COVER STORY/POPULATION

India’s current population growth to unplanned pregnancies. Around 5 in 10 live births are unintended, unplanned or simply unwanted. Of the 26 million children born in 2018-19, about 13 million could be classified as unplanned. Based on NFHS 1 to 4, it is estimated that 135 million out of 430 million births were the result of unplanned pregnancies.

In effect, India is on path to stabilise population. Therefore, the stress on introduction of punitive measures to ensure population control is misplaced. In fact, a few states that imposed restrictions in various forms to enforce the two-child norm are on the back foot now. Four of the 12 states which introduced the two-child norm have already revoked it. Goli says punitive actions have failed to check popu-lation around the world.

A study by former Madhya Pradesh chief secretary Nirmala Buch on laws restricting the eligibility of people with more than two children in Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha and Rajasthan concluded that two-child norm violates the democratic and reproductive rights of individuals. “A high number of women (41 per cent) among our respondents faced disqualification for violating the two-child norm. Among Dalit respondents, this proportion was even higher (50 per cent),” Buch’s study finds.

In 2013, China relaxed its infamous one-child policy imposed in 1979. The policy resulted in undesirable consequences like sex-selective abortions, depressed fertility levels, irreversible population ageing, labour shortages and economic slowdown, according to

a 2016 study by the Institute for

ONLY 24 PER CENT OF MARRIED WOMEN BETWEEN 15 AND 19 YEARS OF AGE WANT A SECOND CHILD. AROUND 5 IN 10 LIVE BIRTHS ARE UNINTENDED, UNPLANNED OR SIMPLY UNWANTED

Population has exploded. There is no argument over this fact. It took millions of years for world population to reach one billion in 1800 AD. It doubled within just 100 years and soon hit the six-billion mark. This exponential growth was driven by progress in agriculture, science and medi-cine, which increased people’s lifespan. As a result, in the 20th century, there was an overwhel-ming focus on population control and management of the planet’s limited resources.

Political parties have raised this issue because they need to deliver services and resolve problems hindering better lives for the people, be it easing traffic jams, better transport facilities or better income. When policymakers fail, rising population works as a shield for them. Right-of-the-centre parties, such as India’s ruling dispensation, have been observed to be more vocal—rather militant—about population growth.

In 2010, then Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard said while campaigning that she did not need a serious climate change policy to win elections. Instead, she put “sustainable Australia” as her agenda, which advocated low population growth. Such was the buying in of her campaign that opposition leader and climate-denier Tony Abbott claimed he was even more

is that the world managed to reduce fertility dramatically from 4.5 in 1970 to 2.5 children per woman now by giving more education, health and contraception to women. This has made them free to be able to choose smaller family size,” says Randers, who is also professor emeritus, climate strategy, department of law and governance, BI Norwegian Business School, Oslo.

Randers is not alone. Paul Morland, author of says much of the world is in a “fertility free-fall”. A new report by Melbournebased think tank, Institute for Family Studies, shows that very low birth rates are becoming normal. Except subSaharan Africa, almost all countries are below replacement-level fertility or about to reach there.

The signs are clear. A 2017 report in British journal found that half of the countries in world is in the midst of a “baby bust”, as opposed to the earlier “baby boom”. They have insufficient children to maintain their population size. Populations of many countries are shrinking—Greece (1.3 TFR), Bulgaria (1.58), Hungary (1.39), Poland (1.29), Italy (1.40), South Korea (1.26) and Japan (1.48). Even the developing world is witnessing this trend. China now has a fertility rate of 1.5 and Brazil just 1.8. Since 1976, the number of countries that officially say they are trying to increase their birth rates has risen from under 9 per cent to almost 30 per cent now.

Urbanisation is an important reason for the decline because, for the first time, majority of population now lives in cities. “In the countryside, a child can help by working on the land, but in cities a child becomes an economic liability. Also in cities, women have less social pressure to have more children. Access to media, schools and contraception increase,” says William Reville, emeritus professor of biochemistry at the University College Cork, Ireland.

POPULATION SHOULD be understood considering the country’s resources and its growth.The relationship between these two is determined by three factors.First,each individual must be assured a minimum standard of living.If 40 per cent of the population suffers while 60 per cent lives a luxurious life,it clearly means our resources are not equally distributed.Second, the state has limitations while implementing developmental works.Be it a communist state,a capitalist state or a welfare state,it cannot exploit all the resources for the present generation; future generations have equal right over these.

The third is the stability factor. When there's development while the population grows, it consumes the futuristic vision. Despite the construction of roads and flyovers,traffic congestions are a constant in cities.Visit a village or district after a five-year gap,one will find arable lands occupied by shops or residential houses.

Given situations like climate change,the question that arises is how much extra population we can add every year.Some aggressive optimists say development is required to sustain society.I think it is important to discuss everything in a democratic country.This is the reason I introduced the Population Regulation Bill.

The population discourse is suffering because of two deficits.First,in the 1970s,the then government encouraged family planning with the slogan“Hum Do,Hamaare Do”.

The government realised that population explosion was imminent and for the first time the country had a discussion on population.But in 1976, Sanjay Gandhi hegemonised the state and used coercion to achieve certain goals.The coercion is still vivid in people’s minds,and successive Congress governments realised the mistake.

The realisation was reflected in 1992 when the National Development Council set up a committee on population control led by the then Kerala Chief Minister K Karunakaran.It suggested the two-child norm and recommended that those who breached it would not be allowed to contest the Lok Sabha,Rajya Sabha or any other elections.But it put the committee report in cold storage.Its understanding did not reflect in its debates or policies.People interpreted the problem in their own different ways.Ultimately,the debate became a victim of communal discourse.This was the second deficit.Communal discourse has worked as a deterrent for futuristic and scientific debate on population stabilisation.

Some opinion-makers justify India’s population and say the country will achieve 2.1 Total Fertility Rate (TFR).They forget that given India’s high population,the addition of even 0.01TFR would equal a few Indian states’total population.Every addition to the optimum population is a burden on the state,its taxpayers and its resources.

The Bill gives benefits to women,the biggest victims in a health crisis.It says that every primary health centre must have a maternity centre and every woman must get a health card.All women must get free health check-ups and compulsory routine counselling.The Bill also gives benefits to those who follow the two-child norm,since they do not add to the population but replace themselves.They should get more interest on bank deposits,priority in admissions,promotions,etc.The message should go to people that if they think in the interest of the state,the state will take care of them as well.

RAKESH SINHA

THERE IS no urgency for India to take population control measures.The country is already witnessing a decline in its population growth rate.Couples not only desire,but also have fewer children than earlier.

The overall growth appears high because of the population momentum in the presence of a large base of the young population.Thirty per cent of the country’s population comprises young—adolescents (10 to 19 years) and youth (15 to 24 years)—who are or will soon be in reproductive age.Even if this group produces fewer children per couple,there would still be a quantum increase because the number of reproductive couples is high.Thus,India,with its large proportion of young people,will take time to stabilise its population.

However,the country’s demographic changes are along the expected lines.With increased access to education,economic and other development opportunities,India will ensure fertility decline in all the states.Regressive social norms continue to undermine the value of women in many parts of India.According to National Family Health Survey-4,as many as 14.43 million women (between 20 and 24 years) married before the age of 18 and 4.5 million become mothers during adolescence.Also,10 million girls between 15 and 24 years of age who wish to delay pregnancy do not have access to contraceptives.Early marriage,teenage pregnancy, son preference,lack of women’s agencies,taboos attached to abortion and poor commitment from men towards family planning are some critical socioeconomic factors resulting in high fertility.India is among the countries with the highest number of girls married before they are 18. As women’s reproductive health is largely affected by decisions made mostly by men and their families,it is important for men to not merely be sexual partners,husbands and heads of families.They should help change women’s lives by increasing the use of contraceptives and seeking reproductive healthcare services.This can change the country’s family planning narrative.

In the early 1970s,coercive population control strategies gained momentum in India,which saw the rise of mass sterilisation camps.It compelled states to employ extreme incentive policies with target-based approach to attain numbers.But in 2000,the Union government brought out the second National Population Policy (NPP) which reflects the commitments made at the International Conference on Population and Development in 1994.NPP emphasised that people must be free and enabled to access quality healthcare,make informed choices and adopt measures for fertility regulation best suited to them.It hoped to bring the nationalTotal Fertility Rate (TFR) to 2.1 by 2010 and work towards filling the unmet need for contraceptives and services by advocating “small family norm”without prescribing numbers and running state-specific programmes.Nowhere did the policy advocate“two-child norm”.

It is disturbing that“small-family norm“was misinterpreted as“two-child norm”,which clearly has coercive implications.India has to stabilise population without coercive policies.To ensure that high fertility regions lower theirTFR to replacement levels,the government needs to raise budgetary allocations,address the large unmet need for family planning services and provide more contraceptive choices in public health systems.Simultaneous investments to enhance women’s education,health status and greater participation in the workforce can contribute to reducing fertility rates.

POONAM MUTTREJA