Race
- The term refers to the concept of dividing people into populations or groups on the basis of various sets of physical characteristics (which usually result from genetic ancestry)
- Each race has small percentage of unique genes
Ethnicity
An ethnic group or ethnicity is a population group whose members identify with each other on the basis of common nationality or shared cultural traditions. Practise common culture.
A tribe is a family grown large, but not yet so large as to be a nationality.
A nation is both a race & ethnic group : A group of people who share in common both race and culture.
Ethnic/Racial Elements in Indian Population
India is a ethnic museums. Variety of migrants came & settle in India & process admixture happened or has been taking place with local populations → resulted in colourful mosaic of human affairs that Indian society is today.
It is very difficult to construct a racial history of India & classify due to
- Only availability of stone as archeological evidences &
- Paucity of skeletal remains, even during historic times
In such light, scholar like Risley, Sir William Crock Haddon, B.S. Guha, James Hutton, Haimendorf, S.S. Sarkar tried to given Indian Racial Classification
Risley’s Classification
Herbert Risey may be considered as first to attempt classification on scientific lines. IN, 1915 in his work “People of India” he came up with radical classification based on Antrhopometic techniques & data collected by him.
Considered 4 Character 1. Stature 2. Nasal Index 3. Cephalic Index 4. Orbits-nasal Index
He summarised description of classification as follows Types
- Turko-Iranian – Baluchistan & Frontier Province with Pathans & Pashtuns
- Indo-Aryans – Punjabis, Rajputs, Jats & Kashmiri Khatris
- Risley identified them as people who started Vedic Civilisation
- Scythe-Dravidian – Maratha, Brahmins, Coorgs & Parsis
- Result of interaction b/w African & Middle Eastern with west Asian groups due to trade relations.
- Arya-Dravidian – UP, RJ, Bihar
- Interbred of Aryans & Dravidian
- Monglo-Dravidian – Bengali Brahmin & Kayasthas
- Mongolid – North Eastern states like Assam, Regions of Nepal & Burma
- Dravidian – TN, AP, Souther MP & chota Nagpur –
- Risley called them “ Original Inhabitants”
Physical Characteristics
| Characteristics | Turko Iranian | Indo Aryan | Sytho Dravidian | Aryan Dravidian | Monglo Dravidian | Mongoloid | Dravidian |
| Head Form | Long | Broad | Long | Broad | Long | Broad | Broad |
| Colour ComplexiN | Fair | Fair | Brown to Dark | Brown to Dark | Light Brown | Yellow Tinge | Dark |
| Stature | Tall | Tall | Medium | Medium | Medium | Short | Short |
| Nose Form | Fine | Fine | Medium to Broad | Medium to Broad | Medium to Broad | Broad | Broad |
| Hair | Plentiful | Plentiful | Scanty | Plentiful | Plentiful | Scanty | Plentiful |
Critique of Risley’s Classification
- Most glaring weakness & deficiency- based on Preconceived Notion& arbitrary conclusions ex. While Turko-Iranain were long headed, Risley reported Round headed
- Max Muller highlighted flaw in nomenclature that use of Linguistic Terms for classification of physical aggregates.
- B.S Guha Criticised attempt due to negligence of Negrito Element & also inclusion of Syntho-Dravidian element as their population & impact was not as large as depicted by Risley
- B.N Dutta criticised Indo-Aaryan classification as Aryan Language widely distrusted among Other parts too
- Risley included Monglo Dravidian on a/c of Epicanthic fold found in some population of Bengal. However, except Northern region, it was not found anywhere.
- Dravidian group of Risley was too generalistic as it have no. Of variations
Haddon’s Classification
Is based on evidences of physical traits, customs & traditions, language & the prevalent folk lore.
- Now only has historical importance.
- He & Guha were the main proponents of the Negrito element in India
- studied Angami Naga & observed sporadic occurrence of Negrito hair among them; supported by Basu & Guha
Divided India into 3 Main Geographical Regions which cover the entire racial group acc. To him ; these are along with major ethic elements
- The Himalayas – Indo – Aryan & Mongoloid.
- The Northern Plains of Hindustan – Indo-Agfhan viz the Jats & Rajputs
- The Deccan – The Negrito, Pre-Dravidian, Souther & western Brachycephals
Guha’s Classification
It was based on anthropometric survey during 1931-33. This was considered as first study based on developed anthropometric techniques & by virtue of it (sound scientific methods) , it is most recognised & acceptable till date.
Criteria – 18 Measurement, ex -cephalic & facial regions, skin colour, hair, eyes, nasal-notch depth, supraorbital dev.
Classification – 6 broad groups
- The Negritito – Guha Consider them as original inhabitant; They trace origin to Africa, Australia & Malensesia (or say neighbouring islands)
- Region – Rajmahal hills, Kadars, Irulas, Kurumba in South India
- Feature – Round occipital head, short stature, Dark, frizzy/wooly hair, thick lips, broad & flat nose; (slightly protruded jaws, black skin)
- 1st racial group to came & settled in hilly area of Kerala & Andaman island
- Negritos element is found in the blood of Andaman Islanders & also some South Indian tribal people like the Kadar & Nagas
- Kadar, Irula and Puliyan tribes of Kerala resemble to a great extent
- The Proto-Australoids – racial feature noted from skeleton Remains of Mohenjodaro
- Region –
- Bhils, kols of C & W India
- Chenchus, Kurumba of South India
- Santhal & Munda of Chota Nagpur
- Feature – Dolicocephlic (long) head, dark brown to black skin, broad & flat nose, short stature, hair are coarse & straight (Instead wooly)
- Perhaps came just after Negrito ; sources are Australian aborigine & Settled in the central India from the Rajmahal hills to the Aravalis. Gond,Oraon etc are also member.
- considered that they were the people who, in collaboration with the Mediterranean race, had developed the Indus Valley Civilization. Their skeletons have been found in the excavations of Mohenjodaro and Harappa.
- Region –
- The Mongoloids – entered India at diff times ; original homeland – Mongolia; came to thr the passes of N&E mountain ranges. These people are conc. in the nearby areas of the Himalayas, e.g. Ladakh, Sikkim, AR & other areas of the N-E
- Features – pale or light pale skin, short height, comparatively large head, half open eyes, flat face & broad nose.
- In India, they can be divided into two branches–
- Paleo-Mongoloids– 1st to come; settled mainly in the border areas of the Himalayas mostly in Burma Frontier, Assam & the adjacent states
- This racial type is further divided into two types,
- Long headed type – Angami Nagas
- Broad headed type – people inhabiting Himalayan foot hills from Kashmir to Assam
- This racial type is further divided into two types,
- Tibeto-Mongoloids– came from Tibet & settled mainly in Bhutan, Sikkim, areas of N-W Himalayas & beyond Himalaya inc. Ladakh & Baltistan
- Himalayan – Stature – Tall ; Nose -Long ; Colour – Darker
- Tibeto – Stature – Medium ; Nose – Broad ; Colour – Yellow Finge
- Both have Epicanthic folds
- The Mediterraneans – Guha calls them one who built IVC; came from the south-west Asia. may be divided into three groups
- Feature -True | Paleo| Oriental
- Stature – Tall | Short | Tall
- Head – Long | Long | Long
- Colour – Fair | Dark | Fair
- Paleo-Mediterraneans – Tamil Brahmin, Telugu Brahmin, Nayar
- 1st to come ; Perhaps they begun cultivation in the north-west India – later came group pushed them towards central & south India ; Now most population of south India & a large part of North
- Mediterranean (True) – Maratha ladies of Indore, Brahmin of Allahabad & Bengal.
- came later on; developed the IVC with the Proto-Australoids & initiated the bronze culture during 2500-1500 BC ; new invading group pushed them to Ganga valley & toward south of the Vindhyas ;
- most population of lower caste belong to this
- Oriental-Mediterranean – Bania of Rajputana & Chettris of Punjab
- came very late; mostly in NW border area of Pak & PB ; also found in sufficient no. In Sindh & RJ & Wester UP
- The Brachycephalics (Western race with broad head):apart from mongoloid, some other too have broad head like
- Alpendoid – Kathi (Kathiawar) , Kayastha (Bengal), Bania (GJ)
- Dinaric: Coorgs, Bengali Brahmins, Mysoori Brahmin
- Armenia: Parsis( Bombay), Vaidya & Kayastha (Bengal) – are representatives
- Feature – Alpednoid | Dinaric | Armenia
- Head – Broad | Broad | Broad
- Colour – Fair | Dark | Fair
- Nose – Long | Broad | Long
- Nordics – the last to came ; from Taiga & Baltic regions ; Replaces Indo-Aaryan Category of Risley
- Scattered all over India – PB, HR, RJ & Jammu ; (mainly North India in mixed from with Mediterranean race)
- Ex – Red Kafirs, Pathans of Bijapur
- Feature – Blue 👀 eyes, long head, fair(Reddish White) complexion, & sharp nose, well-developed & well-built body.
- Scattered all over India – PB, HR, RJ & Jammu ; (mainly North India in mixed from with Mediterranean race)
Among the conclusions of Guha of Guhu’s the most important is that the Brachycephals (broad headed population) dominate the Indian population. Was not the General belief before; classification received max approval & recognition as based on scientific line of greater magnitude than earlier. But some points have been also criticised, which are
Critics of Guha’s Classification
- Undue emphasis on Negrito elements
- No genetic basis of classification
- Source/ origin of all racial groups are traced outside
- Guha didn’t believed in evolution of many races in India
- S.S Sarkar – Sarkar denied extent of Brachycephalisation envisaged by Guha
- Acc. To Sakar, Doliocephalic was prominent
The first three races such as Negrito, Proto-Austroloid & Mongoloid constitute the tribal population.
other three, Mediterranean, Western Brachycephal & Nordic races constitute the general population of India.
It can be stated that the Indian population is composed of imp races of the world. All the races in India, over the past centuries, have got mixed up with one another due to intermarriages. As such, now there is no race in India which is completely pure. Therefore, in true sense no rigid separation of these races is possible.
In this manner, we can say that India has been the melting pot of races and therefore, it is c/l a museum of races.From time immemorial, India has been the melting place of conflicting races and civilization marked by a process of assimilation and synthesis.
More commonly Indian collectively call them self Cancasoid or Cancosial (Commonly used for European , American & Indian)
Negrito Problems in India
Introduction – Negroid element in Indian debate is most complicated issue in Indian ethnology. Absence of fossil evidences makes problem difficult to conclude.
Feature – Negrito (Negroid) have round occipital small (mesencephalic & dolichocephalic) head form , short stature, Dark Skin, wooly/frizzy haire, thick lips, broad & flat nose; & slightly protruded jaws.
- The Main proponents of Negrito element in India were Hutton & Guha
Pro-Negrito School
- De- Quatregages
- Negrito debate started with his observation in 1877 ( & also based on appearance of Wooly hair in Andamanese) , concluding that Negrito element formed basic ethnic substratum of Dravidians & some tribes in India.
- He expressed perhaps certain submerged Negrito race had come to India from Malaysia ; this racial elements seems to be present among Veddas of Sri Lanka & Kadar, Irula, Kurumba etc of South India.
- J.H Hutton
- studied Angami Naga & observed sporadic occurrence of Negrito hair among them
- Gave various Cultural Evidences to link Nagas with Negritos. Ex – Negrito were responsible for introduction of Cults inn India like Headhunting.
- Hutton view was vehemently supported by Guha & Basu, who affirmed it on basis of Skull evidences from Naga hills
- Guha
- Main proponent of Negrito elements in India
- Found presence of wooly & frizzly hairs among 16 Kadar Individuals + Skull (cranial material) remains from 2 Naga hills
- Guha & Basu divided cranial elements into 2 groups
- Mongloid
- Group with Tasmanian & Melanesian affinities – proposed that these were one time present from N.E to SW India but later by migration pressure from other groups , were driven to Oceania.
Negrito School was criticised by many anthropologists too
Against Negrito School Argumnets
- Guha’s views were criticised citing over dependence on one trait i.e Hair form or texture
- Fisher pointed out that mere wooly doesn’t affirm negrito presence As wooly May have developed owning to mutations of wavy form & such mutation can occur in India
- Sarkarwith his extensive study on Kadars using anthropometric techniques, somatotyping, blood group studyconcluded that no way negrito trait is demonstrated in them. He said Kadars of S.India are very similar to autraloids n manner of Skull construction & other feature.
- Majumdar – if Negrito ever dominated Indian population, then some definite & visible feature should have been there in Northern Indian population, due to admixturing, which not the case.
- Eicksteadt – in 1933 concluded that Negrito population never distributed in Indian population, confusion was created due to failure of differentiate b/w woolly hair & spiral -frizzly hair.
- Some proto-Australoid racial features have been noted from Skulls remains found from Mohenjodaro
- Serological Evidences– suggest elements were almost even among the most primitive tribal communities of India
- Primitive tribes in India rarely demonstrate B blood group which is common in Negrito
- Many tribes have A Blood group which is predominant in Australoid
- However tribes like Bhil & Munda show a high frequency of B-Blood groups like Negrito but they lack other physical features of Negritos
Even otherwise no final conclusion can be drawn on the basis of only serological facts specially under the conditions when not many serological studies have been conducted in India. There is lot of scope of research in this direction.
On the basis of present status of knowledge we can conclude only that perhaps the proto- Australosids were earliest inhabitants of India who experienced the admixture of African or Negrito blood in several parts of the subcontinent.
Even this may not be tha final conclusion but till the time some other evidences prove it otherwise it will continue to be the most acceptable conclusion.
Earliest Settler
- Guha → Negrito ; Rishy → Dravidian ; Sarkar & Majumdar → Australoids
When these theories considered relatively, Sarkar’s theory looks more logical & more acceptable byanthropologists
Evidences
- Distribution
- Inside in India – Following all are australoid.
- Varli, Kannokar – Travancore
- Paniyan – Malabars
- Chenchu (Hyd)
- Kadar (Cochin)
- Outside India – following all were australoid
- West – S. Arabia & Persia
- East – Nicobar, Sakai of Malay, Luba of Sumatra
- South – N. Australia & Sri Lankan veddas
- Inside in India – Following all are australoid.
Thus Migration Pattern suggest that Australoid made Indian subcontinent as home in earlier times & then migrated to all directions.
- Primitiveness
- Austaloid – short statured, dark colour, long head ; Bhagwat Purana describes Nishada people with same feature
- Descent –
- Australoid Trait – Neanderthal → thus earlier
- Negroid Trait – Grimaldi Man → Later of Neanderthal
- wooly hair of negrito → derived from wavy hair of Australiod
- Leaves of traits of australoid are Present in primitive Indian tribes, but not of Negrito.
- Fossils
- Skulls of Mohenjodaro (3250 – 2750 BC)
- Iron Age Fossils of Addittanallur
- Neolithic fossils of Brahmagn (Mysore)
Andamanese : Aborigines Africans or Asians ?
Andamese have been object of scientific curiosity since colonial times. While Jarawas & sentinelese escapedanthropologist’s gaze, the orge & Nicobarese have been subjected to intense scrutiny
- British (P) George E. Dobson – was first to note physical similarities between Andaman’s Negrito & African pygmoids In Journal of Royal Anthropological Institute
- Toba Eruption Theory – After super eruption of Toba volcano 🌋 75,000 yrs ago near Sumatra → survivors migrated to Africa → from there to Andamanes
- Homo Sapiens Thoery – Swiss Geologist George Weber ; aftermath of ice age → Mass exodus of home sapiens from Africa to Asia → some migrated to Andamans
Notes
- Study by Kumaraswamy Thangaraj from CCMB (Hyderabad), 2003 ; Andamanese have close affinity S.E Asia Tribes
Geographical Zone classification of Indian Tribes
B.S Guha – 3 Zones
- North & North Eastern in mountain valley & eastern frontiers of India
- Central or Middle Zone – of older hills & plateaus along dividing line b/w peninsula & Indo-Gangetic plains inclining western ghat’s convergence lines
- Southern Zone – whole peninsula
Majumdar & Madan – in their “Introduction to Social Anthropology ” 1956 offered very similar classification
S.C Dubey– classified in 4 zones
- North & NE
- Middle
- South
- West
L.P Vidhyarthi – 5 fold classification
- Himalayan Region
- NE Himalayan Region – N.E states + Mountains region of WB
- Central Himalayan – Terai of UP & Bihar
- NW Himalayan – HP, J&K
- Tribes – Dafias, Apatanis, Mishmi, Singpos, Kuki, Garo, Lepcha, Bhotia, Tharus
- Middle Indian Region – Bihar + WB + OD + MP
- 55% of total tribes
- Tribes – Juang, Maria, Baiga, Bhumil, Munda, Gonda, Santhal
- Western India – RJ, GJ, MH, Goa, D&NH
- Tribes – Gonds, Katkari, Koli, Minas, Siddi, Warli, Bhils, Dhanwar
- South India – AP, TN, KR, KA
- Tribes – Chenchu, Irula, Kadar, Toda, Badags, Kota
- Island Region – A&N, Lakshadweep
- Tribes – Jarawa, Onges, Great Andamanese, North Sentinels
K.S Singh – offered very similar classification as LP Vidyarthi’s
Classification Based on Ecological Habitat
- Hills
- Plains
- Forest
- Rural
- Urban
- Industrial Area
Tribe Density
Linguistic Elements in Indian Population
Introduction – India is kind of linguistic heterogeneity due to diverse ethnic groups along with prolonged geographical isolation. There has been long debate in assigning basic linguistic division to this diversity.
Importance of Language –
- sentiments of Social Integration
- Promote Emotional Integration
- Understanding & Identification Regional Identity & Cultural Identity
Distribution of Linguistic Families
Statistics Total Languages spoken – are 200 + ; half of them have < 10k speakers
- 23 languages – 97% of population; 22 out of 23 in 8th Schedule
Str – divided into 4 lang families(*) by G.A Grierson in Linguistic Survey of India, 1927 : 179 language & 554 dialects
- Austria Family (Nishad) – 1.11%
- Austro (L. southern) Asiatic Subfamily Present in India (Central Indian Tribal belt)
- Max muller separate if from Dravidian Family
- Speakers are proto-Australoid & Australoid types ;/ distribution of it –
- Mon-Khemer (inc. Mon -Burma & Khymer – Indochina) –
- Nicobarese in Nicobar islands,
- Khasi by Khasi tribe (Meghalaya)
- Munda Branch – Largest Austro Asiatic Family includes 14 tribal lang(?)
- North Munda
- Korku
- Kherwarian – having no. Of directs such as —
- Kherwari Branch – Koraku
- Mundari Branch – Mundari, Bhumi, Koda, Asuri, Ho, Birhor, Kol
- Santhali Branch – Santhali, Mahali
- South Munda
- Kharia – Juang
- Koratpur Munda –
- Remo branch : Gata, Bondo, Gaddak
- Savara branch : Sora, Parengi
- North Munda
- Mon-Khemer (inc. Mon -Burma & Khymer – Indochina) –
- Origin
- Chaubey – believes origin to Southeast India
- Riccio – observed speakers of Munda to be descendent from Austro-Asiatic migrants from SE Asia.
- Dravidian Family (Dravid) – 20.80%
- People belonging to Risley’s Dravidian group
- 3 schools regarding origin – 1. Indigenous 2.From N.W to India 3. Australian Origin
- Groups
- South Dravidian Group – Tamil, Malayalam, kannada
- Central Dravidian Group – Telugu & Gondi
- North Dravidian Group – Kurukh, Malti | Brahui (in Balochistan)
- Dravidian lang – less diverse
- Discovery & Origin
- Alexander Cambell suggested existence of Dravidian lang Family in his ‘Grammar of Teloogoo lng’ (1816)
- Robert Caldwell in his Camparative Grammer of Dravidian languages coined term Dravidian
- Origin of Family
- Some argues that this langs were brought by migrants 4th or 3rd millennium BCE, many believed that they are indigenous to india but their origin could not be traced properly.
- B. Krishamurthi assign proto-Dravidian to Indus Valley Civilisation, while Kolapakkam (2018) estimates it 4500 years old
- Linguist Asko Parpola attributes Indus script & Harrapan lang to Dravidian family
- Indo European Family ( Aryan) – (6%)
- Largest no. Of speakers ;
- Believed to came from outside –
- Dartic –
- Sindhi, Pakistan, Kashmir
- Kashmir languages – Shina, Brokskat, Kalkoti.
- Iranian (Persia) – Persia to east of Pamirs
- Indo Aryan – about 219 known Indo-Aryan lang in world
- Outer Subbranch
- North West -Dogri, W. Punjabi (Lahnda) & Sindhi
- Southern Group – Marathi, Konkani
- East – Oriya, Bihari(Bhojpuri, Maithili, Magahi), Bengali, Assamese, Chhattisgarhi
- Intermediate – Western Hindi ( Hindustaini, Haryanvi, Bundeli, Kannauji) , Gujrati, Bhili, Khandesi, Rajasthani
- Inner Subbranch –
- Central
- Pahari (Eastern) – Nepali
- Central Pahaari – Garhwali, Kumaoni
- Ghadar wali
- Outer Subbranch
- Dartic –
- Origin of Indo-Aryan – Aryan Migration into Indian subcontinent from Central Asia in 2nd millennium BCE
- Sino-Tibetian (Kirat ) – 0.55% – non sinitic members of it is Tibeto-Burmese
- Generally tribal population in N.E region
- Group –
- Himalayan – Tibetiani, Mewari, Lepcha, Balti,
- N. Assam – Dafia, Abar- Miri, Mishmi
- Assam – Burmese – Naga hills, Gavo hills, Manipur,
- Bodo group (Dimasa, Garo, Tripura)
- Naga group (Angami, Ao, Rengma)
- Kachin group (Singpho)
- Semito- Hemitc Family (5th Family Acc. To 2011 Census) – 0.01%
- Arabic influence
Relevance
- Side by side of linguistic diversity, evidences of all India common vocabulary
- Sanskrit, Persian, English has been state or admin.languages at times
Thus forming communication linkages between diff. Families.
Unity in diversity in Indian Languages
- Sanskrit – bride b/w diff. Aaryan langs
- Persian – Influenced Marathi, Tamil, Bengali
- English – Modern Education
- Hindi -Urdu – Linguistic unity of India
Conflicts – from last 5-6 decades
- Regionalism – eg. Hindi & Non Hindi conflict ; one Nation – One lang
- Secessionism – eg. Dravidanadu (Southern States) , Nagaland
- Linguistic conflicts – eg. MH -KR dispute
- Importance : Liguistc identity > national identity → harmful for national unity
Conclusion – Though has criticised for some conflict, but by & large acted as unitary & integrative force of national Identity
- forging discussion reveals – seems to be an overlap of linguistic elem s in population → owing to widespread migration & resettlements
- Imp feature of ling div. It doesn’t coincide with racial classification or diversity.
Recent Studies
- Suggest Linguistic groups have sae genetic structure → thus linguistic groups are genetic groups also
- Activation of language part of brain while making tools 🛠
Indian Population – Factors Influencing it str & growth
Introduction – As per the world pop auction prospects 2017, India’s population stands at 1.34 billion, making it the second most populous country globally. With perspective of demographic transition theory, India is in the third stage, with a rich demography dividend expected to last for approximately 25 years more.
Factors Influencing population growth
- Fertility Rate – It indicates number of child birth per one woman of child bearing age. In India, the TFR has shown a positive decline, & is now 2.2. However, states like Bihar, UP, Meghalaya continue to have TFR above or near 3. High TFR is result of
- Poverty, which force people to produce more children to earn, as well as to compensate for the death of members (earners)
- Inadequate access to contraceptive & family planning services
- Traditions & beliefs like child marriage & preference for sons
- Lack of basic healthcare & education
- Mortality Rate – indicate the number of death In a population. Improvement in medical facilities has increased the average life expectancy of Indians from 49.7 in 1970-75 to 67.9 in 2010-14. Thus, the mortality rate has declined contributing to an increase in population growth.
- Migration – At the country – level, migration plays a small role in population change in India. This is because the immigration from neighbouring countries like Bangladesh, Pakistan & Nepal is balanced by the emigration to the western & gulf countries.
- Governmental Intervention – the national population policy 2000 forms the basis of government’s family planing scheme. The states focus on the two child norm, healthcare & family planning services has led to a slowdown of the population explosion witnessed b/w 1951-81
Case studies About Indian Population
- In case of India, a significant decline in child mortality rate b/w 2001-15 ( Lancet 2017 study), along with reduction of TFR from 3.3 to 2.3, confirm its transition from the second to third stage.
- Economic survey 2016-2017 pointed out that Indian stages are following different transition phases. Peninsular India (Kerla, TN, Goa etc) are close to completing their transition. Northern India (Bihar, Rajasthan, UP) is still in the early stage with an expanding population. The result of Peninsular India is expected to peak in 2020s; while of Northern India in 2040s
Conclusion– It is essential for India to achieve its target of stable population levels to reduce the strain on diminishing resources. Simultaneously, the rich demographic dividend must be reaped in order to benefit from the large working age population.
National Population Policy 2000 : Objective & Result
Introduction – The national policy 2000 provides a policy framework for advancing & prioritising strategies related to population stabilisation during the next decade.
Objectives
- Immediate Objective – To address the unmet needs for contraception, health care Infrastructure, & health personnel & to provide integrated service delivery for basic reproductive & child Heath care.
- Medium – term objective – To bring the TFR to replacement levels by 2010
- Long-term Objective – To achieve a stable population by 2045, at a level consistent with the needs of sustainable economic growth, social development, & environmental protection.
Steps Taken – In pursuance of this policy, the govt has taken a number of measures that include –
- Mission Parivar Vikas – to ↑ the access to contraceptive & family planning services in the high fertility districts
- Jansankaay Sthirata Kosh (JSK) – A fund to promote private participation in family planing services & to push up the age of marriage for girls
- Utilisation of service of Asha Workers to ensue spacing in births
- Increasing ♂ participation & promotion of Non-scalpel Vesectomy
- Enhanced compensation scheme for sterilisation
- Promoting education as a tool for population control
Result – population growth rate in India has reduced substantially which is evident from the following
- Total Fertility Rate (TFR) has declined from 3.2 in 2000 to 2.2 in 2017
- The decadal growth rate has declined significantly from 21.5% for the period 1991-2001 to 17.7% during 2001-2011
- 24 states/ UTs have already achieved the replacement leve TFR of 2.1
Conclusion – Although India is yet to achieve replacement level of 2.1, the progress has been significant, & needs to be sustained through effective policy measures, combined with citizen’s active participation.