FRIDAY, AUGUST 12, 2016
12
/hiindialive
@hiindia
/hiindianoone
MIDWEST / EASTCOAST
india featureindia feature
x
Indian population growth dependent on development
There is little evidence to link religion and fertility rates, conflict-ridden states and countries with lower female empowerment reporting higher population growth rates SHREYA SHAH, NEW DELHI
F
ertility rates in India are more closely related to education levels and the socioeconomic development within a state, than to religious beliefs, according to an IndiaSpend analysis of government data and research evidence. The evidence we analyze shows that richer families, states with better health facilities and higher female literacy have lower fertility rates in India. Globally, there is little evidence to link religion and fertility rates, with poorer, conflict-ridden states and countries with lower female empowerment reporting higher population growth rates. When the office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India released fertility rates for the Indian population last year, the conversation was hijacked by the difference in population growth rates across religions. Several newspapers emphasized that the data showed that Muslim women had higher fertility rates than non-Muslims, and that the percentage of Muslims in the population was steadily growing. This implicit suggestion that Muslims have more children than
other religious communities missed data that shows how population growth rates and the Total Fertility Rate (TFR) vary widely between India’s states. The TFR seems more closely related to per capita income, healthcare and other basic facilities in that state. Development and fertility: The case of Kerala and UP Compare, for instance, Kerala
and Uttar Pradesh (UP). In 2011, the TFR of Uttar Pradesh, at 3.3, was higher than the Indian average of 2.4, and higher than the TFR in Kerala, at 1.8, according to census data. The Muslim population in Uttar Pradesh increased 25.19 per cent, while the Muslim population in Kerala increased 12.83 per cent between 2001 and 2011. Over the same period, the Hindu population
increased 18.9 per cent in Uttar Pradesh and 2.8 per cent in Kerala. The higher growth rates of Muslims in northern states are “more or less part of a northern culture than a Muslim culture”, N.C. Saxena, the former secretary of the Planning Commission of India, said in an interview to The Wire, a nonprofit journalism portal. The states with the highest fertil-
ity rates in India are all in north and central India -- Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan (TFR 2.9), Jharkhand (2.8), and Chhattisgarh. These overall fertility rates seem more related to the state’s development. For instance, Kerala has a literacy rate of 93.9 per cent, compared to 69.7 per cent in Uttar Pradesh in 2011. In the same year, 99.7 per cent of mothers in Kerala received medical attention at delivery compared to 48.4 per cent of mothers in Uttar Pradesh. Besides, 74.9 per cent of women were above the age of 21 in Kerala at marriage, compared to only 47.6 per cent in Uttar Pradesh. Another way to interpret population growth rates is through the difference in poor and rich states. Empowered Action Group (EAG) states, which include the poorest in India --Rajasthan, UP, Uttarakhand, Bihar, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, and Chhattisgarh — have higher population growth. Between 2001 and 2011, the population of EAG states grew 21 per cent compared to 15 per cent for the rest of India. Still, decadal population growth rates in even EAG states have fallen when compared to the decadal growth rate of 24.99 per cent between 1991 and 2001.
Governance is about people, not Arvind Kejriwal The Delhi High Court, which the AAP government should have never approached in the first place to settle a constitutional row, turned democracy upside down M.R. NARAYAN SWAMY, NEW DELHI
I
t is a remarkable commentary on the state of the nation that the Delhi High Court’s debatable decision giving the Lt Governor the primary say in the affairs of the Indian capital was portrayed as a blow to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. Since the AAP leader can never be the Chief Minister of Delhi for ever (in as much as Narendra Modi cannot rule India for eternity), how can the court verdict be a setback to Kejriwal? True, Kejriwal is a passionate advocate of full statehood for Delhi. But he is hardly saying anything new. It is a demand both the BJP and the Congress have raised for decades. So the court decision, if anything, was a blow to the people of Delhi and their desire to be
A still of Arvind Kejriwal, Chief Minister of Delhi.
governed by a system where elected representatives are the final decision makers and where the multiplicity of authority that bedevils the city ends.
Instead, the Delhi High Court, which the AAP government should have never approached in the first place to settle a constitutional row, turned democracy upside down. In
its wisdom, not easily understood on the street, a two-judge bench ruled that the Lt Governor — a post now held by Najeeb Jung — will be the final arbiter of mass destiny in Delhi. It is another matter that the ruling has given Jung the audacity to say what no one in a serious democracy would even contemplate: Since I am the boss, we can do away with the Delhi Assembly! Delhi’s administrative predicament is well known but it needs some reiteration. For long just a Union Territory, Delhi became the National Capital Territory with a state assembly in 1993. Since then, Delhi has been governed by four institutions: an elected Delhi government, the Lt Governor (a central government appointee), the elected Municipal Corporation (controlled by the Home Ministry and now split into three wings)
and the Delhi Development Authority (reporting to the Urban Development Ministry). We also have the New Delhi Municipal Council and the Delhi Cantonment Board. To worsen the situation, the physical boundary of the Delhi government and the civic bodies are co-terminus. Further, the Lt Governor gets to be in charge of law and order, police as well as land. The High Court has now given the entire city on a platter to Jung! Nothing can be more undemocratic besides being impractical. Where I live, our neighbours and I have at various times sought out our previous MLAs from both the Congress and BJP over civic issues. I have not met the current MLA, from AAP, but the Residents Welfare Association interacts with him routinely.