The phrase “development is the best contraceptive” has become a cliché and, more often than not, used in India as a slogan for electioneering and political upmanship against the champions of direct family planning interventions. There is no definitive empirical evidence across the world that high economic growth in a decade or two can have a perceptible impact on demographic growth. The significant decline in the growth rate of India’s population, as reported by the provisional figures of 2011 Census, in a decade of significant acceleration in economic growth and the quickest turnaround from the global economic meltdown, certainly merits consideration in this context.
The deceleration in overall population growth was expected, given that the Sample Registration System (SRS) has been recording a continuous fall in natural growth (birth rate less the death rate) from 17.4 per cent in 1999 to 15.2 per cent in 2009. The decline in the birth rate has been much sharper from 26.1 per cent to 22.5 per cent. The relatively slower decline in natural growth is because of a corresponding decline in the death rate. Though the death rate has gone down from 8.7 per cent to 7.3 per cent, the overall population growth rate, as reported by the Population Census, has declined from 21.54 per cent to 17.64 per cent during the decade.
It must be noted that this 3.9 percentage point decline is higher than the corresponding decline of 2.3 points in the previous decade. It is important to note that the population growth rate had been stable during the first four decades since independence largely due to the fall in the death rate. This demographic turnaround understandably gives credence to the thesis that development is a key factor in decelerating population growth, working through the window of gender empowerment, besides other social processes.
The regional pattern of economic growth has changed significantly since the middle of the last decade. During the eighties and nineties, the relatively developed states recorded a higher growth in income compared to their less fortunate counterparts. Making a departure from the past, the latter have now accelerated their growth and brought about a reduction in inequality in the rates. Indeed, the increase in per capita income in Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh and Uttarakhand – all falling in the lowest rung of development – during 2001-11 has been impressive. We must ask if these states are responsible for the decline in the population growth in the country.
The first positive signal in this context is the rapid decline in the birth rate in rural areas, which is one percentage point higher than that in urban areas. Despite that, the decline in their natural growth rates is similar, as reported by SRS. This is basically because rural areas have performed commendably in bringing down their death rate.
It would be difficult to probe the matter further since the Population Census is yet to release the rural-urban breakup of total population. Indeed, their differential growth rates, which reflect the impact of migration, reclassification of towns and so on, can provide insights into the dynamics of rural and urban development. In any case, a similar decline in their natural growth must be considered a significant achievement since all available information suggests a much higher growth of income and consumption expenditure in urban compared to rural areas.
Does the regional pattern of growth from the Census suggest that the relatively backward states have done better in controlling their population growth? Unfortunately, the relatively backward states like Bihar, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh have shown a slower decline in the growth rate than the national average. Another backward state is Rajasthan, records a relatively faster decline but has one of the highest growth rates in the country. Orissa reports an average decline but already had low growth. A dramatic decline has, however, been reported in the hill states of Sikkim, Jammu and Kashmir, Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh and the island Union Territories of Lakshadweep and Andaman & Nicobar. The law and order in many of the border states (impacting coverage and quality of data) could explain their sluggish growth. However, the tendency of the people in the so-called heartland to go to these states to grab employment and business opportunities seems to have weakened.
The fact that Tamil Nadu and Puducherry – both of which qualify for the “developed” label – recorded an increase in population growth (along with Chhattishgarh) despite their high level of income and education would be a matter of policy concern. One would have to look at the specificities in these states, taking migration into consideration within a larger socio-political framework. Indeed, the slowing of outmigration would explain, at least partly, the relatively high population growth in backward states. There is, however, no prima facie evidence that the decline in population growth has been higher in less developed states despite their high income growth in recent years.
The increase in literacy, in particular female literacy, during the last Census decade is impressive. This is larger than that of the previous decade and has reduced gender disparity. The improvement is striking in almost all the north eastern states as also in Jammu and Kashmir, Daman & Diu and Andaman and Nicobar Islands. This is also a factor contributing to the deceleration in population growth. Importantly, the relatively backward states like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Himachal and Uttarakhand have recorded very high increases in female literacy. However, the shocking fact is that the child sex ratio has gone down sharply, much faster than at the national level. The only exception is Bihar which reports a decline but of smaller magnitude. The small consolation is that Delhi, Punjab and Haryana record marginal improvements in the figure although they continue to be at the bottom of the series. Two among the developed states like Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh, recording large increase in female literacy, have experienced the worst declines in the child sex ratio. Female literacy is a social and emotional issue, and undoubtedly the cornerstone of gender empowerment. However, the Census has placed a question mark on its efficacy in reducing the practice of amniocentesis and gender discrimination in childhood.