Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
Special population groups
P.M. KULKARNI
A POPULATION policy is generally conceived at the national
level. However, in a large country like India with conspicuous
spatial variations, a case has often been made for region or state
specific policies and some state governments have recently
announced population policies. But there are other dimensions of
diversity, especially ethnicity, religion and caste. On account of
social, cultural and historical factors, the aspirations of groups, and
hence immediate objectives, may differ, if not the ultimate goals.
Besides, strategies appropriate for one group may not be so for
another, even when the objectives are the same.
The Swaminathan Committee suggested the ‘concept of unity in
population goal and diversity in implementation strategies’ (Expert
Group on Population Policy, 1994, p. 3). However, when interests
of various sections differ, it is possible that a policy might give
precedence to the concerns of dominant groups at the cost of
disadvantaged and minority groups.
It is imperative that the national goals and objectives incorporate
aspirations and needs of various groups, including smaller and
weaker sections of society, strategies be designed to meet these, and
further that national policies and strategies do not adversely affect
the interests of various groups, intentionally or otherwise.
Formulation of policies separately for social groups may not be
feasible since such groups do not form units or levels of
governance. However, it is essential that the perspectives of special
population groups – ethnic, religious and caste – be taken into
account in the formulation of national or state policies.
In principle, a national policy ought to be designed towards
achieving collective national goals. But when there is stratification
on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion or caste, group interests
could possibly differ and conflict with national interests. In the
sphere of population, though lowering the population growth rate
may be a desirable national goal, many groups would like to ensure
that their share does not fall during the process of demographic
transition since share in power depends on share in population. This
is an issue well recognised in the context of religious diversity in
Page 1 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
India (Pai Panandiker and Umashankar, 1994; Jain, 1998). Clearly,
religions form special groups that could legitimately have concerns
about the size and share of their population.
Moreover, the scheduled castes, which suffered due to oppression
and denial of opportunities for generations, and the scheduled tribes
that were secluded and excluded from the process of development
for a long time, constitute special groups. This paper focuses on the
perspectives of religion and caste groups in India in matters of
population policy. Specifically, how do religious minorities, the
scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes fare in population and
related aspects? Do some special groups need policy interventions?
The demographic profile and changes in it could give some idea of
the needs of special population groups. In particular, an assessment
of differentials in growth rates and changes in population share is
useful.
This calls for an examination of differentials in the components of
population changes, namely, fertility, mortality and migration.
Further, population policies in recent years have given greater
attention to aspects of reproductive and child health. Do the special
groups receive appropriate services in these? Finally, does the
National Population Policy 2000 of India address the needs of
special groups?
Population growth: The changes in the relative size of population
attract public attention because of political overtones. In India, over
99% of the population was recorded as Hindu, Muslim, Christian,
Sikh, Buddhist, or Jain in the 1991 Census (India, Registrar
General, 1995). The Hindus constituted 82%,1 the Muslims are the
largest minority with 12% of the population, followed by the
Christians and the Sikhs with about 2% each (Table 1). The
Buddhists and the Jains also have substantial populations, over six
and three million respectively. In addition, many other religions and
persuasions are listed in the census. Of these, Zorastrianism and
Judaism are well recognised, but in 1991 these two religions had
populations of only 76,382 and 5,271 respectively.
The share of various religions in the population has not changed
much since 1961. There has been some marginal rise, less than two
percentage points, in the share of Muslims and a nearly equal fall in
the share of Hindus.2 Very small changes have occurred in the
shares of Christians and Sikhs. The growth rate has been higher
than average among the Muslims, by about half a percentage point
(annual growth rates are presented in the lower panel of Table 1).
The Christian growth rate was higher in the past but has dropped
since 1971. Growth rate has also fallen for Sikhs and Jains. A rise is
seen in the case of the Buddhists, but this is more likely to be due to
the adoption of Buddhism by many, especially the scheduled castes,
Page 2 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
rather than due to a higher natural increase. The growth among the
Jains is particularly low. Among the other religions, the Zorastrians
(Parsees) show a negative growth. The population declined from
111,800 in 1951 to 76,382 in 1991 and there has naturally been
concern among the community about this (Visaria and Visaria,
1999).
The
scheduled castes and tribes together account for about a
quarter of India’s population; at the time of the 1991 Census, 16.5%
were classified as scheduled castes and 8.1% as scheduled tribes
(Table 2). The share of the scheduled tribes did not change much
between 1981 and 1991 but that of the scheduled castes increased
by about one percentage point. The scheduled castes experienced
higher growth during 1981-1991, 2.70% annually compared to
2.13% for the entire population. However, this is at least partly due
to a change in classification (Visaria and Visaria, 1999).
Prior to 1990, scheduled castes were recorded only among Hindus
and Sikhs, but the Constitution (scheduled castes) Order
(Amendment) Act, 1990 for the first time recognised scheduled
castes among Buddhists as well (India, Registrar General, 1994).
Since the late 1950s, many persons belonging to the scheduled
castes have adopted Buddhism; though not counted as scheduled
castes in the earlier censuses, the 1991 Census classified them as
scheduled castes. The growth rate of the scheduled caste population
is quite high in Maharashtra3 (6.7%), the state that had a large
number adopting Buddhism. Overall, there is no cause for concern
about the population sizes of the scheduled castes or scheduled
tribes as a whole being too small or declining. However, this is not
necessarily true for individual tribes. Some tribes are very small in
size and need special attention.
Child
mortality: Do the special groups suffer from higher than
average mortality? Life tables by religion or by caste are generally
not computed. However, the 1981 Census and the two National
Family Health Surveys (NFHS), NFHS-1 and NFHS-2, have given
estimates of early childhood mortality by religion and caste (India,
Registrar General, 1988; IIPS, 1995; IIPS and ORC Macro, 2000).
The NFHS-1 was conducted during 1992-93 and the NFHS-2
during 1998-99, the estimates refer to the 10 year period prior to the
respective survey. Two key indicators, the Infant Mortality Rate
(IMR) and the Under-Five Mortality rate (U5MR), which is the
proportion of children dying before completing five years of age,
are given in Table 3.
The census and NFHS estimates of IMR and U5MR show child
mortality to be slightly lower than average among Muslims and
substantially lower among Christians and Sikhs; the NFHS-2
estimates of IMR are 59, 49, and 53 for Muslims, Christians and
Sikhs respectively compared to the average of 73. Mortality is also
Page 3 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
relatively low among Jains (IMR is 47) and Buddhists (54). On the
other hand, infant mortality is higher than average among the
scheduled castes (83) and the scheduled tribes (84). Thus, the
populations belonging to the minority religions are not
disadvantaged in terms of mortality but the weaker sections, the
scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes certainly are.
The religious composition of population varies across states. The
proportion of Christians is large in the southern states, especially
Kerala, that of Muslims in some southern and some central-eastern
states, and that of Sikhs in the northwestern states. Since there are
large regional variations in the level of mortality, it is conceivable
that some of the inter-religion variations observed are attributable to
regional variations in religious composition. This calls for an
examination of differentials within states.
In Kerala, the only state that has a large (that is, large enough to
allow computation of child mortality estimates) Christian
population, mortality among Christians is not much lower than
average.4 In Punjab, mortality among Sikhs is only marginally
lower than that for Hindus. The Muslims have higher mortality than
the Hindus in Kerala and Assam but lower in many states; the
differences are generally not large.
Thus, the large Hindu-Christian and Hindu-Sikh differences seen at
the national level are not conspicuous within states. The observed
lower mortality among Christians and Sikhs is on account of the
low mortality in the regions in which large populations of these
communities reside, the states of Kerala and Punjab. However, the
scheduled castes and tribes have as above average infant and child
mortality in most of the states.
Fertility: Estimates of fertility measures for major religions and for
the scheduled castes and tribes are available from some recent
censuses and surveys.5 Estimates of the Total Fertility Rate (TFR)
and Cumulative Fertility (CF computed as mean children ever born
to women of age 40-49 at survey) from the NFHS-1 and NFHS-2,
are presented in Table 3. Generally, fertility is higher than average
among Muslims and lower among Christians and Sikhs. The NFHS2 estimates of TFR for Muslims, Christians and Sikhs are 3.6, 2.4,
and 2.3 respectively compared to the average of 2.9. Though the
TFR for Muslims is higher than average, the difference does not
exceed one point, that is, one additional child per woman.
The scheduled castes and tribes show only marginally higher
fertility than average; the NFHS-2 estimates of the TFR are 3.2 and
3.1 respectively. If the TFR is lower than the CF, recent fertility
decline is indicated since the CF measures cohort fertility and the
TFR measures current fertility during the reference period of three
years prior to the survey. It can be seen that there is a decline in
Page 4 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
fertility in all communities but not necessarily at the same pace.
In Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu, TFR for Christians is
not much different from that of Hindus. Similarly, fertility level
among Sikhs is nearly identical to the level among Hindus in Punjab
and Haryana.6 Thus, in states where Sikhs and Christians have
substantial populations, they do not seem to differ from Hindu
populations in fertility. The TFR for Muslims is higher than average
in many states, the differences are wide in West Bengal, Assam,
Karnataka, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Kerala, Bihar and Uttar
Pradesh, but narrow or negligible in Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh,
Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu.
Thus, though the Muslims have higher than average fertility at the
national level, the gap differs considerably over states. Moreover,
the gap is not clearly associated with the level of fertility. Among
low fertility states, the gap is wide in Kerala, but narrow in Andhra
Pradesh and Tamil Nadu and among states with moderate fertility,
the gap is wide in West Bengal but narrow in Gujarat.
Fertility is low among Jains, actually below replacement level; the
NFHS-2 estimate of the TFR is 1.9 (figures not shown in the Table).
The Jains are a highly urbane and advanced community. Fertility
among Buddhists is lower than average, but in Maharashtra, the
state with a large Buddhist population, the level is not much
different from the average. Though NFHS estimates of fertility for
Zorastrians are not available, other surveys and investigations
provide evidence that fertility is very low among Zorastrians (Rele
and Kanitkar, 1974). Overall, though fertility varies by religion,
there is no need to be concerned about unusually low fertility,
except for religions like Zorastrianism.
It must be noted here that higher fertility among women belonging
to a particular religion may not necessarily be attributable to the
religion factor per se. There are differences in characteristics such
as educational level, residence (rural or urban), occupational
distribution and income, many of which have a bearing on fertility.
Therefore, some or all of the religious differentials in fertility could
be on account of differentials in one or more of these factors (the
Characteristics Hypothesis). Appropriate multivariate analysis can
indicate the extent to which the Characteristics Hypothesis explains
the differentials. This issue is not being addressed in this paper;
substantial literature is available on this (Alagarajan and Kulkarni,
1998; Balasubramanian, 1984; Jeffery and Jeffery, 2000; Moulasha
and Rao, 1999; Shariff, 1996; Visaria, 1974).
Age at marriage: Since fertility in India occurs primarily within
marriage, age at marriage has a large effect on completed fertility.
The low age at marriage in India has been cited as one of the main
factors responsible for high fertility. Estimates from recent censuses
and surveys show that the median ages at marriage of the Hindus
Page 5 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
and the Muslims do not differ much, but the Christians and the
Sikhs marry late. The scheduled castes have a lower age at marriage
than average but the difference is not large. The age at marriage for
scheduled tribes is not much different from the overall average.
According to the NFHS-2, the median ages at marriage for women
are 20.5 for Christians and 20.1 for Sikhs (IIPS and ORC Macro,
2000). Among other religions for which NFHS estimates are
available, the median is low for Buddhists (16.9) but not for Jains
(18.9). The medians for the scheduled castes and the scheduled
tribes are 16.3 and 16.6 respectively, quite close to the median of
16.9 for Hindus and Muslims. Thus, though the age at marriage has
risen over time, a majority of marriages are performed before the
legally permitted age of 18 years for girls. This is, thus, a broad
issue, affecting almost all communities except Christians, Sikhs and
Jains.
Contraceptive
practice: This is another important proximate
determinant of fertility. The Contraceptive Prevalence Rate (CPR),
defined as the per cent of couples of reproductive age using some
contraception, has increased in India during the past few decades
and was estimated at 45% in 1998 (India, Department of Family
Welfare, 1999). The NFHS-2 estimate for 1998-99 is 48%. Most of
this, 43 points, is of modern methods, and 36 points, contribution of
sterilisation, female or male.
The NFHS-1 and 2 give estimates of the prevalence rate for major
religions and the scheduled castes and tribes. The patterns in the
surveys are fairly similar and the discussion here is based on
differentials as seen in NFHS-2 (shown in Table 4, upper panel).
Contraceptive prevalence rate is computed for ‘any method’ (that is,
use of any method of contraception), for ‘modern methods’ (use of
any modern method including sterilisation) and for ‘sterilisation’.
Prevalence for any method is lower among Muslims (37%) and
higher among Sikhs (65%) compared to the average (48%). The
differences are in the same direction in the case of modern methods.
In per cent sterilised, the figure for Sikhs is close to the average;
clearly, the higher CPR among Sikhs is on account of higher use of
reversible and traditional methods. Among Muslims, the CPR for
sterilisation is much lower than average (20% compared to the
average of 36%), but for reversible methods, the prevalence is
higher than average (17% compared to 12). Thus, there is some
difference in the pattern of method mix for the various
communities.
Sterilisation
is less popular among Muslims, and reversible and
traditional methods more popular among Sikhs and to some extent
among Muslims as well. The prevalence rate among the scheduled
castes is close to average. The overall prevalence among the
Page 6 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
scheduled tribes is lower than average, but the per cent sterilised is
close to the average.
Contraceptive prevalence is influenced by two factors: demand for
fertility regulation and the use of contraception in case of such
demand. Demand would generally be influenced by socio-economic
conditions. Factors such as education, income, occupation and place
of residence have a bearing on the perceived costs and benefits of
children, and couples would demand contraception if low fertility
were considered to be beneficial. The programme and other service
providers seek to meet this demand.
But the Indian programme, like many other programmes, also seeks
to influence (or generate) demand. The extension component of the
Indian family planning programme was designed for this purpose.
Plausibly, both demand and acceptance of contraception in case of
demand could vary by community. Perceptions of costs and benefits
of children could differ. Access to contraceptive services could
vary. Besides, cultural factors may influence acceptability of the
idea of fertility regulation and of specific contraceptives.
An indicator of the total demand for family planning (TDFP) is the
percentage of women who did not want another child at all or did
not want one within two years, information on which was obtained
in the NFHS. Differentials in TDFP are similar to those in CPR,
higher level for Sikhs (74%) and lower for Muslims (59%)
compared to the average of 64% in NFHS-2 (Table 4). However,
the differences in TDFP are narrower than in CPR. For example, the
CPR for Muslims is 11 points lower than average but TDFP is only
five points lower. Similarly, for Sikhs, the CPR is 17 points above
average but the TDFP only 10 points. Among the scheduled tribes,
demand for contraception is lower than average (55%).
A measure of met need (MN) for contraception is the percentage of
women who (or whose husbands) were using any contraception
among those with demand for family planning. Overall, 75% of the
need for contraception is met, but this is lower among Muslims
(63%) and very high among Sikhs (88%) compared to others (Table
4). In terms of met need, Christians, scheduled castes, and
scheduled tribes are close to the average.
Within states, the pattern of differentials is generally similar to the
national pattern, with some departures.7 The CPR is lower than state
average among Muslims in most states except Gujarat, Madhya
Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. Though the CPR for Sikhs is higher than
average nationally, this is not the case in Punjab. The scheduled
tribes have lower CPR than average in Assam, West Bengal,
Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan, but not in
Gujarat. Again, TDFP follows a pattern similar to that of CPR in
most states but with narrower differences. The proportion of need
for contraception that is met is lower than average among Muslims
Page 7 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
in most states.
Reproductive and child health: For quite some time, maternal and
child health care services have been integrated with the family
planning programme in India. This was justified on a number of
grounds. First, the service delivery network could cater to the needs
of birth control and maternal and child health, especially preventive
health care such as immunisation, and pregnancy and delivery care.
Second, improvement in child survival was considered essential to
achieving a fertility decline. Third, integration of maternal and child
health with family planning gave the programme the image of being
a ‘family welfare’ programme rather than a mere ‘birth control’
programme.
The
scope was further broadened in the 1990s with the
introduction of the ‘reproductive and child health’ programme. All
women are expected to receive care during pregnancy that includes
physical check-up, tetanus-toxoid injections, supplementary
nutrition, and advice about health care. Broadly, this is called
antenatal care. Professional care during delivery and after (postnatal health care) is also important. Similarly, for children, a regime
of immunisations is recommended during the first year.
The NFHS obtained data on pregnancies that resulted in live births
during a reference period of three years before survey and on child
immunisation. Data on birth weight were also collected. But for a
majority of births, weight was not recorded, and using the available
data on birth weights (that is, on births for which weight was
recorded) to examine differentials would not be appropriate because
of the problem of selection bias.
Table 4 (lower panel) gives differentials in four indicators of
reproductive and child health care. These are: (i) ANC: per cent of
pregnancies in the reference period during which the woman
received antenatal check-up, whether from public or private
providers; (ii) Institutional Delivery: per cent of deliveries during
the reference period that were conducted in health institutions; (iii)
Professional Assistance: per cent of deliveries during the reference
period that received professional assistance (from a doctor or a
nurse/midwife); and, (iv) Child Immunisation: per cent of children
of age 12-23 months at survey who had received all the
recommended doses of vaccinations.
The coverage for antenatal care is higher among Christians (84%)
and Sikhs (75%) and lower among the scheduled tribes (57%) than
average (65%); the levels for Muslims and the scheduled castes are
close to average. The extent of institutional care for delivery is
relatively high for Christians (54%) and Sikhs (47%), low for the
scheduled castes (27%) and very low for the scheduled tribes
(17%).
Page 8 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
A
majority of Sikhs and Christians were successful in securing
professional assistance during delivery (69% Sikhs and 64%
Christian). But only 42% of Hindus, 39% of Muslims and 37% of
scheduled castes could obtain such assistance. The most
disadvantaged are the scheduled tribes, only 23% of deliveries
received professional assistance. In child immunisation, the Sikhs
are well covered (70% children receive all recommended
immunisations), as are the Christians (61%) but not the scheduled
tribes (26%) and the Muslims (33%).
Some of the differentials observed at the national level are not seen
within states. In particular, though Christians show higher than
average level of reproductive and child health care coverage at the
national level, in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and Andhra Pradesh this is
not the case.8 Similarly, in Punjab, hardly any Hindu-Sikh
difference is seen. However, delivery care is poorer for the
scheduled tribes than average in almost all the states with
substantial scheduled tribe populations. To a smaller extent, this is
true of the scheduled castes as well. In the case of Muslims, large
differences (coverage for Muslims poorer than average) are seen in
some northern and eastern states but not in the southern and western
states.
The
available data show that religious minorities and weaker
sections such as the scheduled castes and tribes differ in certain
demographic aspects from the average or the majority population.
The rate of growth has fallen among Christians but is not so low as
to be of concern. The fall has been steeper among Jains. This is
considered to be an elite community and appears to be well ahead of
the other major communities in demographic transition with fertility
having fallen below replacement level. However, the current growth
rate is still positive.
On the other hand, the Zorastrians have experienced a decline in
population size. The populations of some tribes are also low enough
to cause concern though the scheduled tribes as a whole continue to
show positive growth. Child mortality is high especially among the
scheduled castes and tribes. The scheduled castes and tribes face
handicaps in income and education and hence a high level of
mortality is not unexpected. However, the public health
programmes are designed so that the disadvantaged populations can
be catered to. Clearly, the programmes have not been fully
successful. Women from the weaker sections are not as well
covered as the majority populations in delivery care.
This is particularly true of the scheduled tribes though the scheduled
castes also do not fare well. Similarly, child immunisation is less
common among the scheduled tribes. Though Muslims do not
experience higher than average child mortality, Muslim children in
northern-eastern states are not as well covered as others. Delivery
Page 9 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
care is also poorer for Muslim women compared to other women in
some states. Contraceptive needs of most sections are met to a large
extent; about 75% of those not desiring an additional child soon (or
ever) do use contraception. But among Muslims, there is relatively
greater unmet need.
The
core issue is whether population policies in India have
addressed the needs of special groups. The thrust of the National
Population Policy 1976, the first explicit population policy in India,
was on intensifying the programme and there was little mention of
special groups. But in the context of compulsory sterilisation it was
stated that, if brought about by states, it be made ‘uniformly
applicable to all Indian citizens resident in the state without
distinction of caste, creed or community’ (India, Department of
Family Welfare, 1977: p. 174). This was apparently designed to
emphasise uniformity.
The policy statement of 1977, primarily rejecting the element of
compulsion in family planning, made no mention of special groups
(for reviews of the policies, see, Mitra, 1978; Srinivasan, 1982;
Raina, 1988; Visaria and Chari, 1998). At the international level,
the International Conference on Population and Development,
(ICPD) 1994, recognised that indigenous populations have a distinct
and important perspective on population and development
relationship (U.N., 1994). One of the objectives stated by the ICPD
was to ensure that indigenous people receive population and
development related services that they deem socially and culturally
appropriate.
The National Population Policy 2000 (NPP 2000) explicitly
recognises the special needs of tribal communities and hill area
populations. The policy statement notes the problems of low
literacy, poor nutrition and high childhood mortality among these
sections of population (India, Department of Family Welfare, 2000:
para 25). The policy acknowledges that these groups are underserved on account of poor access and suggests strategies to
overcome the problem. Significantly, the NPP 2000 also makes the
point that ‘many tribal communities are dwindling in numbers and
may not need fertility regulation. Instead they may need information
and counselling in respect of infertility’ (ibid: p. 23).
Thus, there is recognition of the fact that a population policy need
not always be reduced to one of fertility control. Health issues
receive primary attention for these special populations. It must be
stated that though the earlier population policies did not note the
special needs of tribal populations, health programmes have always
done so and prescribed better than average health centre to
population ratios for tribal and hilly areas.
The NPP 2000 does not take note of the special needs of the
Page 10 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
scheduled castes. The data show that the scheduled castes are not
well served in delivery care. Poverty is undoubtedly a factor
operating in this matter. But are public services also loaded against
the scheduled castes? A point to be noted is that in antenatal care
the scheduled castes are as well served as other groups. This is a
task performed by the female health worker (in some states called
an auxiliary-nurse-midwife or public health nurse).
To their credit, these workers have been doing a good job of
reaching all sections of the society and providing services to
pregnant women. But delivery care falls in a different class.
Accessing a health facility or a health professional at the time of
need is not easy for women from the weaker sections and the
existing programmes have not been able to overcome this handicap.
Religion as a factor does not find place in the NPP 2000 document.
Recognition of religious differentials in a policy document is
presumably considered politically incorrect. In fact, as noted earlier,
the 1976 policy stressed that there should be no distinction by
community. Yet certain needs do vary by religion. The low or
negative growth of some religions does not attract much public
attention perhaps because populations of these are quite small and
upper class. It is probably felt that they are capable of addressing
these issues themselves and not in need of policy support.
The relatively high fertility among Muslims has been a touchy issue
for some time. While it is true that demand for contraception is
lower than average among Muslims, sweeping statements such as
Muslims are against birth control are not supported by evidence.
The NFHS-2 revealed that 37% of Muslim couples used some
contraception and 20% were sterilised. These figures are not
insignificant and in fact, contraceptive prevalence among Muslims
in India as a whole is higher than the level for general population in
major states like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh.
But an important issue that emerged out of the data presented is the
high unmet need for contraception among Muslims. Possibly, there
are reservations about specific methods, particularly sterilisation;
the prevalence of reversible methods is not lower among Muslims
compared to the general population. If the cafeteria approach were
seriously pursued allowing couples greater choice in reversible
methods, the contraceptive needs of Muslims could also be met to a
larger extent.
Finally, the comparative view of the special groups discussed in
the paper, namely religious minorities and the scheduled castes and
tribes, reveals that the principal differences are in areas of health.
The scheduled castes and especially the scheduled tribes are poorly
served in maternal and child health care. This calls for strategies to
cater to the needs of these weaker sections. The NPP 2000 has
Page 11 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
Page 12 of 17
recognised these issues for the scheduled tribes, but special
strategies could also be developed to cater to the needs of the
scheduled castes.
The NPP 2000 proposes special schemes for urban slums, this
would take care of needs of some weaker sections. However, a
majority of the scheduled castes live in rural areas and programmes
need to be developed for this large population. In contraceptive
practice, the large unmet need among Muslims is a matter of
concern. Moreover, though the NPP 2000 explicitly recognises that
some tribes are dwindling in number, it is not clear what specific
efforts are contemplated to support these tribes. In the matter of low
fertility caused by infecundity, specific reproductive health
programmes can help. But population policy may not be the
appropriate instrument to overcome the problem of low growth
caused by late marriage and voluntary low fertility, observed in
some sections, since international experience shows that pro-natalist
policies have rarely been successful.
The available data also indicate that certain issues are relevant in
some states and not necessarily in others. The NPP 2000, designed
to operate at the national level, may not be an ideal instrument to
address these. State policies are normally designed to achieve state
level goals and plan strategies appropriate to conditions in the state.
Given the large inter-state variations, this is a desirable approach.
But in doing so, it is essential that the policies for individual states
give adequate attention to the needs of special groups within these.
TABLE 1
Population Size, Share and Growth Rates by Religion in India
Year/
Period
Religion
All
Hindu
Muslim
Christian
Sikh
Buddhist
Jain
687,647
101,596
19,640
16,260
6,388
3,353
Population $ (in thousands)
1991
838,584
Percentage Share*
1991
100.00
82.41
11.67
2.32
1.99
0.77
0.41
1981
100.00
83.09
10.88
2.45
1.96
0.71
0.48
1971
100.00
83.51
10.37
2.56
1.94
0.70
0.49
1961
100.00
84.27
9.84
2.41
1.83
0.73
0.47
Average Annual Exponential Growth Rate* (per cent)
1961-71
2.17
2.08
2.69
2.78
2.75
1.73
2.48
1971-81
2.23
2.18
2.72
1.57
2.34
2.22
2.10
1981-91
2.13
2.05
2.83
1.56
2.27
3.07
0.43
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
1961-91
2.18
2.11
Page 13 of 17
2.75
1.97
2.46
2.34
1.67
$: Excluding Jammu and Kashmir.*: Excluding Assam and Jammu and Kashmir.
Note: The column ‘All’ includes ‘other religions and persuasions’ and ‘religion not
stated’ as well.
Source: 1991 Population and Percentage Shares: India, Registrar General, 1995.
Growth rates: Kulkarni, 1996.
TABLE 2
Population Size, Share and Growth Rates for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled
Tribes and Others
Year/Period
All
Scheduled
Castes
Scheduled
Tribes
Non-Scheduled
Castes/Tribes
67,758
632,602
7.95
75.32
Population $ (in thousands)
1991
838,584
138,223
Percentage Share *
1991
100.00
16.73
Average Annual Exponential Growth Rate * (per cent)
1981
100.00
15.81
7.83
76.36
1981-91
2.13
2.70
2.28
2.00
$: Excluding Jammu and Kashmir.
*: Excluding Assam and Jammu and Kashmir.
Source: Computed from: India, Registrar General, 1993.
TABLE 3
Differentials in Indicators of Mortality and Fertility
Source
Measure
Religion/Caste/Tribe
All
Hindu
Muslim
Christian
Sikh
SC
ST
IMR
115
122
92
67
75
NA
NA
U5MR
152
155
135
97
108
NA
NA
NFHS - 1
IMR
86
90
77
50
47
107
91
1992-93
U5MR
119
124
106
68
65
149
135
NFHS -2
IMR
73
77
59
49
53
83
84
1998-99
U5MR
101
107
83
68
65
119
127
NFHS - 1
TFR
3.4
3.3
4.4
2.9
2.4
3.9
3.6
1992-93
CF
4.8
4.8
5.8
4.0
4.0
5.4
4.8
NFHS - 2
TFR
2.9
2.8
3.6
2.4
2.3
3.2
3.1
1981
Census
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
1998-99
CF
4.5
Page 14 of 17
4.3
5.7
3.5
3.6
4.9
4.7
SC: Scheduled Castes; ST: Scheduled Tribes.
IMR: Infant Mortality Rate; U5MR: Under Five Mortality Rate = 1000 x 5q0 where 5q0 =
probability of death before completion of age 5.
TFR: Total Fertility Rate; TMFR: Total Marital Fertility Rate.
CF: Cumulative Fertility = Mean children ever born for women of age 40-49.
NA: Not available.
Sources: 1981 Census: India, Registrar General, 1988.
NFHS-1: IIPS, 1995.NFHS-2: IIPS and ORC Macro, 2000.
TABLE 4
Differentials in Contraceptive Use and Reproductive and Child Health Care,
NFHS-2
Measure
Religion/Caste/Tribe
All
Hindu
Muslim
Christian
Sikh
SC
ST
48
49
37
52
65
45
39
-Modern
43
44
30
45
55
40
35
-Sterilisation
36
38
20
39
32
36
32
TDFP
64
64
59
67
74
61
55
MN
71
75
77
63
78
88
73
ANC
65
65
63
84
75
61
57
Institutional Deliveries
34
33
32
54
47
27
17
Professional Assistance
42
42
39
64
69
37
23
Child Immunisation
42
42
33
61
70
40
26
Contraceptive practice, demand and need
CPR -Any
Reproductive and child health
CPR: Contraceptive Prevalence Rate: per cent of couples of reproductive age using contraception.
– Any: current use of any method of contraception.
– Modern: current use of modern method of contraception.
TDFP: Total Demand for Family Planning: per cent of couples of reproductive age not wanting an additional
child or not wanting a child in the next two years.
MN: per cent of need for contraception that is met.
ANC: per cent of pregnancies that received ante-natal care.
Institutional deliveries: per cent of deliveries conducted in health institutions.
Professional Assistance: per cent of deliveries conducted by health professionals.
Child Immunisation: per cent of children of age 12-23 months at survey who had received all recommended
vaccinations.
Source: IIPS and ORC Macro, 2000.
Footnotes
* This paper arose out of discussions with Leela Visaria and Vimala
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
Ramachandran of the HealthWatch Trust. Able technical support was provided by
M. Sivakami.
1. The 1991 Census was not conducted in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, and
the population figures in Table 1 are only for the enumerated areas. Since the
1981 Census was not conducted in Assam, percentage shares excluding both
Assam and Jammu and Kashmir are given in the table for 1961 to 1991 censuses.
The data from the 1961 and the 1971 censuses show that exclusion of Assam and
Jammu and Kashmir raises the percentage share of Hindus by about 0.8 and
lowers that of Muslims by 0.8-0.9. If the same correction were applied to the
1991 data, the share of Hindus would be about 81.6% and that of Muslims 12.5%.
The percentages for other religions would change very little.
2. An issue raised frequently in India, especially at the political level, is the
growth of the Muslim population. There are some apprehensions that due to
higher than average growth, Muslims will soon be in a majority. While it is true
that the Muslim growth rate has been higher than the national average in all the
recent inter-censal decades, the difference has been small, close to half a
percentage point. Over the period 1961-91, the average growth rate for Muslims
was 2.75% (except the populations of Assam and Jammu and Kashmir) compared
to 2.18% for the national population. Simple calculations show that even if the
growth imbalance persists, Muslims would not be the majority population in the
next two-three centuries, a point that has often been noted earlier (see, for
example, Bhatia, 1990). Moreover, the growth differential is primarily on account
of higher fertility among Muslims. But this has also been declining and as the
transition progresses the gap in fertility and hence in growth rate would narrow
down.
3. Differentials by religion and caste within states are not shown in the tables in
order to save space. Tables on differentials in major states can be obtained from
the author.
4. See footnote 3.
5. Estimates of the Total Fertility Rate (TFR) and the Total Marital Fertility Rate
(TMFR) are also provided by recent censuses. These are generally underestimates. Estimates adjusted using the Brass method (P/F ratio) are also available
but not given here because, since fertility decline was in progress, such
adjustments would be inappropriate.
6. Op cit., footnote 3.
7. Op cit., footnote 3.
8. Op cit., footnote 3.
References
Manoj Alagarajan and P.M. Kulkarni. 1998. ‘Fertility Differentials by Religion in
Kerala: A Period Parity Progression Ratio Analysis’, Demography India 27(1):
213-228.
K. Balasubramanian. 1984. ‘Hindu-Muslim Differentials in Fertility and
Population growth in India’, Artha Vijnana 26(3): 189-216.
P.S. Bhatia. 1990. ‘Population Growth of Various Communities in India – Myth
and Reality’, Demography India 19(1): 121-130.
Page 15 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
Expert Group on Population Policy, 1994. Draft National Population Policy. New
Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
India, Department of Family Welfare, 1977. Family Welfare Programme in India
Yearbook 1976-77. New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
India, Department of Family Welfare, 1999. Family Welfare Programme in India
Yearbook 1998-99. New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
India, Department of Family Welfare, 2000. National Population Policy 2000.
New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
India, Registrar General. 1988. Census of India 1981: Child Mortality Estimates
of India. Occasional Paper No. 5. New Delhi: Controller of Publications.
India, Registrar General. 1993. Census of India, Series 1 India, Final Population
Totals: Brief Analysis of Primary Census Abstract. Paper 2 of 1992. New Delhi:
Controller of Publications.
India, Registrar General. 1994. Census of India, Series 1 India, Primary Census
Abstract, General Population, Part II, B(i) Vol. II. New Delhi: Controller of
Publications.
India, Registrar General. 1995. Census of India 1991: Religion, Paper 1. Series 1
India, New Delhi: Controller of Publications.
International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS). 1995. National Family
Health Survey (MCH and Family Planning), India 1992-93. Bombay: IIPS.
International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) and ORC Macro. 2000.
National Family Health Survey (NFHS-2), 1998-99: India. Mumbai: IIPS.
Anrudh K. Jain. 1998. ‘Population Policies that Matter’, in Anrudh K. Jain (ed.)
Do Population Policies Matter? Fertility and Policies in Egypt, India, Kenya, and
Mexico. New York: The Population Council: 1-18.
Roger Jeffrey and Patricia Jeffrey. 2000. ‘Religion and Fertility in India’,
Economic and Political Weekly 35(35): 3253-3259.
P.M. Kulkarni. 1996. Differentials in the Population Growth of Hindus and
Muslims in India, 1981-91. Monograph Series. No. 1. New Delhi: Population
Foundation of India.
Asok Mitra. 1978. India’s Population: Aspects of Quality and Control. Vol. 2.
New Delhi: Abhinav Publications.
K. Moulasha and G. Rama Rao. 1999. ‘Religion-Specific Differentials in Fertility
and Family Planning’, Economic and Political Weekly 34(42): 3047-3051.
V.A. Pai Panandiker and P.K. Umashankar. 1994. ‘Fertility Control and Politics
in India’, in The New Politics of Population, Jason L. Finkle and C. Alison
McIntosh (eds.), Population and Development Review – A Supplement to Vol.
20: 89-104.
B.L. Raina. 1998. Population Policy. Delhi: B.R. Publishing Corporation.
J.R. Rele and T. Kanitkar. 1974. ‘Residence Background and Fertility in Greater
Page 16 of 17
Thematic Resources (Population/Demography)
Bombay’, Population Studies 28(2): 299-308.
Abusaleh Shariff. 1996. ‘Poverty and Fertility in Differentials in Indian States:
New Evidence from Cross-Sectional Data’, Margin 29(1): 49-68.
K. Srinivasan. 1982. ‘Population Policy and Programme’, in Population of India:
Country Monograph Series No.10. New York: U.N.-ESCAP.
United Nations. 1994. International Conference on Population and Development:
Programme of Action. New York: United Nations.
Leela Visaria. 1974. ‘Religious Differentials in Fertility’, in Ashish Bose et al.
(eds.) Population in India’s Development, 1947-2000. Delhi: Vikas Publishing
House.
Pravin Visaria and Vijaylaxmi Chari, 1998. ‘India’s Population Policy and
Family Planning: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow’, in Anrudh K. Jain (ed.) Do
Population Policies Matter? Fertility and Policies in Egypt, India, Kenya, and
Mexico. New York: The Population Council: 53-112.
Pravin Visaria and Leela Visaria. 1999. ‘India’s Population: Its Growth and Key
Characteristics’. Occasional Papers in Sociology, No. 3. New Delhi: Institute of
Economic Growth.
Page 17 of 17