CENSUS INDIA 1991 STAGNANT STATUS
Item
- Title
- CENSUS INDIA 1991 STAGNANT STATUS
- extracted text
-
India’s stagnant status
L
ET’me begin by rejoicing that the
census of Assam has been poss
ible this time only because the
Home Ministry's writ, under
which the office of the Registrar-Gen
eral and Census Commissioner oper
ates as a subordinate office, still runs in
the country This achievement should
lay to rest once and for ail the claim
which P. C. Mahalanobis, statistical
Adviser to the Government of India.
persisted in making as long as Tie lived
that the census should be placed either
under the National Sample Survey or
,the Central Statistical Organisation or
the Planning Commission or the Minis
try of Finance which on paper pays for
all pipers and should therefore be the
best agency to call the tune.
As a student enumerator in 1931. a
subdivisional charge officer in 1941. as
Census Superintendent of West Bengal
in 1951-58 and as one in charge of the
Census Commission of India for 10
years from 1958. I have been convinc
ed that the census is primarily an ad
ministrative job which must have all the
support of a Ministry that is still the
symbol in the public mind of Adminis
trative coordination. I have the feeling
that the magnificent support that the
1991 Census has had from the public
and privately owned media and the.commitment it received from each
State and Union Territory would not
have been possible had the task been
entrusted to some other department or
Ministry
In the next place, the Census Com
missioner himself should be a senior
member of the premier administrative
service with a professional bent of
mind and attuned to work with techni
cal experts, because such a person
alone can win the ready allegiance of
the State administration involved at all
levels.
Then again, in such a vast and tricky
operation the man in charge is called
upon to take risks which a person of
academic or technical eminence is not
usually accustomed to. I am reminded
of a remark Indira Gandhi made in 1969
following the Congress split. Someone
had suggested she might like to consult
several eminent academics on econ
omic policy She said wryly. "You
Frontline, Apnl 13-26, 1991
The first results of Census 1991, the vast, tricky,
decennial exercise which involved the dedicated work
of millions all over the country, suggest that none of
the basic requirements for a steady fertility decline in
India’s population is yet in sight. A minimum
domestic agenda for ensuring, among other things,
universal literacy, reduction of infant and maternal
mortality and provision of shelter and employment,
has to be accomplished by the country using all its
might, if it is to win its rightful place in the comity of
nations. ASOK MITRA, former Census Commissioner,
puts the preliminary facts in perspective.
Population of India: 1901-1991
Year
Decadal growth
Population
Absolute
1
2
Per cent
3
4
—
13.697.063
+
1901
1911
238.396.327
252.093.390
+
1921
1931
1941
1951
1961
1971
1981
1991
251.321.213
278.977.238
318.660.580
361.088.090
439.234.771
548.159.652
683.329.097
843.930.861
772,177
+ 27.656.025
+ 39.683.342
+ 42.420.485
+ 77.682.873
+ 108.924.881
+ 135.169.445
+ 160.601.764
Average
annual
exponential
growth rate
(per cent)
Progressive
growth rate
over 1901
(per cent)
5
6
—
5.75
—
0.56
- 0.31
+ 1100
+ 14.22
+ 13.31
+ 21 51
+ 24.80
+ 24 66
+ 23.50
- 003
1.04
1.33
1.25
1 96
2.20
2.22
2.11
+
'
—
5.75
+ 5.42
+ 17.02
+ 33 67
+ 51.47
+ 84 25
+ 129.94
+ 186.64
+ 254.00
Notes:
1. In 1981. census was not conducted m Assam. Based on the 1971 Census and the provisional results of
the 1991 Census the population of Assam as on March 1, 1981 has been interpolated.
2. As a consequence of the revised estimate for Assam for the year 1981. the total popuiaoon of India as
of 1981 has been estimated ai 683.329.097 as against the earlier published figure of 685.184.692.
3 The 1991 Census has not yet been, conducted in Jammu & Kashmir The provisional pooctabon figures
for India include the population figure for Jammu & Kashmir projected by the Standing Committee of
Experts on Population Projections.
4 The 1971 Census was conducted with April 1. 1971 as the reference date. In both the 1961 and 1981
Censuses the reference date was March 1. The average annual exponential growth rate presented in
the statement takes into account this difference. No such adjustment has been made wnile calculating
decadal growth rate
5. In working out ’decade variation' and 'percentage decade variation' for India for 1941-51 and 1951-61.
the 1951 population of Tuensang district of Nagalano ie 7 025 and 1961 population of Tuensang
(83,501) and Mon (5.774) districts have not been taken into account as these areas were censused for
the first t-rne m 1951 ano these figures are not comparaole
6. In Arunachal Pradesh the census was conducted for the first time in 1961 While working out the
decadal growth, both absolute as weil as per cent, for 1951-61. 1961 Census population or Arunachal
Pradesh has been excluded
33
know each one will say 'on the one
hand.' and then 'on the other hand.' But
I have only two hands! If both go on
merely arguing with each other, when
shall I act?."
One must begin with warm congratu
lations to the Registrar-General and
Census Commissioner. Mr. A. R. Nanda. for a great and difficult job com
preceding three weeks. The Paper haeight illuminating maps, six basic table
of demographic data of States anc
Union Territories tabulated by hanc
from the Census- returns. 16 compare
tive statements of statistics over van
ous decades along with nine graph
and charts of movement over time c
demographic characteristics of India
pleted on the dot. and for all the sweat
and toil that produced the impressive
Paper I in less than 21 days. The Paper
itself is a striking testimony to leader
ship at the top and to the speed, fore
thought. organisation, coordination and
dedicated work of nearly two million
persons wedded to the task of explain
ing what they had performed in the
INDIA
Decennial population growth rate 1981-91
(Districts)
sss
Percentage variation
Above 45.00
35.01 — 45.00
30.01 — 35.00
25.01 —30 00
20 01 — 25.00 National average 23 50 ■
15.01 —20.00
Below 15.01
Data not available (N.A.)
34
Frontline, April 13-26, 199-
INDIA
Decennial population growth rate
1981-91
(Slotes/Unlon territories)
Percentage variation
Above 36.00
31.01 — 36.00
Jammu & Kashmir 28.92
Himachal Pradesh 19.39
Chandigarh 41.88
Punjab 20.26
Haryana 26.28
Delhi 50.64
Rajasthan 28.07
Gujarat 20 80
Uttar Pradesh' 25.16
--------------Bihar 23.49
Madhya Pradesh 26.75
Maharashtra 25.36
Andhra Pradesh 23.82
Karnataka 20.69
-------------Goa *15.96
Kerala 13.98
Tamil Nadu 14.94
Pondicherry 30.60
Onssa 19.50
West Bengal 24.55
Assam 23.58
Arunachal Pradesh 35 86
Meghalaya 31 80
Tripura 33 69
Mizoram 38.98
Nagaland 56 86
Manipur 28.56
Sikkim 27.57
Daman and Diu 28 43
Dadra and Nagar Haveli 33.63
Andaman and Nicooar Islands 47.29
Lakshadweep 28.40
26 01 —31.00
21.01 — 26.00 National average 23.50
Below 21.01
<
population. All this wealth processed
and presented in so short a time is a
feat that has not been surpassed in any
other country, however small, let alone
one of India's size, population and
complexity. The large frontispiece map
serves as a reference and index for
identification of districts in the other
seven colour-graded maps of smaller
format.
Now to the Census results. The late
Professor Raj Krishna gave us a pictur
esque yet telling mot juste for the prog
ress of the Indian economy following
the wars with China in 1962 and Paki
stan in 1965. This was his Hindu Rate
of Growth of 3.5 per cent with little
variation either way from one year to
another or one Plan period to another.
This rate manages to keep a little
ahead of the annual rate of growth of
population, yet never leaves enough
surplus for an economic breakthrough
or major structural change in the econ
omic or social field. India's population
movement has followed more or less
the same course. I wonder whether it is
a mere coincidence but Statement 2 of
the Paper showing the percentage av
erage decadal rate of change since
1901 (see table on page 33) suggests
four divides corresponding more or
less to four social, economic, and politi
cal epochs in India's life.
The first was the period 1901-1921 or
rather, looking further back in history,
1871-1921 when the population was vir
tually stagnant, suffering from recurring
famines, economic stasis and nascent
political activity overawed by the might
of British rule.
The second was the great divide
1921-31 when India's population made
its first sprint of growth which continu
ed unabated until 1951. Curiously
enough, this period coincided with in
tense political protest, stirrings in indus
trial self-sufficiency and diversification.
improvements, however small, in agri
cultural and rural activities enthused
more by a climate of resurgence and
revolt rather than impressive physical
achievement.
The third was the brief decade and a
half of what looked like a real resur
gence and a great leap forward. This
was the period 1951- 65 during which
India felt like reaching out to new
worlds and new heights involving struc
tural change and readjustment in the
economy and social matrix. This co
incided with a spurt of unexpectedly
high rate of population growth of 21 51
per cent during the decade 1951-61.
This in demographic terms meant a
structural change denoting a surge in
the proportion of the young population.
This process reached a plateau in
the Census of 1971 which may possibly
continue up to 2000. These 30 years
may be called the period of demog
raphic inertia closely coinciding with
the picture of India's social, economic
and political inertia when nothing hap
pens very much anywhere, except in
cremental marginal change for the bet
ter or the worse in particular sectors
but no significant structural change
anywhere- a fairly static picture of more
of the same, a little for the worse here
or a little for the better there.
This provides an exciting occasion
for cheese-paring academics to display
the prowess of their statistical tools in
speculating over changes in the first
two places of decimals in the rate of
population movement. Such sophistry
over the second or third place of deci
mal does not excite a social or econ
omic demographer like me. if I may call
myself one. who considers that marked
changes in the integers of the rate
alone should matter
Statement 5 (see table on page 36).
giving rates of decadal changes. 197191 of the total population and the
change in the rate of changes of
growth is of interest. This needs to be
read with the State and Union Terri
tory-wise decadal growth rate map of
India (page 27). This latter map will
come handy to one who knows his dis
tricts over the whole of India. In the ab
sence of information on urban growth
such an exercise, will enable him to
form notions of sizeable urban growth
in specific districts of each State and
Union Territory.
For example. Karnataka has an over
all low average rate of growth of 20.69
Frontlma, April 13-26, 1991
33
IWW»
Statement 5 gives room for both
hope and worry. Hope for States such
as Gujarat. Goa. Himachal Pradesh.
Karnataka. Kerala. Punjab and Tamil
Nadu where the average annual expo
nential growth rate has declined notice
ably not only in terms of the first two
places of decimals but, as in the case
of Goa. Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh.
Punjab, from 2 per cent plus to less
than 2. Sikkim seems to have experi
enced a sharp drop in the alarming im
migration rate of 1971-81. So has
Mizoram to a lesser extent The spurt in
the growth rate in Nagaland, Tripura
and West Bengal will give cause for
political worry, particularly if one looks
at the tell-tale increase in the districts
of North and South 24 Parganas. Murshidabad. Maida and West Dinajpur. all
bordering on Bangladesh. It is com
monly known how political parties are
constantly in a mood to welcome ac
per cent while Bangalore district which
includes Bangalore city shows a much
higher rate of growth of 35 to 45 per
cent in the second map. The two maps
read together help one to spot districts
and States that have experienced a
marked fall in the growth rate, which is
very possibly not due tq outmigration
alone but due to a decline in the birth
rate as well. These are Tamil Nadu. Ke
rala, and a fair number of the coastal
districts of Karnataka. Gujarat presents
an intriguing picture in the latter map of
low growth in the peninsula which is
more or less made up by Vadodhara,
Bharuch. Surat and Valsad region
Space will not permit more of this
guessing game but one cannot help
making a passing comment on the phe
nomenally high rates of population
growth, for example, in Jaisalmer,
Bikaner and Ganganagar districts of
Rajasthan.
cretions from Bangladesh to their vc
banks in their districts even at the r:of seriously upsetting the demograpr
balance of major religious communiti
in the border thanas.
But the even more depressing p.
tures are those of the proportion
females per 1.000 males for almost tr
entire country except for the south ar
western coastal areas, the Uttarkhar
hill districts of Uttar Pradesh and
pocket of four'districts in Himach
Pradesh along with sizeable pockets
underdeveloped areas in Madhya Pr.
desh and the south western coastal d:
tricts of Orissa. These areas in Maori.
Pradesh and Orissa are largely peer
ed by the Scheduled Tribes which s:
place a high value on female lives, cc
ferring on them corresponding soc.
equity and status.
The proportion of the sexes at bir
almost universally obtains between 1C
Decadal variation in population, change in decadal variation and average exponential growth rate of population
Decadal variation in
population
(per cent)
1971-81
1981-91
Change in
the growth
rate
(Cot 3—a
2
3
4
.
24.66
23.50
Andhra Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Goa
Gujarat
Haryana
Himachal Pradesh
Jammu & Kashmir
Karnataka
Kerala
23.10
35.15
23.36
24.06
26.74
27 67
28.75
23.71
29.69
26.75
19.24
23.82
35.86
23.58
2349
15.96
20.80
26.28
19.39
28.92
2069
13.98
12. Madhya Pradesh
13. Maharashtra
14. Manipur
-;
15. Meghalaya
16. Mizoram
•
17. Nagaland
• • >
I
18 Orissa ••• •
‘
' 19. Punjab ' '
•
20. Rajasthan
• ’ "
21. Sikkim
22. Tamil Nadu
• •
23. . Tripura . • . •
■.
24. Uttar Pradesh
25. West Bengal •
25.27
24.54
' 32.46
32.04
' 48 55
. . 50.05
20 17
’
23.89
32.97
50.77
17.50
•’ 31.92
2549
.23.17
> •
• -r-
26.75
25.36
28.56
31.80
38.98
56.86
19.50
20.26
28.07
27.57 .
1494
33.69
25.16
24 55
\
India/State/
Union Territory
1
INDIA
States
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Union Territories
•
i.' A&N Islands
’ - 2. Chandigarh
" '
.’3. Dadra & Nagar Haveli
■ 4. Daman & Diu
'
.'■>'5. Delhi
k-r 6 • Lakshadweep
■■■■': 1- Pondicherry -
-
-
+ 0.72
+ 0.71
+ 0.22
- 0.57
- 1078
- 6.87
- 2.47
- 4.32
- 0.77
- 6.06
- 5.26
’ *
•
..
-
■ •-
1971-81
1981-91
5
6
7
4.70
222
2.11
+ 3.12
+’ 2.02
+ 0.94
. - 237
- 40.31
' - 24.83
- 859
- 18.22
- 2.59
- 22.65
- 27.34
210
304
■ 212
217
237
2.46
255
215
258
239
1 77
214
3.06
212
211
1.48
1.89
233
1.77
258
1 88
1.31
227
221
283
280
3.99
4.09
1.85
216
287
4.14
1.63
2.79
2.29
210
237
2.26
251
276
- 3.29
4.50
1.78
1.85
247
•2 43
- 1.39
290
. 224
a220
4.98
567
338
2.32
. 4.29
237
250
3.87
350
290
2.50
^?-4.10
■ .. • . 250
2,67
.
•
-
1.16
•
+ 1.48
+ 0 82
- 3.90
- 0.24
- 9.57
+ 6.81 - ■■ 0.67 . •
- 3.63
- 4.90
- 23.20
- 2.56
+ 1.77
- 0.33
+ 138 ■
Average annual
exponential
growth rate
Rate of
change
of the
growth
rate
+ 5.86
+ 3.34
- 1201
- 0.75
- 19.71 .
+ 13.61
.. - . 3.32
. - 15.19
- 1486
- 45.70
- 1463
+ 5.55
- 1.29
+ 5.96
.
- 16.64
63.93 .. 47.29
. - 26.03
.75.55
41.88
: - 33.67
- 44 57
•
39.78 .. ■
33.63
- 6.15
- 15.46
'' t-.’v 26.07 .
+ 9.05
28.43
+ 236
.
50.64
..;4.45
.
53.00 .
. .- , : • -T-. 2.36 /c 26.53
■;(?. 28.40
1.87
■.
+ 7.05
28.15 z J<- '- \ 30.60 ..
+ . 245 .... ., + 8.70
•
•
.
Frontline. April 13-26, 1991
to W6 males to 100 females Biologi
cally the male is the weaker sex in in
fancy and this ratio is equalised in most
communities where the status of the
females is good at puberty. Thereafter.
despite the risk of higher differential
mortality among women at ages of
child birth — 15 to 45 — this ratio sel
dom goes below par in societies where
women's status is good.
,
An equivalent risk for males at the
ages 15-45 is the comparatively higher
INDIA'
Comparative size of population (States/Union territories)
Jammu and Kashmir (Projected) 7,718,700 0.91%
Himachal Pradesh 5,111,079 0.61%
Tripura 2,744,827 0.32%
Manipur 1.826.714 0.22%
Meghalaya 1,760,626 0.21%
Nagaland 1.215,573 0.14%
Goa 1,168,622 0.14%
Arunachal Pradesh 858,392 0.10%
Pondicherry 789,416
Mizoram 686,217
Chandigarh 640.725
Sikkim 403.612
A and N Islands 277,989
- Dadra and Nagar Haveli 138,542
Daman and Diu 101,439
Lakshadweep 51,681
0.09%
0.08%
0.08%
0.05%
0.03%
0.02%
0.01%
0.01%
INDIA
risk on account of occupational haz
ards and heavier physical labour. How
ever. as soon as females clear the span
of childbearing their proportion rapidly
improves on those of males as a con
sequence of which the overall ratio of
females to 1.000 males goes consider
ably above parity as in most countries.
Not so in India where the ratio of
females to males suffers not only be
cause of high neglect of girl babies at
infancy and childhood but at almost all
ages augmented by the still unconscio
nably high rates of maternal mortality.
What is even worse is that, in spite
Frontline, April 13-28, 1991
37
Distribution of Population, Sex Ratio, Density and Growth Rate of Population
Population 1991
SI.
No.
India/State/
Union Territory
1
2
INDIA
-
Density
Sex Ratio
Growth rate
'
1971-81 1981
Females
1981
-1991
1981
5
6
7
8
9
437,597,929
406.332,932
934
929
216
267
+ 24.66 + 22
33,623.738
461,242
11,579,693
45,147.280
593.563
32681,116
397,150
10,714,869
41,191.573
575,059
19,901,672
7,612336
2550.185
3.704.600
21.955.989
14,793.070
31.903.814
975
972
861
925
912
969
936
874
195
8
230
402
272
174
292
77
241
10
284
+ 23.10 + 22
+ 35 15 + 35
+ 23.36 + 23
497
316
210
369
92
76
234
+ 24.06 +25
+ 26.74 + 15
+ 27.67 + 20
+ 28.75 + 26
+ 23.71 + 19
+ 29.69 +28
+ 26.75 +2C
+19.24 + i:
■ Persons
Males
3'
4
843,930,861
66,304.854
. 858.392
'•
'
1991
10
11
States
1
Andhra Pradesh
2
3
4
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Goa
Gujarat
Haryana
Himachal Pradesh
Jammu & Kashmir
Karnataka
Kerala
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Manipur
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Meghalaya
Mizoram
Nagaland
Orissa
Punjab
Rajasthan
Sikkim
Tamil Nadu
Tripura
Uttar Pradesh
West Bengal
22.294.562
86.338.853
1,168.622
41.174.060
16.317,715
5,111,079
7.718.700
44.817.398
29.011.237
66.135.862
78.706.719
1,826.714
1.760.626
686.217
21.272,388
8.705.379
2560.894
4,014,100
22.861.409
14.218.167
34.232,048
40.652.056
931,511
904.308
356.672
643.273
15.979,904
38.054.663
55.638.318
2.744.827
138.760.417
10.695.136
22.935.895
214,723
28,217,947
1,410,545
73,745,994
67.982.732
35.461.898
895.203
856.318
329.545
572300
15.532,166
9.495.659
20.944.745
' 188.889
27.420.371
1.334,282
65,014.423
32.520.834
277.989
152.737
357.411
125,252
283.314
70,927
51.452
5,120.733
26.582
398,324
67,615
49.987
4,249,742
25.099
391,092
1.215.573
31.512070
20.190.795
43.880.640
403.612
862
910
946
975
942
870
973
892
963
1,032
941
937
971
954
760
919
863
981
879
919
835
977
946
885
911
996
923
960
1.040
932
936
961
947
924
890
972
888
913
880
972
946
882
917
59
194
655
118
204
64
60
23
47
169
333
100
45
372
196
377
615
747
149
256
82
78
33
73
202
401
128
57
428
262
471
766
+ 25.27
+ 24.5
+ 32 46
+ 32.04
+ 26
+ 25
+ 48.55
+ 50.05
+ 20.17
+ 23 89
+ 32.97
+ 50.77
+ 17.50
+ 31.92
+ 25 49
+ 23 17
+ 35
+ 56
+ 1£
+ 2C
+ 2c
+ 3'
+ 25
+ 27
+k
+ JC
+ 25
+ 2-
Union Territories
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
A &N Islands
Chandigarh
Dadra & Nagar Haveli
Daman & Diu
Delhi
Lakshadweep
Pondicherry
640,725
138,542
101,439
9,370,475
51.681
789,416
769
974
1.062
808
975
985
820
793
953
972
830
944
982
23
3.961
211
705
4.194
1,258
1.229
34
5.620
282
906
6.319
1.615
1.605
+ 63.93 + 47
+ 75.55 + 4*.
+ 39.78 + 33
+ 26 07 + 28
+ 53.00 + 5C
+ 26.53 + 2c
+ 2815 + 30
Notes:
1. In 1981, Census was not conducted in Assam, Based on the 1971 Census population and the 1991 Census provisional re
the population of Assam for 1981 has been interpolated
2. As a consequence of the revised estimates for Assam for the year 1981. the total population of India as of 1981 has :
estimated as 683.329.097 as against earlier published figures of 685.184.692.
3. As a consequence of the revised figures, the decadal growth rate for India during 1971-81 has been estimated as 2
per cent
4. The 1991 Census has not yet been conducted in Jammu & Kashmir. The figures are as per projections prepared by the Star
Committee of Experts on Population Projections. October^ 1989.
5. Sex ratio is defined as number of females per 1.000 males.
of a substantial progress in medical
and public health facility and the im
provement in agricultural production,
this depletion shows not only no sign
of abatement but steady deterioration
from a figure of 972 in 1901 to 929 in
1991. This is undoubtedly the cruelTest
aspect of our demographic status, des
pite the improvements we may have
Frontline, April 13-26, 1991
made in the social, economic political
and organisational fields. So long as
this ratio does not markedly improve
in favour of females, we shall have
achieved little by way of improvement
in the demographic as well as social
and economic structure of our body
politic.
The second, demographically and
culturally related and equally depress
ing aspect has been the more or less
incremental or marginal rate of growth
in literacy. Although on paper literacy
is defined in census enumeration as the
ability to read and write a letter with
understanding denoting formal school
ing at least up to the primary level, this
test is seldom applied to persons claim39
Literacy is an essential
aspect of human dignity
and a window to the
world. But in India its
growth rate is so slow the
the country could enter
the 21st century with the
maximum number of
illiterates in the world. Dr
VENKATESH ATHREYA,
Professor and Head of the
Department of Economics,
Bharatidasan University,
gives an analysis based on
the preliminary findings c
the 1991 Census.
ing admission to informal education
and literacy. Literacy is often equated
with the ability to sign one's name.
Despite this neglect in the application
of tests, the literacy map of India as a
whole has remained more or less
unaltered in the order of attainment of
States and Union Territories.
Thus Kerala has borne the palm at
the top of the list in respect of the total
population as well as for males and
females, followed by small States and
Union Territories such as Mizoram.
Lakshadweep. Chandigarh, Goa. Delhi
and Pondicherry, each with its high
proportion of urban population.
The order among the States of sub
stantial size and population remains
practically unaltered. As a Bengali I
cannot help noticing that West Bengal
still zealously clings to its 17th place in
the descending order in 1981 and 1991
in respect of total population compared
with the second place it enjoyed on the
map of India in 1951. It has gone down
to the 18th place in the order of male
literacy and the 19th in that of female
literacy in 1991. This despite vigorous
campaigns in the winter months of
1990-91 in several districts conducted
primarily by dominant political cadres
with the object of teaching people to
sign their names.
The first results of the 1991 Census
40
suggest that none of the basic require
ments of steady fertility decline in In
dia's population is yet in sight. These
are universal male and female literacy
up to the primary level, the enforce
ment of compulsory formal primary
education of at least four years from
age 6 and the banning of child labour.
and thereby raising the cost of rearing
of children, the removal of malnutrition
and bad hygiene, provision of safe
drinking water, drastic reduction in in
fant and maternal mortality, provision
of shelter employment, especially for
women and improvement in productiv
ity and skill This is the minimum do
mestic agenda that yet remains ne
glected on the eve of the 21st century.
Until this agenda is accomplished satis
factorily. India with all its might will re
main a colossus with feet of clay and in
Abraham Lincoln's great words, modif
ied to suit India's picture, "one-quarter
free and three-quarters slave." The
place of respect that should have by
right and achievement belonged to In
dia in the comity of nations will conti
nue to elude it. ■
The author, an ICS officer, was the
Registrar-General and Census Commis
sioner of India in 1958-63 and subse
quently Secretary in the Planning Com
mission.
IKE earlier population censuses
the just-concluded 1991 Census
promises to be a veritable mine
of extremely useful information.
The preliminary results released tc
the media on March 25 by Dr. A R
Nanda. Registrar General and Census
Commissioner, are certainly of great in
terest. Nanda and his team deserve tc
be congratulated for their remarkabb.
quick work leading to such an early re
lease of preliminary findings.
There will, of course, be modifica
tions in various component and aggre
gate figures subsequently and the 5 per
cent sample check that the Census
Commissioner and his team wouic
soon carry out will enable us to assess
critically the validity and precision of
the data from the Census. However.
there is enough in the preliminary find
ings that merit serious discussion.
Decadal population growth rates.
sex ratios, urbanisation, population
densities, and many other important
variables as well as their variations, as
between States, between urban and ru
ral areas, and between women and
men. would all no doubt attract a great
deal of attention. One variable of par
ticular interest should be literacy — es
pecially in the context of the Interna
tional Literacy Year of 1990 having re
ceded into history so recently, and the
much-heralded milestone of the 21st
century not very far away.
L
Frontline, April 13-28.
J
One would imagine that the import
ance of literacy hardly needs to be
‘stressed in today's world. Yet. some
times a purely "pragmatic'’ viaw is
taken — for instance, to the effect that
literacy need not be "imposed on un
willing adults" whose daily life may not
require much by way of literacy
Against this view, it needs to be assert
ed that literacy is an essential aspect of
human dignity in a civilised world, and
opens a window to the collective re
corded wisdom of humankind, access
to which we have no right to deprive
our brethren of. Let us examine the In
dian situation in this context.
India's overall literacy rate stood at
36.23 per cent in 1981. This average, as
is well known, conceals many sharp in
equalities. as indeed do most socio
economic averages such as per capita
income or consumer expenditure First.
and quite glaring, is the wide difference
between rural and urban areas. In 1981
the rural literacy rate at 29.65 per cent
was barely half of the urban rate of
57 40 per cent Secondly, there is the
(almost equally) large difference be
tween males and females. Female liter
acy rate in 1981. at 24 82 per cent, was
just a little over half the male literacy
rate of 46.89 per cent. Thirdly, there are
enormous mter-State differences in lit
eracy rates In 1981. among the major
States. Kerala stood at one end with an
overall literacy rate of 70.42 per cent
(male. 75.25 per cent, female 65.73 per
cent) and Rajasthan at the other, with
24 38 per cent (male. 36.30 oer cent, femaie. 11.42 per cent) The maximum
difference — between Kerala's urban
male population and Rajasthan s rural
female population — was over 75 per
cent
if one goes by the 1997 Census fig
ures released on March 25. it would ap
pear as though there has oeen a phe
nomenal progress The overall literacy
rate has been reoorted as 52.11 per
cent, that for males as 63 86 per cent
ano for females as 39 42 per cent.
However, these are so-cailed effective
literacy rates, and refer to literates as a
proportion of the population in the age
group of seven years and aoove. To
make the figures comparaoie with the
ones reported for 1981. one has to get
an estimate of the 1991 peculation in
the age group of six years and below
Using the figures projected for 1990 in
the Seventh Plan document, one gets a
figure of 17.5 per cent as the share of
this age group in the peculation. The
1991 literacy rates comparable with the
Frontline, April 13-26, 1991
Table 1: Progress of Literacy 1971-1991
Literacy rate (%)
Total
Males
Females
Change in percentage points
1971
1981
1991
1981 over 1971
1991 over 1981
29.48
39.52
1870
36.23
46.89
24 82
42.94
52.68
32.52
6.75
7.37
6 12
'6.71
5.79
7.70
1981 figures then become 0.825 times
the effective literacy rates released to
the press. Assuming identical age com
positions for -males and females, one
can use the same ratio for converting
sex-specific literacy rates These are.
respectively. 42.94 per cent (total)
52 68 per cent (males) and 32.52 per
cent (females).
One may now compare the progress
in literacy in the decade 1981-1991 with
that in 1971-1981. The data are present
ed in Table 1
A comoarison of the figures in the
last two columns of each row is quite
INDIA
Literacy rate
1981-1 991
Literacy rates
relate to population
aged seven years
and above.
revealing. The first row comoarison
shows that there was. in fact, a slowing
down of the rate of growth of the over
all literacy rate A '6 71 percentage
point increase over a base of 36.23 per
cent is definitely a little less in propor
tional terms than a 6.75 percentage
point increase over a base of 29.48 per
cent — although the absolute increase
in the number of literates would be
greater during 1981-91. given the high
er base year (1981) literacy rate A
comparison of the last two columns of
the second row shows that the rate of
growth of male literacy has distinctly
declined in the most recent cecade as
compared with the previous one The
one redeeming feature, however, is a
somewhat more rapid increase in the
female literacy rate in the period 19811991 as compared with 1971-1981
Female literacy has still a very long
way to go. however. The male-female
literacy rate differential in 1991 at 20.16
percentage points is still quite large.
The gap has only narroweo a little in
that the female literacy rate >s now a
little over 60 oer cent of the male liter
acy rate. What is more, we nave not
yet looked at rural-urban or mter-State
differences. For instance, the four large
and/or populous States of Bihar.
Mao'nya Pradesn. Rajasthan ano Uttar
Pradesh — sometimes referred to as
the 'BIMARU' States — have reported
effective female literacy rates in 1.991
of 23. 28. 21 and 26 per cent respect
ively If one takes the entire female
population as the divisor, these rates
would of course be lower still.
What does all this add up to7 One
straightforward message is that, if India
continues at the present rates of
growth of literacy, it will keep on add
ing to the number of illiterates Earlier
estimates by such a reputed source as
the World Bank had suggested that if
India continued at present rates, by
A D. 2000 it would have the rather du
bious distinction of being the home of
more than half the illiterate population
41
in the world. The preliminary
findings from the
1991
Census do not contradict
this assessment.
Such a poor performance
has. of course, many serious
implications.
There
is
enough evidence now to
show that high literacy rates
— especially high female lit
eracy rates — are associat
ed with low rates of popula
tion growth. Kerala is an
outstanding example where
high (especially female) liter
acy rates have gone hand in
hand not only with low rates
of growth of population but
with superior performance
in terms of a number of
health indicators such as in
fant mortality rates, death
rates, sex ratios and so on
In sharp contrast, abysmally
low rural female literacy
rates are associated with
both high population growth
rates and poorer perform
ance in terms of health indi
cators — as the case of the
BIMARU States demons
trates.
What then are the policy
implications? For one thing.
the fact that apparently
massive adult education
programmes have not made
a serious dent in illiteracy
should lead to a serious re
thinking on the nature of
these programmes. Regard
less of the sincerity and ear
nestness of purpose that
might have gone into these
programmes, a few points
need to be made. First.
overall outlays on both nonformal adult education and
on primary education — in
deed on education as a
whole — have been woe
fully inadequate throughout.
Secondly, tackling illiteracy
in the long run requires, as a
precondition, free and com
pulsory education for all
those in the age group of
six to 14 years, as promised
in our Constitution in Article
45 of the Directive Princi
ples of State Policy of the
Constitution Thirdly, adult
education programmes have
in the past not only tended
to be unimaginative, but
have remained externally
(that is. Government) de
signed and imposed prog
rammes without any signifi
cant community participa
tion in design, planning and
42
INDIA
Literacy 1991
(States/Union territories)
Jammu & Kashmir N.A.
Himachal Praoesh 63.54
Chandigarh 78.73
Punjab 57.14
Haryana 55.33
Delhi 76.09
.Rajasthan 38.81
Gujarat 60.91
Uttar Pradesh
Bihar 38.54
Madhya Pradesh 43.45
Maharashtra 63.05
Andhra Pradesh 45.11
Karnataka 55 98
Goa 76 96
Kerala 90 59
Tamil Nadu 63.72
Pondicherry 74 91
Ortssa 48 55
West Bengal 57.72
Assam 53 42
Arunachal Praoesh 41 22
Meghalaya 48 26
Tripura 60.39
Mizoram 81.23
Manipur 60 96
Sikkim 56.53
Nagaland 61.30
Daman and Diu 73.58
Dadra and Nagar Haveli 39 45
Andamans and Nicobar islands 73.74
Lakshadweep 79.23
Percentage of literates to
total copulation
Above 75.00
45 01 — 60.00 National averag
Data not available (N.A.)
INDIA
Female Literacy 1991
(States/Union territories)
Jammu & Kashmir N A
Himachal Praoesh 52 46
Chanoigarh 73.61
Punjab 49.72
Haryana 40
' 94
Delhi 68 01
Rajasthan 20 84
Gujarat 48.50
Uttar Pradesh 26 02
Bihar_____
23.10
Madhya Praoesh 28 39
Maharashtra 50.51
Andhra Praoesh 33.71
Karnataka 44.34
Goa 68.20
Kerala 86.93
Tamil Nadu 52.29
Pondicherry 65.79
Orissa 34 40
West Bengal 47.15
Assam 43.70
Arunachal Pradesh 29.37
Meghalaya 44.78
Tripura 50.01
Mizoram 78 09
Manipur 48.64
Sikkim 47 23
Percentage of female literates to
total female population
Above 65.00
,.J 50.01 —65 00
35 01 — 50.00
National averag-.-
Below 35 01
Data not available (N.A.)
Nagaland 55 72
Daman and Diu 61.38
Dadra and Nagar Haveli 26.10
Andamans and Nicobar Islands 66.22
Lakshadweep 7088
Frontline, April 13-26, 199-
execution. In particular, the problem of
'motivating both learners and instruc
tors was not effectively tackled
The picture is far from being entirely
bleak, however While the progress
from the inception of the National Adult
Education Programme (NAEP) in 1978
till the National Literacy Mission (NLM)
established in 1988 was rather tardy.
the initiatives supported by the NLM m
the last two years have shown great
promise. In particular, the. strategic
switch that the NLM is currently making
from centre-based adult literacy pro
grammes — whereby voluntary or government/quasi-government
agencies
receive funds to impart literacy to a tar
get adult population — to the mass
campaign approach promises to be ex
tremely fruitful. While the centre-based
approach typically involves poorly paid
instructors and an elaborate project
bureaucracy with little community in
volvement. the mass literacy campaign
(MLC) mode embodies the view that a
literacy effort is far more likely to suc
ceed when it is based on voluntarism
and community participation, and is on
a sufficiently large scale to generate
mass enthusiasm in the target popula
tion.
This is not the place to go into the
technical design aspects of a mass lit
eracy campaign in great detail A point
or two may. however, be m order. Such
a campaign would require a critical
minimum size. In terms of the number
of learners. 20.000 in a compact area
would be close to an absolute mini
mum size for success. Secondly, the
programme would have to be strictly
time-bound, with total literacy in the
campaign area to be achieved within
12 to 18 months Of these, the first four
to six months would be devoted to cre
ating the environment, setting up the
participatory organisational structures
at all levels, and training the key func
tionaries. master trainers and volunteer
instructors. The next six months would
be the active teaching phase during
which around 200 to 240 hours of in
struction would be imparted to learners
in groups of a convenient size, say, ten
learners per instructor, based on a
carefully designed curriculum for func
tional literacy. The final phase would in
volve a follow-up programme, including
setting up and running centres for con
tinuing education, designing and dis
seminating post-literacy literature, and
ensuring compulsory school enrolment
of children in the school-going age.
That what has been sketched above
is not a purely theoretical or speculat
ive exercise is illustrated by the suc
cess of the total literacy campaign carr
ied out in Ernakulam district of Kerala
in 1989-90, widely reported in the me
dia. More important, however, is the
fact that mass literacy campaigns have
proved successful in places where the
environment and literacy infrastructure
are far less favourable than in highly lit
erate Kerala. A case in point is Pondi
cherry where the Puduvai Arivoli lyakkam — a unique joint organisation
whose constituents include govern
mental bodies,such as the Department
of Education and non-governmental
ones such as the Pondicherry Science
Forum — is on the threshold of com
pleting a mass literacy programme for
nearly one lakh learners begun in Sep
tember. 1989.
A "Bharat Gyan Vigyan Jatha" (or
All-lndia March for Science and Liter
acy) was launched from October 2 to
November 14. 1990, in every district of
the country. Organised by the Bharat
Gyan Vigyan Samiti (BGVS) chaired by
Dr. Malcolm Adiseshiah. it has helped
focus attention on literacy and brought
it on to the political agenda. The Jatha.
in which the National Literacy Mission
as well as people's science organisa
tions in many parts, of the country —
from the Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad to the Himachal Vigyan March in
the North to the Assam Science So
ciety in the North-East — played im
portant catalytic and organising roles.
has generated a widespread urge for
literacy. Some 30 districts are now
carrying out mass literacy campaigns.
inspired by the Jatha and by the Erna
kulam experience. In Tamil Nadu
seven districts are slated to commence
such campaigns with assistance from
Central and State Governments. Two
of these campaigns — in Kamarajar
and Pasumpon districts — are under
way
Welcome as these developments
are. it needs to be emphasised that im
mediate actuahsation of the constitu
tional directive to provide free ano
compulsory primary and lower sec
ondary schooling is a must for the elim
ination of illiteracy. An important item
on the political agenda in the coming
elections should certainly be this com
mitment. ■
Literacy 1991:
inter-State variations
HE provisional and preliminary
results presented in Paper 1 of
the 1991 Census of India provide
interesting material on variations
in literacy rates along three different di
mensions: across time as between 1981
and 1991: across States: and as be
tween males and females An important
dimension on which data are not pres
ented in this paper is the rural-urban
variation. Soon, this will also be avail
able and should evoke much dis
cussion.
Let us turn now to the variation in lit
eracy rates across major States in
1991. The data for the 15 States whose
populations exceed one
crore are
presented in Table 1 (on page 44). The
reported literacy rates — for both 1981
and 1991 — may be designated as "ef-
T
Frontline, April 13-28, 1991
The literacy situation in
general is far from
satisfactory as the absolute
number of illiterates has
grown considerably
between 1981 and 1991.
And it is atrocious as far
as female literacy is
concerned.
fective literacy rates." referring as they
do to literates as a proportion of the
estimated population aged seven years
and above.
Looking first at the overall literacy
rates in 1991 Statewise, one finds Ke
rala way ahead with a literacy rate ex
ceeding 90 per cent. Way behind Ke
rala but significantly above the all-lndia
average are Tamil Nadu. Maharashtra
and Gujarat. Close to the average, but
somewhat above it. are West fjiengal.
Punjab. Karnataka and Haryana in that
order. The real horrors are the
"BIMARU" States. Bihar. Madhya Pra
desh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh
One could also include in this category
one State outside the Hindi belt. Andh
ra Pradesh
Turning now to the trends in inter
state variations between 1981 and
1991 as far as the overall (that is "per
sons") literacy rate is concerned, one
finds practically no change in the rela43
'Table I
Percentage of literates in estimated population aged seven years and above
States with 1991 population exceeding one crore
State
Literacy rate 1981
(percentage)
Males
Females
Literacy rate 1991
(percentaqe)
Persons
Males
Females
Persons
1 Andhra Pradesh
2. Assam
3 Bihar
4. Gujarat
5. Haryana
6. Karnataka
7: Kerala
8. Madhya Pradesh
9. Maharashtra
10. Orissa
11 Punjab
12. Rajasthan
13. Tamil Nadu
]4 Uttar Pradesh
15. West Bengal
India
35.66
NA
32.03 ,
52 21
43.85
46 20
81 56
34.22
55 83
40.96
48 12
30 09
54.38
33 33
48.64
46.83
NA
46.58
65 14
58 49
58 72
8774
48 41
69.66
56.45
55.52
44.76
68.05
47.43
59.93
24 16
NA
1651
38 46
26.89
33.16
75.65
18.99
41 01
25.14
39 64
13.99
40.43
17.18
36 07
45 11
53.42
38.54
60.91
55.33
55.98
90.59
43 45
63.05
48.55
57.14
38.81
63.72
41.71
57.72
56 24
62.34
5263
72.54
67.85
67.25
94.45
57.43
7484
62.37
63.68
55.07
74.88
55.35
67.24
3371
43.70
23.10
48.50
40 94
44.34
86.93
*28.39
50.51
34 40
49.72
20 84
52.29
26.02
47.15
43.56
5637
29.75
52.11
63.86
39 42
Source: Census of India 1991, Paper 1, Statement 16, p, 67
Table 2
.Literacy: Growth and male-female differentials, 1981-1991.
Growth injiteracy rate. 1981-1991
Gn perce£Jge points)
State
1 Andhra Pradesh
2 Bihar
3 Gujarat
4 Haryana
5 Karnataka
6 Kerala
7 Madhya Pradesh
8 Maharashtra
9 Orissa
10 Punjab
11 Rajasthan
12. Tamil Nadu
13 Uttar Pradesh
14 West Bengal
India
Male-female
differentials
Gn percentage
points)
Persons
Males
Females
1981
1991
1981-91
9 45
6.51
8.70
11 48
9.78
9.03
9.22
7.22
7.59
9 02
8.72
9.34
838
9.08
941
6.05
7 40
9.36
8.53
6.71
9.02
5 18
5.92
8 16
10.31
683
7 92
731
9.55
6 59
10 04
14.05
11 18
11.28
940
9.50
9.26
10.08
6.85
11 86
8.84
11.08
22 67
3007
26.68
31.60 *
25.56
12.09
29.42
28.65
31.31
15 88
30.77
27.62
30 25
23 86
2253
29 53
24.04
26 91
22 91
752
29.04
24.33
27 97
13.96
34 23
22.59
29.33
20.09
- 0.14
- 0.54
- 2.64
- 4.69
- 2.65
- 4.57
- 0.38
- 4.32
- 3.34
- 1.92
+ 3.46
- 5 03
- 0.92
- 3.77
8.45
7 49
9.67
26.62
24 44
- 2.18
tive positions of various States. The
only changes are that of Tamil Nadu
overtaking Maharashtra to be next only
to Kerala, and Bihar falling behind Ra
jasthan to end up at the bottom of the
pile
FEMALE LITERACY RATES
The same pattern of variation is ob
served in the case of female literacy
rates, where again Kerala tops the list
followed, a long way behind, by Tamil
Nadu and Maharashtra. It is worth not
ing that even in 1991 — and in terms of
"effective literacy rates" — only these
three States have crossed the 50 per
cent mark in female literacy rates. It is
' indeed a matter for shame that in the
large and populous States of Raja
sthan. Bihar. U.P. MP and A.P.. as
44
Increase
or
decrease
also in Orissa, female literacy rates are
so abysmally low. In fact, if one were
to look at rural female literacy rates.
the figures would be nothing short of
scandalous.
Between 1981 and 1991. the relative
positions of the States with respect to
female literacy rates have remained
pretty much unchanged, except for
Tamil Nadu overtaking Maharashtra
GROWTH RATES AND SEX DIFFERENTIALS
While the overall literacy picture has
improved between 1981 and 1991. the
situation is far from satisfactory in gen
eral. considering that the absolute num
ber of illiterates —; among both males
and females — has grown consider
ably in this period. And it is atrocious
as far as female literacy is concerned
— a fact to be regretted all the more in
view of the well-established positive in
fluence of improvements in female liter
acy rates on a whole host of welfare
indicators such as infant mortality, fer
tility. morbidity and so on. Yet. some
may wish to draw comfort from the
fact that literacy has grown in this per
iod in all the States The percentage
point increases in effective literacy
rates from 1981 to 1991 are presented
in Table 2 for all States with population
exceeding one crore in 1991 except
Assam (since 1981 literacy rate data
are not available for Assam). Table 2
also provides data. Statewise, on male
female literacy differentials in 1981 and
1991, and the change between these
two points in time. (Table 2 here)
The following key points emerge
from Table 2.
* Haryana shows the greatest im
provement in terms of overall as well
as female literacy rates.
★ Bihar shows the least progress in
male, female and total literacy rates.
★ Male-female literacy differentials
have narrowed in all States except Ra
jasthan. While this is encouraging, the
pattern of decline is not. Thus, the
States which perform worst in terms of
literacy rates — Bihar. Rajasthan, M.P .
U P. and A.P. — are also the ones
which have recorded minimum im
provement m the matter of male-female
differentials.
.* The States which have shown sig
nificant decline in male female literacy
differentials are also the ones which
have had consistently above average
literacy rates for all categories — "per
sons". males and females
OTHER STATES AND UNION TERRITORIES
We have dealt mainly with States
with a population exceeding one crore
Let us now take a quick look at the re
maining States and Union Territories
Here the picture is brighter Only Me
ghalaya. Dadra and Nagar Haveli and
Arunachal Pradesh (with a combined
population of around 27 lakhs) have lit
eracy rates below the national average
literacy rate for 1991. Several States/
Union Territories show high literacy
rates; these are Mizoram. Laksha
dweep. Chandigarh. Goa. Delhi. Pondi
cherry, Andaman and Nicobar Islands
and Daman and Diu. Only Kerala is
ahead of this pack. The rest — Hima
chal Pradesh. Nagaland. Manipur, Tri
pura and Sikkim — are closer to (but
above) the national average rates.
overall and sex-wise. The other aspect
to be highlighted is the fact that male
female differentials are comparatively
low in three regions inhabited predomi
nantly by tribals: Meghalaya. Mizoram.
and Nagaland.
VENKATESH ATHREYA
Frontline, April 13-26, 1991
Position: 1453 (6 views)