BackBack to Beyond the Book Indian & Bihar Economy

BPSC Mains GS-2 Masterclass · Indian & Bihar Economy

Population & DevelopmentMore People, Uneven Growth

India's population grew from 36 crore in 1951 to over 121 crore in 2011, but not evenly: Kerala's grew 56% between 1971 and 2011, Bihar's about 140%. This page traces where and why population grew, how rapid growth holds development back and widens regional gaps, and what India is doing about it.

Explosion36.1 → 68.3 crPopulation

1951 to 1981: almost 90% growth.

Density117 → 382Persons per sq km

India's density, 1951 to 2011.

Bihar1,106Bihar density

per sq km, the highest among northern states.

North–south56% vs 140%Growth 1971–2011

Kerala vs Bihar, UP and MP.

Fertility3.2Bihar's TFR

the highest in India (NFHS-4).

Policy1952Family planning

India the first country with an official programme.

Part 1 · Population and development

India's Population Challenge

The scale of India's population, the meaning of development, and the debate over whether population helps or hinders it.

A crowded railway platform in Bihar with families, workers and students, under a large clock

A growing, uneven population

India, with population of more than 1.3 billion, is currently 2nd most populous country in the world. According to World Population Prospects 2019, it is expected to surpass China as the world's most populous country by 2027.

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

Population and development

According to 'World Population Projections 2019' report released by United Nations, the world population is to reach around 9.7 billion by 2050 and India is projected to surpass China as the world's most populous country by 2027. Such rapid rise in the population is seen as hindrance to the development process.

By development we mean not only increase in national income (GNP) or per capita income, but also reduction in unemployment as a result of the growth of employment opportunities and reduction in poverty, rise in standard of living and inequalities of income.

Generally, it is viewed that high population growth leads to decline in standard of living as more and more people chase fewer and fewer resources. However, some scholars believe that the population growth is, by itself, a neutral phenomenon with respect to economic growth. In fact, population rise can be a source of labor force and boost consumption demand in economy.

Example: Imagine a family's income grows 5% a year. If the family also grows 5% a year, each member is no better off; if it grows 2%, each member gains about 3%. A state's per capita income works the same way.

Part 2 · Background (not needed in the 1999 answer)

Four Phases and Today's Spread

The history of India's population growth falls into four phases, divided at 1921, 1951 and 1981. Density and distribution are very uneven.

Four phases of population growth

1921 is known as the year of Great Divide, which differentiated the earlier period of fluctuating growth rates from a period of moderately increasing growth rates.
- Fluctuating trend of population was due to famine, disease etc.
- During 1911-21 India's population recorded a virtual shrink in its size in the wake of influenza epidemic, which had struck in 1919. It has been estimated that the epidemic claimed the life of nearly 7% of the population in the country.
The second point of division was 1951, which differentiated the period of earlier moderate growth from a period of rapid growth in the post-independence period.
- The growth rate remained otherwise virtually stable during 1931-51. Over a period of thirty years, i.e., 1921-51 population grew at moderately increasing rate.
- Strikingly, the central zone recorded a consistently lower growth rate than the nation's average perhaps because of a persistently higher incidence of mortality and substantial out-migration.
- On the other hand, the western zone experienced a much faster growth in its population, as it was the period of initial industrial growth in the western zone.
- The states like Bihar, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh recorded a consistently lower growth. Some of these states (like Bihar, U.P. etc) lost their substantial population through the process of out-migration.
This phase of rapid growth in population continued up to 1981. Thereafter, though population continues to grow, the rate of growth shows a definite deceleration.

Density and distribution

The density of population increased from 117 persons/sq km in 1951 to 382 persons/sq km in 2011.
Almost half of India's population lives in just five states. These are Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Bihar, West Bengal, and Andhra Pradesh.
The spatial variation of population densities in the country ranges from as low as 17 persons per sq km in Arunachal Pradesh to 11,320 persons in the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
Among the northern Indian States, Bihar (1106), West Bengal (1028) and Uttar Pradesh (829) have higher densities, while Kerala (860) and Tamil Nadu (555) have higher densities among the peninsular Indian states.
North-South divide: Between the 1971 and 2011 Censuses, the population of Kerala grew by 56% compared to about 140% growth for Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh.

Density, 2011 (persons/sq km)

Bihar1,106
West Bengal1,028
Kerala860
Uttar Pradesh829
Tamil Nadu555
India382

Population growth, 1971–2011

Bihar, UP, MP140%
Kerala56%

Part 3 · Regional variations since independence

Where India's Population Grew Fastest

After independence, death rates fell sharply and growth surged; after 1981 it slowed, but much more in the south than in the north.

Post-independence surge

Post independence India saw the beginning of rapid growth in the population in the country, as a result of a sharper decline in death rates after independence in 1947.

The acceleration in the growth rates continued up to 1981. The total population increased from 36.1 crores in 1951 to 68.3 crores in 1981 recording a growth rate of a little short of 90%.
The decades 1951-1981 are referred to as the period of population explosion in India. It was caused by a rapid fall in the mortality rate but a high fertility rate of population in the country.
- It is in this period, after the Independence, that developmental activities were introduced through a centralised planning process and economy started showing up ensuring the improvement of living condition of people at large. Consequently, there was a high natural increase and higher growth rate.
- Besides, increased international migration bringing in Tibetans, Bangladeshis, Nepalis and even people from Pakistan contributed to the high growth rate.
The average annual exponential growth increased from 1.21% during 1921-51 to 2.2% during 1951-81.
Though all the zones witnessed increase in pace of population growth, the northern zone recorded the largest acceleration. The northern zone, in fact, recorded a faster growth than the nation's average.
- In this zone, Haryana and Rajasthan experienced a very rapid growth in their population.
The next highest growth rate was recorded in the western zone. In fact, as during the pre-independence period, the western zone continued to experience a faster growth than all India average even after independence.
- At the state level, Gujarat maintained its leading position among the major states in the zone.
The central zone (Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh) continued to record a lower growth than the nation's average probably due to persisting high mortality rates and out-migration.
- Uttar Pradesh is found to have recorded one of the lowest growth rates in population among the major states during the period.
The southern zone, which had experienced a faster growth than the nation's average up to 1951, experienced a reversal in the pattern. With a much smaller increase in the pace of growth, the zone recorded a significantly lower growth than the nation's average during 1951-81.
- This could perhaps be attributed to out-migration and also to an early decline in the rate of natural growth with decline in the birth rates.
- Among the major states in the zone, Tamil Nadu recorded the lowest growth rate, followed by Andhra Pradesh.
- Remarkably, in Kerala, the growth rate was only marginally lower than the nation's average.
Some of the highest growth rates in the population during the decade were recorded in the north-eastern region of the country. This was driven by the in-migration from Bangladesh and other parts of country.

Fertility today

Currently, according to NFHS-4, twenty Indian states have dipped below the 2.1 replacement rate level and are no longer contributing to Indian population growth.
- The total fertility rate of India stands at 2.2 as of 2017.
- Bihar with TFR 3.2 has the highest fertility rate.
- On the Demographic Transition Model, India falls in the third stage due to decreased birth rates and death rates. In 2026, it is projected to be in stage four once the Total Fertility Rate reaches 2.1.
Example: TFR (total fertility rate) is the average number of children a woman would have in her lifetime. At about 2.1, each couple just replaces itself and the population eventually stops growing.

Average annual growth

1921-511.21%
1951-812.2%
1981-20012.04%

Total fertility rate

Bihar3.2
India (2017)2.2
Replacement2.1

Part 4 · How rapid population growth holds development back

Why Rapid Population Growth Is a Hindrance

The relationship between population growth and economic growth is debated, but in general population can limit development in many ways.

The debate

The relationship between population growth and economic growth is a highly debated topic. Low population growth in high-income regions is likely to create social and economic problems while high population growth in low-income regions may slow their development.
According to Malthusian view, population growth is likely to impede economic growth because it will put pressure on the available resources, result in reduction in per capita income and resources; this, in turn, will result in deterioration in quality of life.
- However, contrary to the Malthusian predictions, several of the East Asian countries have been able to achieve economic prosperity and improvement in quality of life in spite of population growth.
- Even in India, some states like Maharashtra could achieve higher economic growth in spite of high population growth.

Population reduces the Rate of Capital Formation:
- The rapid growth of population diminishes the availability of capital per head which reduces the productivity of its labour force. Their income, as a consequence, is reduced and their capacity to save is diminished which, in turn, adversely affects capital formation for investment.
- Increase in population by adding to the number of people whose requirements of "feeding and clothing" have to be met tends to raise consumption and, therefore, lowers both saving and investment.
- The government has to spend a lot on providing basic facilities like education, housing and medical aid. It reduces capital availability.
Higher Rate of Population requires more Investment:
- A rapidly growing population increases the requirements of demographic investment which at the same time reduces the capacity of the people to save. This creates a serious imbalance between investment requirements and the availability of investible funds.
- Most of income is absorbed by demographic investment and nothing is left for economic development.
Example: 'Demographic investment' is spending just to keep pace with more people: new classrooms, clinics and houses for the extra children, rather than new factories or roads.
Adverse Effect on per Capita Income:
- So long as the rate of population growth is lower than the rate of economic growth, the per capita income will rise but if population growth exceeds the rate of economic growth, per capita income will fall.
- e.g. Per capita annual income in Bihar is Rs 43,822 while national average is 130 thousand rupees.

But population can also help

However, the rising population can also create favorable conditions for economic development:

Human resource is an asset to an economy, not a liability. India's major strength lies in its skilled and efficient workforce which attracts many firms to invest and set up their operations in India.
High population means more demand in the consumer markets. This creates business opportunity for domestic businesses and attracts more FDI.
Regional diversity in the population growth rate is related to different windows for demographic dividend in India. The demographic dividend for southern states will be over soon. The northern states can supply the labour in that case.
- This suggests that workers of Bihar will be supporting the ageing population of Kerala in 20 years.

Part 5 · Impact on economic imbalances

How Population Growth Widens Regional Gaps

High population growth and under-development tend to go together; poorer states can spend less per person, and central schemes do not always correct this.

The impact on economic imbalances

In India, in majority of States with high population growth rates, the performance in the social and economic sector has been poor.
In spite of the additional assistance provided, improvement in infrastructure, agriculture and industry have been sub-optimal and the per capita income continues to be low in most of the poorly performing States.
Poorer states are constrained in their ability to raise revenues, and are able to spend much less per capita on investments in human and physical capital compared to the richer states, thus perpetuating the cycle of inequality.
- The differences in spending on health and education are particularly stark, with poorer states spending far less per person compared to richer states.
- Despite a plethora of centrally sponsored schemes which ostensibly aim to correct such imbalances, and despite attempts by successive Finance Commissions to equalize outcomes across states, development spending has not really converged across states.
It is now realized that population growth or demographic transition can have favourable impact on economic growth only when there are optimal interventions aimed at human resource development (HRD) and appropriate utilisation of available human resources, i.e. status of education, skill development, health, use of modern technology etc determines the impact of the population growth on the economic development in the region.
Former Finance Commission member, M Govinda Rao argues that in designing central schemes, the Union government fails to take into account the per capita requirements of each state. As a result, richer states often tend to gain more from such schemes compared to poorer states.
- Rao uses the example of the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) to show how per capita spending on the scheme is higher for the prosperous states compared to poorer states. Given that the overwhelming majority of children are in the poorer states, this has grave implications for inter-generational equity and equality of opportunity in the country.
- Furthermore, while Finance Commission allocation formulas tend to account for backwardness in general, they also take into account performance of states on various parameters, which tend to penalise states which have a legacy of poverty and bad governance. It goes against the states with more population growth rate.
Example: If a scheme gives every state the same money per school, Bihar, with far more children per school, ends up with much less per child than Kerala.

Conclusion on regional imbalances

To conclude, generally there is convergence of high population growth rate and under-developed regions in India. Since last few decades, almost all the states are continuously registering decline in the population growth. The Economic Survey 2018-19 notes that India is set to witness a "sharp slowdown in population growth in the next two decades". So, there is need to improve the quality of the population which will not only boost the economic development but also check the population growth rate itself.

Part 6 · Population is not the only cause

Other Causes of Poverty, and Checking Population Growth

Rapid population rise is not the only obstacle to development: the 2009 version of the question asks whether density is the basic cause of poverty.

Colonial destruction of economy:
- e.g. Imports of manufactured cotton cloth from Lancashire in England displaced much local production, and India reverted to being an exporter of cotton yarn, not cloth.
Uncontrolled population; social, economic and political inequality; social exclusion.
Growth is not rapid enough to eradicate poverty.
Models of growth may be unsuitable for poverty alleviation. For example, capital-intensive growth in a labour surplus country like India.
Poverty is a vicious circle preventing investment and development.
- It is said that "a country is poor because it is poor."
- Low level of saving reduces the scope for investment; low level of investment yields low income and thus the circle of poverty goes on indefinitely.
Low Resources Endowment:
- A household is poor if the sum total of income earning assets which it commands, including land, capital and labor of various levels of skills, cannot provide an income above the poverty line.
- Lack of skills.
Inequality in the Distribution of Income and Assets: It means the benefits of the growth have been concentrated and have not "trickled down" sufficiently to ensure improved consumption among the lower income groups.
Price Rise: The rising prices have reduced the purchasing power of money and thus have reduced the real value of money income.
Lack of Productive Employment: The lack of productive employment is mainly due to problems of infrastructure, inputs, credit, technology and marketing support. The gainful employment opportunities are lacking in the system.

So, is population the cause?

Thus, there are multiple factors at play which impede the development process; rapid rise in population is a major one among them. In India where supplies of other economic resources, especially capital equipment, are relatively scarce, increase in population or labour force does not lead to the employment of all due to scarcity of capital resources. Unemployed people do not add to national output. Furthermore, the demand or market for goods increases if the real purchasing power in the hands of the people increases. The mere growth of unemployed or paupers cannot lead to greater demand for goods or expansion in their markets.

Measures taken to check the rising population

National Population Policy (NPP) was introduced in 2000:
- The essence of the policy was the government's commitment to "voluntary and informed choice and consent of citizens while availing of reproductive health care services" along with a "target free approach in administering family planning services".
- So, currently, family Planning programme in India is target free and voluntary in nature and it is the prerogative of the clients to choose a family planning method best suited to them as per their reproductive right.
Poverty elimination programs:
- The poor tend to have more children because child survival is low, son preference remains high, children lend a helping hand in economic activity for poorer households and so support the economic as well as emotional needs of the family.
- As the National Family Health Survey-4 (2015-16) notes, women in the lowest wealth quintile have an average of 1.6 more children than women in the highest wealth quintile, translating to a total fertility rate of 3.2 children versus 1.5 children moving from the poorest to the wealthiest.
Incentivising family planning: e.g.
- The restriction of maternity leave and other maternity benefits for first two births only and
- disqualification from panchayat elections for people with more than two children in some states along with minor incentives for sterilisation.
Minimum age of Marriage.
Spread of education: the number of children per woman declines with a woman's level of schooling. Women with no schooling have an average 3.1 children, compared with 1.7 children for women with 12 or more years of schooling.
Example: Each extra year a girl spends in school tends to delay her marriage and first child, and educated mothers usually choose smaller families.
Facilitating adoptions of orphans.
Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act: banned prenatal sex determination.
More employment opportunities for women. e.g. Jeevika scheme in Bihar; The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013 ("the Act") was enacted with the objective to provide protection against sexual harassment of women at workplace.

TFR by wealth (NFHS-4)

Poorest fifth3.2
Richest fifth1.5

Children per woman by schooling

No schooling3.1
12+ years1.7

Conclusion

These efforts have resulted in some positive results. The Indian TFR declined from 3.2 in 2000 to 2.2 in 2016 (NFHS-4). The Economic Survey 2018-19 notes that India is set to witness a "sharp slowdown in population growth in the next two decades". Today, as many as 23 States and Union Territories, including all the States in the south region, already have fertility below the replacement level of 2.1 children per woman. So, moving forward we need to focus on creating quality of the human resource by providing education, skill, health etc.

“There is need to improve the quality of the population which will not only boost the economic development but also check the population growth rate itself.”

— BPSC Mains answer, 1999

Curated for BPSC, UPSC & State PCS Civil Services Aspirants | Indian & Bihar Economy Master Module

Explore More Beyond the Book Modules