World Population Prospects 2024: UN

 The most recent “World Population Prospects 2024” study from the United Nations gives us a lot more information about how many people are expected to live on Earth in the future. According to key findings, the world’s population will hit its peak of about 10.3 billion people in the middle of the 1980s. After that, it will start to slowly decline until the end of the century. The fact that this peak is about 700 million fewer than what was thought ten years ago shows that population trends have changed.

Factors Affecting Population Growth

Lower birth rates in some of the world’s most popular countries, like China, are to blame for the change in population predictions. These changes are having a big effect on the demographic picture and give us a new way to think about how populations will change in the future. The earlier coming of this population peak is also seen as a good thing for the environment because it could reduce the stress that human consumption puts on the planet’s resources.

Global Distribution and Ageing

Over a quarter of the world’s people live in places like China, Russia, Japan, and Germany where population growth has stopped. This group is going to grow because countries like Brazil, Iran, and Turkey are going to have their most populous decades in the next 30 years. Also, after 2054, the populations of more than 120 countries will still be growing. This includes big countries like India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Pakistan, and the United States. The ages of people in the population are also changing. In line with trends seen after Covid, life expectancy will rise from an average of 73.3 years in 2024 to 77.4 years in 2054. It is expected that by the late 2070s, there will be more adults aged 65 and up than people under 18 years old. This means that the world’s population is getting older quickly.

Implications

The world’s population is getting older and will finally go down, which brings both problems and chances. It might help the environment in some ways by lowering total consumption, but it also makes people more aware of the need to live in a way that is good for the environment. Also, governments around the world may face problems because of populations that are getting older, such as a lack of workers and higher healthcare needs. In conclusion, it is important to understand these population trends for policymaking and long-term growth, as they will have big effects on the world’s social, economic, and environmental settings in the future.

About UN Population Prospects

• Global and Regional Trends: The UN Population Prospects study projects the world’s population to peak at about 10.4 billion by 2100, with India surpassing China as the most populous country by 2023. Africa is highlighted for its significant population growth, with Nigeria expected to be the third most populous country by 2050.
• Longevity and Migration: By 2050, the global life expectancy is projected to reach nearly 77 years, reflecting improvements in healthcare. Conversely, Europe’s population may decline due to falling birth rates and increased longevity. Migration plays a crucial but complex role in shaping demographic changes, especially in developed regions.

World Population Review

 The United States Census Bureau World Population Clock recently released its “World Population Review” report. According to the report, the world’s population (as of September 2022) was 7.9 billion. It is to reach 8 billion by November 2022. In 2015, the world population was 7.2 billion.

Key Findings of the Report

• India and China were the only countries with more than 1 billion people.
• China is the most populous nation in the world with 1.42 billion people.
• The population of India is 1.41 billion. India is to overtake China and become the most populous nation in the world by 2030.
• The population growth rate of the world is decreasing. It will reach zero by 2080-2100. After 2100, the growth rate will be negative.
• Prediction made: By 2100, the world population is to reach 10.4 billion people.

Countries with more than 100 million people

Twelve countries in the world have more than 100 million people. They are as follows:

• US: 338 million
• Indonesia: 275 million
• Pakistan: 236 million
• Nigeria: 219 million
• Brazil: 215 million
• Bangladesh: 171 million
• Russia: 144 million
• Mexico: 127 million
• Japan: 123 million
• Ethiopia: 124 million
• Philippines: 115 million
• Egypt: 111 million

Of these twelve countries, the population of Russia and Japan is to decrease by 2050. But the population growth rate of the rest of the countries is expected to increase.

Countries with less than 100 million people

• Vatican City is the least populated country in the world with a population count of 500 people.
• Eighty countries have populations between 10 million and 99.9 million.
• Sixty-six countries have populations between 1 million and 9.9 million.
• Seventy-Four countries have a population of less than one million.

Population Growth rate

• World Population growth rate: 140 babies are born every minute
• The growth rate fell below 1% in 2020. This occurrence is the first since 1950.

Future Predictions

Half of the world’s population is expected to come from just eight countries. They are as follows:

• India
• Egypt
• Ethiopia
• Nigeria
• Pakistan
• Philippines
• Tanzania
• Congo

As fertility and birth rates are increasing in some African countries, their population is expected to double in the coming days. Another reason for the doubling is the decrease in malnutrition and infant mortality.

Life Expectancy

• Global life expectancy has increased. It was 72.8 years in 2019. This is nine years longer than the expectancy in 1990. The global expectancy is expected to increase and reach 77.2 years by 2050.
• Life expectancy is increasing because of the reduction of impacts of non-communicable diseases and AIDS.

World’s population touches 8 billion: How India is placed

 

The 8-billion-humans milestone brings both opportunities and challenges, especially for India, set to become the world's most populous nation by 2023

The human population touched 8 billion on Tuesday (November 15), a milestone that heralds both opportunities and challenges — especially for India, which is set to become the world’s most populous country next year by surpassing China.

While the United Nations hailed the 8-billion figure as “a testament to humanity’s achievements”, it also sounded a note of caution.

“The growth of our population is a testament to humanity’s achievements, including reductions in poverty and gender inequality, advancements in health care, and expanded access to education. These have resulted in more women surviving childbirth, more children surviving their early years, and longer, healthier lifespans, decade after decade,” the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) .

However, in a report, Liu Zhenmin, UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, said rapid population growth can make challenges of hunger and poverty steeper. “Rapid population growth makes eradicating poverty, combating hunger and malnutrition, and increasing the coverage of health and education systems more difficult,” the UN official said

Unequal distribution

The UN population report said the global population is growing at its slowest rate since 1950, having fallen under 1 per cent in 2020. The world’s population could grow to around 8.5 billion in 2030 and 9.7 billion in 2050. It is projected to reach a peak of around 10.4 billion people during the 2080s and to remain at that level until 2100.

“More than half of the projected increase in the global population up to 2050 will be concentrated in eight countries: the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines and the United Republic of Tanzania. Countries of sub-Saharan Africa are expected to contribute more than half of the increase anticipated through 2050,” the report said.

How India is placed

India is projected to overtake China as the world’s most populous country in 2023, “with prospects to reap the demographic dividend as the median age of an Indian this year was 28.7 years, compared to 38.4 for China and 48.6 for Japan against a global value of 30.3 years,” a PTI report said. The population prospects report had said that India’s population stands at 1.412 billion in 2022, compared to China’s 1.426 billion. India is projected to have a population of 1.668 billion in 2050, way ahead of China’s 1.317 billion people by the middle of the century. According to UNFPA estimates, 68 per cent of India’s population is between 15-64 years old in 2022, while people aged 65 and above comprise seven per cent of the population.

As per UN estimates, over 27 per cent of the country’s population is between the ages of 15-29. At 253 million, India is also home to the world’s largest adolescent population (10-19 years).UNFPA has noted that India has its largest ever adolescent and youth population. According to UNFPA projections, India will continue to have one of the youngest populations in the world till 2030 and is currently experiencing a demographic window of opportunity, a “youth bulge” that will last till 2025.

How China is placed

China, which is weighed down by a rapidly increasing ageing population, is projected to enter a “severe ageing” phase in 2035 with 400 million people above 60 years. This can be blamed mainly on its decades of one-child policy.

China’s elderly population reached 267 million last year, accounting for 18.9 per cent, Wang Haidong, director of the National Health Commission’s Department of Aging and Health said.

It is estimated that the elderly population will top 300 million by 2025 and 400 million by 2035, he said in September, according to Chinese official media report.The size of China’s senior population and its proportion of the total population is expected to peak around 2050, posing huge challenges to the provision of public services and to the national social security system, Wang said.

On the one hand, China is rapidly ageing, and on the other, its population is in decline due to falling birth rates. This is raising concerns over the future availability of a labour force, the main driver of the country’s economic growth.China’s population grew by less than half a million-last year to 1.4126 billion as the birth rates fell for the fifth consecutive year.

Since last year, China has allowed couples to have three children and even announced incentives for people to have more children.

Note of caution from UN secy general

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has highlighted some of the challenges the world is facing, saying that “as our human family grows larger, it is also growing more divided.”

“Unless we bridge the yawning chasm between the global haves and have-nots, we are setting ourselves up for an 8-billion-strong world filled with tensions and mistrust, crisis and conflict,” Guterres wrote, adding, “A handful of billionaires control as much wealth as the poorest half of the world. The top one per cent globally pockets one fifth of the world’s income, while people in the richest countries can expect to live up to 30 years longer than those in the poorest. As the world has grown richer and healthier in recent decades, these inequalities have grown too.”

Source: Indian Express, 15/11/22

Population growth: Myths, realities and the deeper neglect

 As India prospers, educational standards improve and more and more women acquire a degree of control over their own lives, the population growth rate would keep falling, and eventually turn negative.

The UN report posits that India would overtake China in population in 2023. This has given rise to dire warnings of a population explosion in India, and concerted exhortations to adopt stringent measures to curb population growth.

The publication of the United Nations’ World Population Prospects 2022 has served as an occasion for the display in India of much bigotry and ignorance by very many people who should know better.

The report posits that India would overtake China in population in 2023. This has given rise to dire warnings of a population explosion in India, and concerted exhortations to adopt stringent measures to curb population growth.

In the ideas sphere of the Sangh Parivar, the family of organisations that take ideological inspiration from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, of which the BJP is a proud member, population explosion is code for the danger of Muslims outnumbering Hindus in India. The UN report’s release has been followed by shrill calls to rein in Muslim proliferation, forcing the BJP’s Muslim face, Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, to say that the population explosion is a problem for the nation, and not of any particular community.

Let us get some things straight.

• There is no population explosion. On the other hand, India has entered a phase in which we have to prepare for a dwindling population, like Japan.
• One man marrying multiple women does not increase the population any more than one man marrying one woman.
• A child born represents not just a mouth to feed but two hands and a brain to create new value. Particularly in a post-agrarian society, each additional human being would produce far more than is required to sustain herself. People are a source of wealth, not a burden.
• Socio-economic backwardness is the biggest determinant of population growth, not religion.

India’s population grew the fastest in the 1970s and the 1980s, when the annual growth rate of the population was around 2.3%. The growth rate has steadily declined, and struggles to reach 1% now. As India prospers, educational standards improve and more and more women acquire a degree of control over their own lives, the population growth rate would keep falling, and eventually turn negative.

What determines the rate of population growth is the average number of children born to a woman during her lifetime. This is called the Total Fertility Rate (TFR). When this is high, the population would grow. When it falls, the growth rate of population would fall.

When it reaches two, on average, each woman would replace two people of her generation with two new lives. Since every infant does not survive to adulthood, the average number of children per woman has to be a little higher than 2, for new births to replace eventual deaths of the mother and her reproductive partner. The replacement TFR is generally accepted as 2.1.

According to the findings of the Fifth Round of National Family Health Survey, released in May, TFR for India as a whole has already dipped below 2.1. The survey was conducted over 2019-21, and yielded a TFR of 1.99 for India as a whole.

Some states such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand continue to have TFRs higher than 2.1, but in these places too, the trend is downward. This is a uniform trend from the First Family Health Survey (1992-93) onwards.

Rural fertility rates tend to be higher than urban ones. The fertility rate falls across income quintiles, proceeding from the lowest fifth to the highest 20%. TFR for women with zero years of schooling is 2.82, that for women with more than 12 years of schooling is 1.78.

Socio-economic status and the degree of autonomy women seem to determine how many children they end up having, on average. It is not surprising that a poor state like Bihar has a fertility rate of 2.99, while the figure for Kerala is 1.8 and that for Goa, 1.3.

Muslim population vs Hindus

Let us look at the bugbear of the Hindu right, the supposedly exploding population of Muslims. Muslims at large have a relatively low socio-economic status, and their fertility rates are higher than those of Hindus. However, at 2.36, the Muslim average TFR is lower than that for Bihar (2.99) as a whole and on par with Uttar Pradesh’s 2.35.

Does a Muslim man marrying multiple wives increase Muslim fecundity? Since the number of men roughly equals the number of women, when many men take multiple wives, they condemn several other men to lives of solitude. Population grows with the number of children and children are born to women. The average number of children born to a woman determines the size of the population, not whether several women were impregnated by the same man or by different men.

The average TFR for Muslims is admittedly higher than the average TFR for Hindus. But Muslim TFR has been declining faster than the Hindu TFR, as the periodic NFHS rounds show. The TFR for Muslims has come down from 4.43 in 1992-93 to 2.35 in 2019-21, a decline of nearly 47%. For Hindus, the decline was from 3.3 to 1.94, a decline of 42%.

In Kerala’s Muslim-majority Malappuram district, the TFR lagged the TFR of other districts, but has gone below the replacement level of 2.1. Bangladesh has a TFR well below 2.1, as has Iran and Turkey.

As India prospers, backward states like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, and socioeconomically deprived communities like Muslims and the Scheduled Castes would also advance, and register ever lower TFRs.

The population would not begin to decline as soon as a society achieves a TFR below 2.1. Better healthcare and nutrition keep people alive longer. The youth bulge created before the TFR begins to decline would continue to reproduce. And, even if at a low rate for each woman member of that youth bulge, the size of that reproductive age group would keep the population growing, till they themselves grow old and fall by the wayside. The cohorts that come after them would be smaller than the numbers who pass on, making the population shrink.

Japan and several countries of Western Europe have gone through the transition. In Germany, a shrinking human population paved the way for the return of the wolf to that land. The US is one rich country that is insulated from the problem of a shrinking population because of the constant infusion of fresh blood via immigration.

The real population problem

Why is a shrinking population a problem? Its share of the elderly, non-working population would steadily rise. They have to be cared for by the incomes generated by the proportionately shrinking population of workers.

Just because someone has prudently saved during their work-life, it does not automatically mean that their old age needs would be met. The saving represents a claim on the productive capacity of the economy, from which profits, dividends, interest payments and taxes are extracted. If there are not enough people to work that productive capacity, merely having made financial savings in the past would not protect a pensioner from a tough life.

This is why China abandoned its one-child policy and desperately seeks to persuade its citizens to have three children.

The challenge before India is not any population explosion, but in creating the human, physical and institutional capital that would raise productivity. Ruling party functionaries would do well to abandon futile projects such as conjuring up population dangers that do not exist or baring the fangs of regally serene ancient lions in their contemporary rendition, and focus their attention on this substantive challenge. That is the way to reap India’s demographic dividend.

TK Arun

The Federal, 15/07/22

Births and rights: On laws on reproductive rights

 

Laws on reproductive rights must recognise differences in orientation, relationship choices

A Bill that the government of the land intends to make law, cannot be exclusivist at the very outset; and at least, with the time of passage, it is imperative that it loses its biases. It cannot exclude certain categories of citizens from the benefits and rights that the law seeks to confer upon the people of the country. And, that is what the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Bill, 2020, that was passed in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday, has done, by excluding two categories — LGBTQIA+ and single men. Undoubtedly, the time has indeed come for such a Bill; for government intervention to regulate the field of fertility treatments, and by seeking to establish a national registry and registration authority for all clinics and medical professionals in the segment, it will fill a vacuum. The Bill has provisions to protect the rights of the donors, the commissioning couple and the children born out of ART, to grant and withdraw licences for clinics and banks depending on performance factors. It proposes to make it impossible for outlaws to operate within the system and profit from it, while exploiting patients. It also plans to put an end to illegal trafficking in embryos, and mistreatment of the poor coerced by their circumstances into donating eggs or sperm.

It is unfathomable that a Bill, so progressive by its very nature, would glaringly exclude members of the LGBTQIA+ community and single men. As citizens, these groups too have the right to exercise reproductive rights. The omission is particularly baffling considering that the legislation has made provisions for single women too, apart from a commissioning heterosexual couple. The Union Health Minister said that several recommendations made by the Parliamentary Standing Committee had been considered. Unfortunately, despite expert recommendations to include both categories, the Committee recommended ‘it would not be appropriate to allow live-in couples and same sex couples to avail the facility of ART’ citing the best interest of the child born through ART. It also recorded that ‘given [the] Indian family structure and social milieu and norms, it will not be very easy to accept a child whose parents are together but not legally married’. While the law would do well to be cognisant of the sentiments of the people, its purpose is also to nudge retrograde social norms out of their freeze-frames towards broader acceptance of differences and preferences. Legislators have also pointed out that the Surrogacy Bill intrinsically connected with the ART Bill was pending in the Rajya Sabha, and that it would only be appropriate that both Bills be considered together before they are passed. The ball is now squarely in the court of the Upper House; legislators can still set right the omissions and introduce the spirit of justice in the letter of the law.

Source: The Hindu, 3/12/21

With India’s demographic transition, come challenges

 

Sonalde Desai, Debasis Barik write: The demographic dividend is smaller, but will last longer due to regional variation in the onset of fertility decline. As southern states struggle with the growing burden of supporting the elderly, northern states will supply the workforce needed for growth.

Success brings its challenges. The first challenge is accepting the win, the second is to learn to live with it. Recent results from National Family Health Survey-5 (NFHS-5) suggest that we are entering an era where we will have to tackle these challenges. NFHS-5 places the total fertility rate (TFR) at 2.0. With two parents having two children, we have reached a replacement level of fertility. Due to many young people, the population will continue to grow, but the replacement level fertility is a significant milestone in India’s demographic history. This decline is spread evenly across the country, with 29 states and UTs having a TFR of 1.9 or less, with seven below 1.6. All southern states have a TFR of 1.7-1.8, similar to that of Sweden. Even states that have not reached replacement fertility — Bihar and Uttar Pradesh — seem to be headed in that direction. Between 2015-16 and 2019-20, UP’s TFR has declined from 2.7 to 2.4, while Bihar’s TFR has declined from 3.4 to 3.0. Part of the original coterie of lagging states, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan both have achieved TFRs of 2.0.

This success, however, brings its challenge. As fertility declines, the proportion of the older population grows, and societies face the challenge of supporting an ageing population with a shrinking workforce. This challenge is greater for leaders at the beginning of the demographic transition — Kerala and Tamil Nadu. According to the National Statistical Office, while the proportion of population greater than age 60 was 8.6 per cent for India as a whole in 2011, it was 12.6 per cent for Kerala and 10.4 per cent for Tamil Nadu, projected to increase further to 20.9 per cent and 18.2 per cent respectively by 2031. Interestingly, these are also among the more prosperous states in India, whose economic activities increasingly rely on migrant labour from other states. With a paucity of data on migration, it is not easy to estimate the dependence on migrant workers, but the Covid crisis and mass return migration of interstate workers suggest that many industries such as auto parts manufacturing and construction in southern states rely on semi-skilled migrants, often transported under contractual arrangements, from northern and eastern states, particularly Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Odisha.

With ageing states increasingly relying on a workforce from relatively younger states to maintain their economic prosperity, it may be time for us to change our mindset about critical dimensions of India’s federalism. Concern with population growth and a desire to not reward non-performing states have shaped inter-state relations in India over the past decades, shaping the allocation of political power and central resources devolved to states.

While the Indian constitution mandates allocation of Lok Sabha seats across states in proportion to their population via the Delimitation Commission, the Emergency-era 42nd amendment froze seat allocation to the population share of states in the 1971 Census. This freeze, originally expected to end in 2001, was further extended until after the 2031 Census by the 84th amendment. This has led to a much greater population per constituency in northern states than in southern states. In 2011, Uttar Pradesh had an average of 25 lakh persons per constituency, while Tamil Nadu had 18.5 lakh.

The division of central allocation to states is another area where population concerns have dominated equity considerations. Much of the Centre-state revenue sharing occurs through recommendations of various Finance Commissions. The sixth to fourteenth Finance Commissions allocated resources between states using the 1971 population shares of various states. The Fifteenth Finance commission used Census data from 2011, but it also added the criteria of demographic performance, rewarding states with lower TFR.

In view of sustained fertility decline in all states and the overall attainment of replacement level fertility nationally, should a focus on demographic performance continue to trump principles of equity? The answer depends on our view of India’s demographic future. Does India want to pursue China’s route of sharply lower fertility, with a large number of families stopping at one child, or are we content with moderately below replacement fertility of about 1.7-1.8? If the latter, we are well-positioned to head in this direction. Little needs to be done beyond improving the quality of family planning services for couples already desirous of small families.

In our opinion, trying to aim for a very low fertility of TFR below 1.5 will be a mistake. As China’s experience shows, while very low fertility provides a temporary demographic dividend with a reduced number of dependents to workers, the increased burden of caring for the elderly may become overwhelming over the long term. India is fortunate that its demographic dividend may be smaller, but is likely to last for a more extended period due to regional variation in the onset of the fertility decline. As southern states struggle with the growing burden of supporting the elderly, northern states will supply the workforce needed for economic growth. The increasing pace of migration may help shore up economic expansion in the south with its shrinking workforce augmented by workers from other states.

If we choose to follow this path of moderate fertility decline coupled with inter-state sharing of demographic dividend, there is little justification for continuing to punish states that entered the demographic transition later. The Sixteenth Finance Commission and the next Delimitation Commission must be freed from the burden of managing the demographic transition, focused on carrying out their tasks in the best interests of Indian federalism.

Written by Sonalde Desai , Debasis Barik 

Source: Indian Express, 1/12/21

Population: A promise rather than a problem

 India’s population boom is over. Headcount stability is assured. For the first time on record, the country’s total fertility rate (TFR) has dropped below the replacement rate of 2.1, as assessed. According to data crunched from findings of the fifth National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5) and released on Wednesday, the average number of children per woman has fallen from 2.2 found by the survey of 2015-16 to 2.0 in 2019-20, slipping into a zone that would leave us with fewer people overall if sustained. For a country that is both proud of and alarmed by its own multitudes, this is momentous news, regardless of bright or dismal views on the value of our being a billion plus. In academia, the gloom of Malthus’s crystal ball has long been lifted by the ingenuity of human enterprise in staying ahead of a doomsday scenario on this front. Yet, anxiety over how populous we are has prevailed for decades and even prodded policy along. Our TFR estimate of 2.0 is drawn from a study with a sample large enough to reflect reality, and even if we allow for some margin of error, a major bulge of demography that endured for a century can now be consigned to history. And yesterday’s battles should not detain us.

The fieldwork for India’s official health report was done almost entirely before the covid pandemic. It shows both gains and losses, with a slide-back on anaemia a cause for worry. But it is the fertility finding that stands out. Not just for a long trend about to snap, but also the controversy that efforts at population control often whip up. Our two-child norm of ‘family planning’ was always advisory in nature, unlike China’s strict one-child policy that it had to reverse after its TFR slumped just as its demography began to drive its economy. But the Emergency in India saw a wave of forced sterilizations, a scandal whose effects have lingered in the suspicion that state-led vaccination drives arouse—think polio or covid—among some citizens. That was back in the misguided 1970s. Attempts at setting limits for offspring, however, have outlived that gloomy era of population pessimism: Uttar Pradesh recently sought to use selective state employment and welfare provisions as an instrument to cap the size of families. While UP has had a relatively high TFR, it too has seen it slide from 2.7% in 2015-16 to 2.4% in 2019-20, as per NFHS-5 data. At this pace, its state-level rate will go below 2.1 in a few years. The uproar that followed UP’s policy announcement was justified not by this trend, though, but by a matter of principle.

Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, adopted on 26 November 1949, grants us all the fundamental right to personal liberty. While exceptions exist under the law, how many children an individual opts for is a self-evident personal choice and any conception of liberty must cover reproductive autonomy. Regardless of how deliberate a couple’s decisions on having kids are, few other life choices are so intimate that it is hard to see why the state should meddle with family size at all. Any post-Malthusian reading of economics holds population as an asset and not liability, as creators of value and not mouths to feed, and so a common cause can’t be cited for intervention. Families have been shrinking on their own anyway, with diverse socio-economic factors at play, and the emergence of our economy could see us clubbed in the same bracket as countries that have fallen short of people. Ironies rarely get richer.

Source: Mintepaper, 25/11/21

Bad news for girls: Sex ratio at birth plunges in south

Kerala Is Lone State To Buck Alarming Trend

Abysmal sex ratios have generally been associated with states like Haryana and Punjab. However, the data for 2007 to 2016 on sex ratio at birth, an indication of which way the sex ratio will move in coming years, shows that southern states barring Kerala have witnessed some of the most dramatic drops. Data collated by the office of the Registrar General of India from the civil registration system (CRS) showed that in 2016, Andhra Pradesh and Rajasthan had the worst sex ratio at birth (SRB) of 806. Tamil Nadu was sixth from the bottom with its ratio falling from 935 in 2007 to 840, compared with the all-India figure of 877. In Karnataka, it fell from 1,004 to 896. In Telangana, it fell from 954 in 2013, when the state was formed, to 881. Since most of these states have achieved near 100% registration of births, the low ratios cannot be because large numbers of female births aren’t getting registered. In the case of Andhra Pradesh, the drop to 806 in 2016 from 971 the previous year does seem abnormal. LN Prema Kumari, joint director of census operations in Andhra, said the sudden fall was due to the confusion created by the bifurcation of population between Andhra and Telangana. However, the bifurcation happened in 2013 and the data from then till 2015 does not show any sharp variations though the data for both states see-saws over the years. Also, in 2016 both states have witnessed a fall in the ratio. Tamil Nadu had dropped steadily from an SRB of 939 in 2006 to an all-time low of 818 in 2015. Compared to that, 840 in 2016, though lower than even Haryana’s 865, was an improvement. Since 2011, the state’s SRB has been lower than the all-India one. In Karnataka too, ever since 2011, when it achieved 98% birth registration and an SRB of 983, the ratio has steadily declined. ‘Fall in sex ratio due to registration system’ Sabu George, an activist who has worked for decades on the issue of falling sex ratios, explained that while declining sex ratios in southern states were a worry and a reality, they seem to be too low in 2016. “I think there is a problem in the birth registration system in some districts in these states, which is pulling the overall ratio down,” he said. This analysis by TOI does not consider the smaller states and Union territories since the number of births in these are too small for any firm conclusions. Between 2007 and 2016, states which earlier had extremely low sex ratios at birth such as Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and Maharashtra, have improved, with Delhi and Assam showing the most significant jump from 848 to 902 and from 834 to 888 respectively. But many others like West Bengal, Odisha, Jammu and Kashmir and Goa are slipping downwards.
 In Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, the SRB fell from 924 to 837 and from 930 to 885 respectively. With just 60% birth registration, these numbers may not give an accurate picture. But anecdotally sex selection is leading to lower ratios in these states too. Madhya Pradesh too had just about 75% registration of births.

Source: Times of India, 28/01/2019

Now, majority of families have 2 or less kids

Subodh Varma

New Delhi:





For the first time in the country's recorded history, more than half the families do not have more than two children, according to Census 2011 data released on Monday.About 54% married women reported having two or less children, significantly up from the 46.6% two-or-less children mothers counted by the previous Census in 2001, reflecting a pan-India desire for smaller families.
There were about 34 crore married women who had about 92 crore children in 2011: an average of about 2.69 child ren per married woman. In 2001, the corresponding figures were 27 crore married women having 83 crore children at an average of 3.03 children per woman. The dip in the average number of women is the sharpest compared to earlier decades.
Another feature is that women are deferring child birth to later years. Among women in the 20-24 years age group, 35% had no child in 2011 compared with 32% in 2001, and in the age group 2529, 16% had no child compared with 13.4% in 2001.
As a result of these changes, the period fertility rate -the average number of child ren that a woman in the age group 45-49 years has ever borne -has declined by a drastic 16% between 2001 and 2011. The fertility rate of women between 45 and 49 years, that is, when their child bearing days are over, is considered a standard measure by demographers for defining average fertility.
The 14% decline in Muslim fertility rate is significant because in the previous decade (1991 to 2001) the decline was only 5%. So it appears that Muslim families too are quickly catching up with other communities, impelled by similar economic and social considerations.

Source: Times of India, 2-03-3016

Sex ratio dips, Jains & Sikhs buck trend

Subodh Varma





Two religious communi ties of India, Sikhs and Jains, have turned the corner on child sex ratio while all others showed further dips, as did the national average, according to fresh Census 2011 data released on Wednesday .Child sex ratio is the number of girls aged 0-6 years for every 1,000 boys in the same age group. It is a crucial measure for India where preference for sons and smaller families has driven the number of girls ­ and women ­ to unnaturally low levels in the past several decades. The child sex ratio for the whole country now stands at 918, dipping further from 927 in 2001, and reaching the lowest level since 1961.
Among Hindus, who make up nearly 80% of India's population, the child sex ratio declined from 925 in 2001 to 913 in the latest Census data. This is the biggest decline -of 12 points -among all religious communities and a chilling reminder for the continuing need for much more robust action to save the girl child.
The child sex ratio among Christians declined from 964 to 958 while among Muslims it declined from 950 to 943. The turnaround among Sikhs and Jains is a silver lining in this rather bleak scenario because these communities had the worst sex ratios despite being generally better off and better educated.
It reflects a growing consciousness about the issue created in part by considerable public campaigns in Punjab where most Sikhs live.However, the ratio is still dangerously low in both communities.
As reported by TOI earli er, Christians have the best population sex ratio, with 1,023 females for every 1,000 males, way ahead of all other communities and the national average of 943. Hindus and Sikhs have the worst sex ratios, at 939 and 903 respective ly. At 951, Muslims have a better sex ratio than Hindus and Sikhs but lagging behind Buddhists (965) and Jains (951). The latest Census data also sheds light on the growth of literacy among various religious communities. Muslims, who showed the lowest literacy rate of 59% in 2001, recorded the biggest increase and reached 69% in 2011.
Although still short of the national average of 73%, and still the lowest among all religious communities, the gap is rapidly closing. Jains continue to have the highest literacy rate, at 95%, followed by the Christians who are now at 85%. All communities are showing a much higher rate of growth of female literacy than male literacy . Overall, across India, female literacy jumped from 54% to 65% while male literacy rose from 75% to 81%.
Times View
The data shows that for all the efforts thus far, the child sex ratio continues to fall for most communities except those in which it was already at abysmally low levels. This must be reversed. Strict enforcement of government controls on sex selection tests is one part of what needs to be done, but cannot be the sole answer. That must be combined with more vigorous campaigns for awareness about discrimination against the girl child being a social evil and with incentives for people to have daughters. Some tax breaks already exist, but there needs to be more thought given to devicing more such incentives.

Source: Times of India, 31-12-2015

Region and religion both matter for better population indicators

For better population indicators, region and religion both matter, suggest data from 2011 and 2001 decadal Censuses.

According to the data, in the more developed southern States all communities do better than in the more backward northern States.

Poor education indicators

Between 2001 and 2011, Muslims (24.65 per cent) remained the group with the fastest population growth, followed closely by Scheduled Tribes (23.66 per cent) and Scheduled Castes (20.85 per cent). All three groups have historically had poor education indicators, especially for women, and restricted access to health care.

However, in States such as Kerala and Tamil Nadu, which are considered advanced in terms of income and development indicators, population growth is low for all communities, the numbers show.

The population growth rate for Muslims in Kerala, for example, while substantially higher than that for Hindus or Christians in the State, is lower than the national average for Hindus, and half that of Hindus in States like Bihar.

“When the demographic transition is occurring, the better off communities first reduce their fertility, which is then followed by poorer communities. This is exactly what we are seeing, and in developed States, access to education and health becomes available to all,” Dr. P Arokiasamy, demographer and professor at the International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai, said.

A similar trend is observed in other States; those with higher than average Hindu growth rates have higher than average Muslim growth rates too.

Two notable exceptions are Assam and Uttarakhand, where the Muslim growth rate is significantly higher than the national average, while the Hindu growth rate is lower.

“It is undeniable that in the border districts of Assam, there is illegal immigration. There is no other explanation for the Muslim population growth there,” a senior Census official said.

Worst sex ratio

When it comes to sex ratio, Sikhs as a community had the worst sex ratio in 2011 at 903 females for every 1,000 males, followed by non-SC/ ST Hindus (929), while Christians had the best sex ratio (1,023 females for every 1,000 males) followed by STs (990). Here again, region matters.

In Punjab and Haryana, all communities see their sex ratios plummet to their worst, while in Kerala, the sex ratio of all communities except Sikhs and Buddhists rises above 1,000 females for every 1,000 males.

In Tamil Nadu, the sex ratio for Muslims, Christians and SCs rises above 1,000.

Keywords: Census 2011 data on Population by Religious Communities, census religion data, Census of India: Religion, religion data of Census 2011

How India’s population bulge could become a ticking bomb

Today, an estimated average of 68,922 Indian citizens will turn 25. Tomorrow there will another 68,922 newly minted 25 year olds. Ditto the day after tomorrow and the day after that, and so on till 2025.

That number— 68,922 — is an average calculated on a projection of age-wise population data that was sourced from the national census of 2011 and what it means is this: Every  month, 2.1 million people in India will turn 25. Of them, 1.48 million will be in rural India and remaining 0.62 million in urban centres. What it also means is that 10 years from now, in 2025, there will be 690 million Indian citizens below the age of 25.

By then, India’s population is expected to grow to 1.43 billion and under-25s will comprise more than 48%.

Why am I throwing these numbers at you on a Sunday morning? You, I and everyone else already know(s) that even today India is one of the world’s biggest “young” nations with nearly two-thirds of its population below the age of 35 and nearly half below 25.

So what’s the big deal about 2025 when there will be nearly 700 million under-25s?

Quite a bit, really, if you consider how India’s population numbers rarely make their way into political discourse nowadays, at least not in any serious manner.

Read | Census sees jump in tech graduates, but jobs scarce

No Indian political party, whichever part of the spectrum you choose to look at, talks about the country’s population surge and the immense challenges that it poses.

Yet references to India’s “demographic dividend” are plenty, with everyone from marketers, economists and politicians referring to that big bulge of young people as the real edge that India could have over other countries across the world — many of which (with the exception of some in Africa) have populations that are aging.

India’s present population of 1.25 billion (or “125 crore” as Prime Minister Narendra Modi likes to phrase it in his Hindi speeches; he made 28 references to it in his Independence Day speech this year) and the estimate that it will outstrip China’s by 2022, and not 2028 as was earlier expected, often become a cue for chest-thumping pride, which, if you really think of it, may be misplaced.

Having a big bulge of people in the age group of 18-55 (or the working age group) can most certainly be a potential advantage — potential because many things have to fall into place before it becomes real. More than seven out of 10 of India’s young people live in rural India, primarily eking their livelihood off unproductive farms with little skill or education to be of use in anything other than manual labour.

Read | 127,42,39,769 and on the increase: India's huge population

Those in urban areas are only slightly better off with their overall quality of education making them inadequate for meaningful employment.

Successive Indian governments, the present incumbent included, have tried to focus on addressing the skill deficit in India’s working age population but with limited success.

The thing is that government schemes to make people job-ready such as Modi’s Skill India are slow burn programmes that take much longer than it takes for the population bulge to grow bigger.

You could accuse me of invoking the ghost of Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus, the 18th century English cleric, who predicted a catastrophe if unchecked population growth (which he said grows geometrically) outstripped the supply of food (which grows arithmetically) but consider the facts.

India’s population growth has actually slowed down (it was 3% in the 1980s; 1.8% in the 1990s; and is now only 1.2%) but on a base as large as India’s, even 1.2% leads to absolute numbers that are staggering.

Malthus predicted that runaway growth of the world’s population without the resources to feed and sustain it would ultimately lead to a catastrophe as a spate of famines, diseases, epidemics and wars would take place.

Now consider this. If India’s population of young people grows to huge numbers — as it will — but meets up with large-scale joblessness and millions of dashed hopes, and that in turn leads to widespread civil unrest, crime and violence, would you call it a catastrophe?

 Sanjoy Narayan is the editor-in-chief of Hindustan Times. He tweets as @sanjoynarayan

In 7 yrs, India will surpass China in population: UN

Washington: PTI





India is expected to surpass China to become the world's most populous nation by 2022, the United Nations said on Thursday . China and India remain the two largest countries in the world, each with more than 1 billion people, representing 19% and 18% of the world's population, respectively .“But by 2022, the population of India is expected to surpass that of China,“ said the report `World Population Prospects: The 2015 Revision', released by the UN. Currently , among the 10 largest countries in the world, one is in Africa (Nigeria), five are The curr in Asia (Bangladesh, expecte China, India, Indo2050 and nesia, and Pakistan), two are in Latin America (Brazil and Mexico), one is in Northern America (USA), and one is in Europe (Russian Federation). Of these, Nigeria's population is growing the most rapidly . Consequently , the population of Nigeria is projected to surpass that of the US by about 2050.
By 2050, six countries are expected to exceed 300 million: China, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Pakistan, and the USA, the report said.
A significant aging of the population in the next several decades is projected for most regions of the world, starting with Europe where 34% of the population is projected to be over 60 years old by 2050. In Latin America and the Caribbean and in Asia, the population will be transformed from having 11% to 12% of people aged over 60 years today to more than 25% by 2050. Africa has the young est age distribution of any major area, but it is also pro jected to age rapidly , with the population aged 60 years or over rising from 5%today to 9%by 2050.
The current world pop ulation of 7.3 billion is ex pected to reach 8.5 billion by 2030, 9.7 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100, the re port said.

Hindus’ population share in U.S. doubles in 7 years

Proportion of Christians in U.S. drops from 78.4 per cent to 70.6 per cent.

The proportion of Christians in the U.S. population dropped by ten per cent over the last seven years, even as Hindus and Muslims nearly doubled their share, according to a recent study.

In its report on “America’s Changing Religious Landscape” released this week, the Pew Research Center said that while the U.S. remained home to more Christians than any other country in the world, and roughly seven out of ten Americans continued to identify with some branch of the Christian faith, “growth has been especially great among Muslims and Hindus, albeit from a very low base.”

The Pew study found that while the proportion of Christians across sub-denominations dropped from 78.4 per cent in 2007 to 70.6 per cent in 2014, the figure for Hindus rose from 0.4 to 0.7 per cent during that period, and similarly for Muslims it rose from 0.4 to 0.9 per cent.

Well educated

The report also shed light on attributes of specific religious communities within the U.S., noting for example that more than one in ten immigrants identified with a non-Christian faith, such as Islam or Hinduism, and that Hindus and Jews continued to be the most highly educated religious traditions.

Thirty-six per cent of Hindus said their annual family income exceeded $100,000, compared with 19 per cent of the public overall, and 34 per cent of the community made between $50,000 and $99,999.

The population of U.S. Hindus also appeared skewed towards younger cohorts, with 56 per cent of them falling within the age range of 30-49 years and 34 per cent within the 18-29 category.

Unsurprisingly an overwhelming majority, 91 per cent, of U.S. Hindus were of Asian origin, with only four per cent or lower percentage each being white, black, Latino or mixed.

Keywords: U.S. population, Hindus population in U.S. America’s Changing Religious Landscape, U.S. Hindus