Q. Account for the regional variations in the growth patterns of population in India since Independence and show that impact on economic imbalances. [BPSC-1999]

Q. Account for the regional variations in the growth patterns of population in India since Independence and show that impact on economic imbalances. [BPSC-1999] ©crackingcivilservices.com

India, with population of more than 1.4 million, is currently 2nd most populous country in the world. According to World Population Prospects 2022, India is projected to surpass China as the world’s most populous country during 2023 (it was 2027 according to World Population Prospects 2019).

The increasing trend of Indian population is the major challenge of successive government in India right since independence. In 1951, Population of India was 36.1 crores. India was the first country in the world to adopt an official population policy and launch an official family planning programme way back in 1952. Since them, planned efforts have been the mainstay of population stabilization programme in the country. But largely, the population rise couldn’t be control. However, the growth pattern of population was uneven across the country.

Note: (not needed in this answer)

• The history of growth in India’s population can be divided into four distinct phases – the points of division being 1921, 1951 and 1981.
  • 1921 is known as the year of Great Divide, which differentiated the earlier period of fluctuating growth rates from a period of moderately increasing growth rates.
    • Fluctuating trend of population was due to famine, disease etc.
    • During 1911-21 when India’s population recorded a virtual shrink in its size in the wake of influenza epidemic, which had struck in 1919. It has been estimated that the epidemic claimed the life of nearly 7% of the population in the country.
  • The second point of division was 1951, which differentiated the period of earlier moderate growth from a period of rapid growth in the post-independence period.
    • The growth rate remained otherwise virtually stable during 1931-51. Over a period of thirty years, i.e., 1921-51 population grew at moderately increasing rate.
    • Strikingly, the central zone recorded a consistently lower growth rate than the nation’s average perhaps because of a persistently higher incidence of mortality and substantial out-migration.
    • On the other hand, the western zone experienced a much faster growth in its population. As it was the period of initial industrial growth in the western zone.
    • The states like Bihar, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh recorded a consistently lower growth.
      • Some of these states (like Bihar, U.P. etc) lost their substantial population through the process of out-migration.
  • This phase of rapid growth in population continued up to 1981. Thereafter, though population continues to grow, the rate of growth shows a definite deceleration.
• The density of population increased from 117 persons/ sq km in 1951 to 382 persons/sq km in 2011.
• Almost half of India’s population lives in just five states. These are Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Bihar, West Bengal, and Andhra Pradesh.
• The spatial variation of population densities in the country which ranges from as low as 17 persons per sq km in Arunachal Pradesh to 11,320 persons in the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
• Among the northern Indian States, Bihar (1106), West Bengal (1028) and and Uttar Pradesh (829) have higher densities, while Kerala (860) and Tamil Nadu (555) have higher densities among the peninsular Indian states
• North-South divide: Between the 1971 and 2011 Censuses, the population of Kerala grew by 56% compared to about 140% growth for Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh.

The regional variations in the growth patterns of population in India since Independence:

• Post independence India saw the beginning of rapid growth in the population in the country, as a result of a sharper decline in death rates after independence in 1947.
• Between 1951-1981:
  • The acceleration in the growth rates continued up to 1981. The total population increased from 36.1 crores in 1951 to 68.3 crores  in 1981 recording a growth rate of a little short of 90%.
  • The decades 1951-1981 are referred to as the period of population explosion in India. It was caused by a rapid fall in the mortality rate but a high fertility rate of population in the country.
    • It is in this period, after the Independence, that developmental activities were introduced through a centralised planning process and economy started showing up ensuring the improvement of living condition of people at large. Consequently, there was a high natural increase and higher growth rate.
    • Besides, increased international migration bringing in Tibetans, Bangladeshis, Nepalies and even people from Pakistan contributed to the high growth rate.
  • The average annual exponential growth increased from 1.21% during 1921-51 to 2.2% during 1951-81.
  • Though all the zones witnessed increase in pace of population growth, the northern zone recorded the largest acceleration.
  • The northern zone, in fact, recorded a faster growth than the nation’s average.
    • In this zone, Haryana and Rajasthan experienced a very rapid growth in their population.
  • The next highest growth rate was recorded in the western zone. In fact, as during the pre-independence period, the western zone continued to experience a faster growth than all India average even after independence.
    • At the state level, Gujarat maintained its leading position among the major states in the zone.
  • the central zone (Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh) continued to record a lower growth than the nation’s average probably due to persisting high mortality rates and out-migration.
    • Uttar Pradesh is found to have recorded one of the lowest growth rates in population among the major states during the period.
  • The southern zone, which had experi­enced a faster growth than the nation’s average up to 1951, experienced a reversal in the pattern. With a much smaller increase in the pace of growth, the zone recorded a significantly lower growth than the nation’s average during 1951-81.
    • This could perhaps be attributed to out-migration and also to an early decline in the rate of natural growth with decline in the birth rates.
    • Among the major states in the zone, Tamil Nadu recorded the lowest growth rate, followed by Andhra Pradesh.
    • Remarkably, in Kerala, the growth rate was only marginally lower than the nation’s average.
  • Some of the highest growth rates in the population during the decade were recorded in the northeastern region of the country. This was driven by the in-migration from Bangladesh and other parts of country.
• Post 1981:
  • The growth rate maintained an increasing pace up to 1981, and since then, though population continues to grow, the pace of growth has undergone a definite deceleration. It is expected that this deceleration will continue in future also as decline in the birth rates becomes sharper in more and more states.
    • This was affected by an increase in the mean age at marriage, improved quality of life particularly education of females in the country.
  • Thus, the year 1981 can be called yet another year of great divides in the demographic history of the country.
  • The annual exponential growth rate declined to 2.04 per cent during 1981-2001.
  • Notably, except the central zone, the deceleration in the growth rate has been witnessed all over the country.
    • The central zone has instead recorded a further rise, albeit small, in the annual exponential growth rate, due to a sharp decline in the death rates, unaccompanied by any substantial change in the birth rates during the post-1981 period.
      • Uttar Pradesh in the zone recorded an increase in the growth rate. The only other example from amongst the major states in the country is Bihar, which witnessed a similar increase in the pace of population growth.
        • It is interesting to note that the state of Bihar has reported a continuous increase in the growth rate. Much of the gain in the growth rate was witnessed in areas, which came to the share of Bihar after its bifurcation.
      • These two states (undivided) taken together account for over 27 per cent of India’s population in 2001.
      • Madhya Pradesh has witnessed some decline in the pace of growth.
    • Some of the southern states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu, on the other hand, have experienced a noteworthy decline in the growth rate.
      • In Kerala, the average annual growth rate is found to have declined from over 2% during 1951-1981 to 1.12 during 1981-2001. In both Kerala and Tamil Nadu, birth rates have undergone significant decline during the last few decades.
      • It is in these southern regions that the pace of growth in population has undergone further deceleration during the 1990s. The deceleration has been more conspicuous in the states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu. With substantial decline in the birth rates during the post-independence period, these states have already reached a replacement level fertility in the country.
    • the states of Gujarat and Haryana also experi­enced increase in the growth rate during the 1990s.
      • much of this acceleration is due to gain in the population through migration.
  • Elsewhere in the country also, there are evidences of gain the pace of growth in population at district-level. Many of the districts recording gain in the growth are, however, mainly confined to the north and northeastern parts of the country.
  • During 1991- 2001: The spatial pattern in the growth of population in the country during the 1990s, thus, again reveals a marked ‘north-south’ divide.
    • The States like Kerala, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, Puducherry, and Goa show a low rate of growth not exceeding 20 per cent over the decade. Kerala registered the lowest growth rate (9.4) not only in this group of states but also in the country as a whole.
    • A continuous belt of states from west to east in the north-west, north, and north central parts of the country has relatively high growth rate than the southern states.
      • It is in this belt comprising Gujarat, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh, Sikkim, Assam, West Bengal, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand, the growth rate on the average remained 20-25 per cent.
    • On an average, the northern parts of the country are found to have recorded faster growth in population during the decade as compared to the their counter­parts in the south.
    • The only exceptions to this can be seen in some areas in Punjab plains, in the hilly areas of Himachal Pradesh and Uttaranchal and in districts located in eastern Gujarat.
    • Likewise, to the south of this line also, notable exception of a faster growth can be noticed in northern Maharashtra in and around the district of Thane. The capital district of Bangalore in Karnataka and the areas surrounding the capital district of Andhra Pradesh also appear conspicuous with a reasonably faster growth on the map.
  • During  2001-2011, the growth rates of almost all States and Union Territories have registered a lower figure compared to the previous decade, namely, 1991-2001.
    • The percentage decadal growth rates of the six most populous States, namely, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Bihar, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh have all fallen during 2001-2011 compared to 1991-2001, the fall being the lowest for Andhra Pradesh (3.5% percentage points) and highest for Maharashtra (6.7 percentage points).
    • Tamil Nadu (3.9 percentage points) and Puducherry (7.1 percentage points) have registered some increase during 2001-2011 over the previous decade
• Within a state too there were uneven growth. The urban areas witnessed higher growth due to rural to urban migration.
• Currently, according to NFHS-5, The Total Fertility Rate (TFR), has further declined from 2.2 to 2.0 at the national level between NNFHS 4 and 5.  
  • There are only five states in India which are above replacement level of fertility of 2.1. These states are Bihar, Meghalaya, Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand and Manipur.
    
    • Further, as per Bihar economic survey 2021-22, the TFR for India is expected to decline from 2.1 in 2016-20 to 1.7 during 2031-35. In the same period, the TFR for Bihar is expected to decline from 3.2 to 2.4, a decline of 0.8 in TFR
    • Currently, Bihar with according to NFHS-5 TFR 3.0 (It was 3.2 in NFHS-4) has the highest fertility rate in India..
    • On the Demographic Transition Model, India falls in the third stage due to decreased birth rates and death rates. In 2026, it is projected to be in stage four once the Total Fertility Rate reaches 2.1.On the Demographic Transition Model, India falls in the third stage due to decreased birth rates and death rates. In 2026, it is projected to be in stage four once the Total Fertility Rate reaches 2.1.

Impact of the regional variations in the growth patterns of population on economic imbalances:  

• The relationship between population growth and economic growth is highly debated topic. Low population growth in high-income regions is likely to create social and economic problems while high population growth in low-income regions may slow their development.
• According to Malthusian view, population growth is likely to impede economic growth because it will put pressure on the available resources, result in reduction in per capita income and resources; this, in turn, will result in deterioration in quality of life.
  • However, Contrary to the Malthusian predictions, several of the East Asian countries have been able to achieve economic prosperity and improvement in quality of life in spite of population growth.
  • Even in India, some states like Maharashtra could achieve higher economic growth in spite of high population growth.
• Generally, population can be a limiting factor to economic development because of the following reasons:
  • Population reduces the Rate of Capital Formation:
    • The rapid growth of population diminishes the availability of capital per head which reduces the productivity of its labour force. Their income, as a consequence, is reduced and their capacity to save is diminished which, in turn, adversely affects capital formation.
    • The government has to spend a lot on providing basic facilities like education, housing and medical aid. It reduces capital availability.
  • Higher Rate of Population requires more Investment:
    • A rapidly growing population increases the requirements of demographic investment which at the same time reduces the capacity of the people to save. This creates a serious imbalance between investment requirements and the availability of investible funds.  Most of income is  adsorbed by demographic investment and nothing is left for economic development.
  • Adverse Effect on per Capita Income:
    • So long as the rate of population growth is lower than the rate of economic growth, the per capita income will rise but if population growth exceeds the rate of economic growth, per capita income will fall.
    • e.g. As per Bihar economic survey 2021-22, The Per Capita Income of Bihar in 2020-21 was Rs. 46.3 thousand at current prices; for India, it stood at Rs. 128.8 thousand.
  • Large Population creates the Problem of Unemployment:
    • A fast growth in population means a large number of persons coming to the labour market for whom it may not be possible to provide employment.
    • Unemployment, underemployment and disguised employment are common features in regions with high population growth rate.
  • Rapid Population Growth creates Food Problem:
    • Increased population means more mouths to feed which, in turn, creates pressure upon available stock of food.
    • The inadequate supply of food leads to undernourishment of the people which lowers their productivity.
  • High growth rate of population disturbs the land man ratio (land fragmentation):
    • It has increased the problem of disguised unemployment and reduced per capita farm product in such economies, as the number of landless workers has largely increased followed by low rate of their wages.
    • The low farm productivity has reduced the propensity to save and invest. As a result these economies suffer largely for want of improved farm techniques.
  • Population and Vicious Circle in Poverty:
    • On account of rapid growth of population people are required to spend a major part of their income on bringing up their children.
  • Adverse Effect on Environment:
    • Due to high population growth, a large number of people are being pushed in ecologically sensitive areas such as hill sides and tropical forests. It leads to the cutting of forests for cultivation leading to several environmental change. Besides all this, the increasing population growth leads to the migration of large number to urban areas with industrialization.
    • This results in polluted air, water, noise and population in big cities and towns. This has economic consequences.
  • The regions with high population is also associated with difficulties in providing good governance.
    • A analysis of the crime data with populations in cities revealed a significant positive relationship between crime rate and population size, indicating that the higher populated cities reported the higher crime rates.
    • More crime rates means bad business environment.
• However, The rising population can also create favorable conditions for economic development:
  • Human resource is an asset to an economy, not a liability. India’s major strength lies in its skilled and efficient workforce which attracts many firms to invest and set up their operations in India.
  • High population means more demand in the consumer markets. This creates business opportunity for domestic businesses and attract more FDI.
  • Regional diversity in the population growth rate is related to different window for demographic dividend in India. The demographic dividend for southern states will be over soon. The northern states can supply the labour in that case.
    • This suggests that workers of Bihar will be supporting the ageing population of Kerala in 20 years.
• In India, in majority of States with high population growth rates, the performance in the social and economic sector has been poor.
• In spite of the additional assistance provided, improvement in infrastructure, agriculture and industry have been sub-optimal and the per capita income continues to be low in most of the poorly performing States.
• Poorer states are constrained in their ability to raise revenues, and are able to spend much less per capita on investments in human and physical capital compared to the richer states, thus perpetuating the cycle of inequality.
  • The differences in spending on health and education are particularly stark, with poorer states spending far less per person compared to richer states.
  • Despite a plethora of centrally sponsored schemes which ostensibly aim to correct such imbalances, and despite attempts by successive Finance Commissions to equalize outcomes across states, development spending has not really converged across states.

It is now realized that population growth or demographic transition can have favourable impact on economic growth only when there are optimal interventions aimed at human resource development (HRD) and appropriate utilisation of available human resources. i.e. status of education, skill development, health, use of modern technology etc determines the impact of the population growth on the economic development in the region.

Former Finance Commission member, M Govinda Rao argues that in designing central schemes, the Union government fails to take into account the per capita requirements of each state. As a result, richer states often tend to gain more from such schemes compared to poorer states. Rao uses the example of the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) to show how per capita spending on the scheme is higher for the prosperous states compared to poorer states. Given that the overwhelming majority of children are in the poorer states, this has grave implications for inter-generational equity and equality of opportunity in the country. Furthermore, while Finance Commission allocation formulas tend to account for backwardness in general, they also take into account performance of states on various parameters, which tend to penalise states which have a legacy of poverty and bad governance. It goes against the states with more population growth rate. ©crackingcivilservices.com

To conclude, generally there is convergence of high population growth rate and under-developed regions in India. Since last few decades, almost all the states are continuously registering decline in the population growth. The previous economic Survey has noted that India is set to witness a “sharp slowdown in population growth in the next two decades”. So, there is need to improve the quality of the population which will not only boost the economic development but also check the population growth rate itself. ©crackingcivilservices.com