life expectancy.
The findings suggest that longer life expectancy in a state does not necessarily translate into more years spent in good health, financial security and independence.
The researchers said measures such as Years of Good Life could help policymakers assess the circumstances of older people beyond life expectancy alone.
The findings suggest that healthcare and social protection for older adults may need to address several needs simultaneously, including physical rehabilitation, assistive devices, support with everyday activities and financial security.
The study also highlights the possible importance of education and social participation throughout life, particularly in relation to women's cognitive health in old age.
The researchers said the index could be used to monitor differences in older people's quality of life between states and help identify areas requiring greater policy attention.
However, they acknowledged several limitations.
The analysis relied on data from a single round of the Longitudinal Ageing Study in India, meaning it could not establish whether differences between states were widening or narrowing over time.
The lack of sufficiently detailed mortality data by education, caste and religion also limited the analysis.
The findings therefore provide a picture of inequalities in later life based on the available data, rather than a measure of how those inequalities have changed in recent years.
As India's older population grows, the study raises a question for policymakers: not simply how many years people can expect to live, but how many of those years they can spend in good health, with independence, financial security and satisfaction.
