The Demography of South Asia from the 1950s to the 2000s

Population-E, 63 (1), 2008, 9-90

º»

JaCques Véron*

The Demography of South Asia from the 1950s to the 2000s

A Summary of Changes and a Statistical Assessment

SouthAsia,forthepurposesofthischronicle,iscomposedofeightcountries,namelyAfghanistan,Bangladesh,Bhutan,India,theMaldives,Nepal,PakistanandSriLanka(1).In2007thepopulationinthisregiontotallednearly1.6billioninhabitants(UnitedNations,2007a),representingnearly24%oftheworld’stotalpopulationspreadoverlessthan4%oftheworld’ssurface(2).Fromademographicpointofview,SouthAsiaisdominatedbyIndia,whichalonehasapopulationof1.17billion,buttherearetwootherdenselypopulatedcountriesinthisregion:PakistanandBangladesh,withpopulationsof164and159millionrespectivelyin2007.SouthAsiaalsoincludescountrieswithsmallpopulationssuchasBhutan,withonly658,000inhabitantsandtheMaldiveswithjust306,000.

Therearesharpcontrastsbetweenthesecountries,be it in termsofdemographicgrowth,populationdensity,mortalityandfertilityrates,urbanizationorliteracy.AndthesituationwithinIndia,thelargestcountryintheregion,is itselfoneofmajor internalcontrasts. Its28stateseachhavedistinctdemographictraits–populationsize,stageofdemographictransition,densityetc.–aswellasdifferenteconomic,socialandreligiouscharacteristics.

ThedemographicchallengesconfrontingSouthAsiaarethoseofdevelopingcountriesfacedwithamajorpopulationincrease.Theyarethechallengesofeducating,housing,caringforandemployingagrowing–sometimesrapidlygrowing–population.Thesecountrieshavetofightagainstpovertywhileensuringthattheeconomicgrowththeysobadlyneedtoimprovethelivesoftheirpeopledoesnotresultinseriousenvironmentaldamage.Thepopulations

*Institutnationald’étudesdémographiques,Paris.TranslatedbyKrystynaHorko,RosemaryKneipp,GodfreyRogers.(1)FortheUnitedNations,SouthAsiaismadeupofthesamecountriesexcludingAfghanistan,whichisconsideredtobeinCentralAsia.

(2)Thelandsurfaceisthedifference,ineachcountry,betweenthetotalsurfaceareaandtheinlandwaters(themainriversandlakes).SeePison(2007).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 9 23/06/2008 14:36:15

J. Véron

10

ofSouthAsiaareveryvulnerablebotheconomically(especiallythechildrenwhostartworkingatanearlyage)andenvironmentally.Forinstance,aportionoftheBangladeshipopulationlivesatsealevelwithconsiderableexposuretofloodrisk,andseveralcountriesintheregionwereaffectedbythetsunamiinthewinterof2004.Incertainfragileorexposedareas,demographicgrowthandtheconsequentincreaseinpopulationdensityexacerbatethevulnerabilityofthepoorestpopulations.

I. South Asia in the world

Withjustunderonequarteroftheworld’spopulationintheearly2000s,SouthAsia’spopulationgrowthof2.1%overthepastthirtyyearsisfarhigherthantheworldaverageof1.6%betweentheyears1975-2005(Table1),butbelowthatofsub-SaharanAfrica(2.7%)ortheArabworld(2.6%).SouthAsiaislessadvancedinitsdemographictransitionthantheworldasawhole:thefertilityratewas3.2childrenperwomanbetween2000-2005comparedwithaglobalaverageof2.7,whilelifeexpectancyatbirthwas3.6yearsbelowtheworldaverage.SouthAsiaisquitedistinctfromEastAsiaandthePacificregion,

Map 1. South Asia

India

Pakis

tan

Bangladesh

BhutanNepal

Afghanistan

Sri Lanka

Maldives

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 10 23/06/2008 14:36:15

the deMograPhy of south asia froM the 1950s to the 2000s

11

Tab

le 1

. Sel

ecte

d s

oci

o-d

emo

gra

ph

ic c

har

acte

rist

ics

of

Sou

th A

sia

com

par

ed w

ith

oth

er w

orl

d r

egio

ns

Pop

ula

tio

n

in 2

004

(i

n m

illio

ns)

TFR

in

200

0-20

05

(ch

ildre

n

per

wo

man

)

Life

ex

pec

tan

cy

at b

irth

in

200

4

(in

yea

rs)

An

nu

al

po

pu

lati

on

g

row

th

1975

-200

5 (%

)

HD

I in

200

4

Per

cap

ita

GN

I in

USD

(PP

P)

in 2

004

Ad

ult

lite

racy

ra

te

in 2

004

(%)

Sub-

Saha

ran

Afr

ica

689.

65.

546

.12.

70.

472

1,94

663

.3

Nor

th A

fric

a an

d th

e M

iddl

e Ea

st31

0.5

3.7

67.3

2.6

0.68

05,

680

69.9

Latin

Am

eric

a an

d th

e C

arib

bean

548.

32.

672

.21.

90.

795

7,96

490

.2

Sout

h A

sia

1,52

8.1

3.2

63.7

2.1

0.59

93,

072

60.9

East

Asi

a an

d th

e Pa

cific

1,94

4.0

1.9

70.8

1.4

0.76

05,

872

90.7

OEC

D c

ount

ries

1,16

4.8

1.8

77.8

0.8

0.92

327

,571

–

Wor

ld t

otal

6,38

9.2

2.7

67.3

1.6

0.74

18,

833

–

TFR

: tot

al f

ertil

ity

rate

. H

DI:

Hum

an d

evel

opm

ent

inde

x.

PPP:

Pur

chas

ing

pow

er p

arit

y.So

urc

e: U

ND

P (2

00

6).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 11 23/06/2008 14:36:15

J. Véron

12

wherefertilityisbelowreplacementlevelandlifeexpectancy7yearsabovethatofSouthAsia.ThehealthsituationinSouthAsiaisworsethaninotherregionsoftheworld,withtheexceptionofsub-SaharanAfrica.

SouthAsiaisalsothesecondleastdevelopedregionintheworldaftersub-SaharanAfrica.In2004,thehumandevelopmentindex(HDI)(3)was0.60comparedwithaworldaverageof0.74;percapitaGDP(USD3,072perheadintermsofpurchasingpowerparity)wasnearlythreetimesbelowtheworldaverage, andadult literacy the lowest in theworld, evenbelow thatofsub-SaharanAfrica.

II. Abundant demographic data in view of development levels

Overall,withtheexceptionofBhutanandAfghanistanforwhichdemographicinformation–apartfromUNdata–isfragmentary,richsourcesofdemographicdataareavailableforSouthAsiancountriesfrombothcensusesandsurveys(seeTable2a).Thethreemostdenselypopulatedcountries,India,PakistanandBangladesh,havetakenregularcensusessincetheendofthenineteenthcentury.Indiahasheldoneeverytenyearssince1871.Thefirstpost-Independencecensuswasconductedin1951,whilethemostrecentwasin2001.Pakistantookitsfirstpost-Partitioncensusin1951andintendedtoapplythesamedecennialprinciple.Thesecondcensuswasindeedheldin1961butthethirdwaspostponeduntil1972becauseofthewarwithIndia.Thefourthwasheldin1981butthefifthcensuswasdelayeduntil1998.AfteritsindependencefromPakistanin1971,Bangladeshheldfourcensusesin1974,1981,1991and2001respectively.Afghanistanheldapartialcensus in1979,but theoneplannedfor2004waspostponedandwillprobablytakeplacein2008.Nepalhasheldtencensusessince1911,themostrecentbeingin2001.Bhutanhastakenaseriesofcensusesbutthesearereallycitizenshipcensusesforcheckingthenationalityofpopulationsinthewakeofintensemigration.However,thegovernmentcarriedoutafullpopulationcensusin2005toobtainreliablesocio-demographicdataforthecountryasawhole.

Infivecountriesoutofeight,censusinformationiscomplementedbydemographicandhealthsurveys.InthepastfifteenyearsIndiahascarriedoutthreesuchsurveys,calledNationalFamilyandHealthSurveys,andhasjustpublishedtheresultsofthemostrecentoneheldin2005-2006.Sincetheearly1990s,Bangladeshhascarriedoutsevendemographicandhealthsurveys,fiveofwhichwerestandard,whileSriLankacarriedoutthree(Table2b).TwodemographicandhealthsurveyswerecarriedoutinPakistan:afirstonein1990-1991andasecondin2006,buttheresultsofthelatestonearenotyet

(3)ThehumandevelopmentindexwasintroducedbyUNDPin1990.Itisacompositeindexthatincludeslifeexpectancy,adultliteracyratesandschoolenrolmentratio,aswellaspercapitaGDP.Itrangesfrom0to1.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 12 23/06/2008 14:36:16


13

available.Theremainingcountriesintheregion(Afghanistan,BhutanandtheMaldives)haveneverconductedasurveyofthistype.

Themostdenselypopulatedcountryintheregionisalsotheoneforwhichwehavethemostdemographicdata,thanksinparttoIndia’sSampleRegistrationSystem(SRS)whichconstitutesavaluableadditionalsource.ThissystemforregisteringdemographiceventswassetupbytheRegistrarGeneralbetween1964-1965,originallyforafewstates,andthenextendedthroughoutIndia

Table 2a. Number of population censuses and national demographic surveys carried out since the 1960s in South Asia

1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2007 Total

Census 4 7 6 6 6 29

Demographic and health surveys (DHS) – – 2 8 7 17

Other surveys – 4* – – 4** 8

Total 4 11 8 14 17 54

* 1975-1976 World Fertility Survey.** 2002-2003 World Health Survey.

Table 2b. Dates of DHS surveys in South Asian countries

Country Dates

Bangladesh 1993-1994 (standard)1996-1997 (standard)1999-2000 (standard)1999-2000 (MCH SPA)*2001 (maternal mortality)2004 (standard)2007 (standard)

India 1992-1993 (standard)1998-1999 (standard)2005-2006 (standard)

Nepal 1987 (in-depth)**1996 (standard)2001 (standard)2006 (standard)

Pakistan 1990-1991 (standard)2006 (standard)

Sri Lanka 1987 (standard)1993***2000***

* Maternal and Child Health, Services Provision Assessment Survey.** In-depth study to find out why women wanting to space births or limit family size were not using contraception.*** Surveys featured on the Sri Lanka Department of Census and Statistics website, but not on the Macro international site.Sources: www.measuresdhs.com/countries; www.statistics.gov.lk

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 13 23/06/2008 14:36:16

J. Véron

14

between1969-1970.Itisbasedonadualsystemofbirthanddeathrecords(4).TheSRSBulletins,publishedtwiceayear,provideestimatesofcrudebirthanddeathrates,naturalgrowthratesandinfantmortalityratesforbothurbanandruralareasaswellasbystate.

III. Demographic and socioeconomic heterogeneity

SouthAsiaisadiversifiedgeographiczone,withsharpcontrastsbetweenthemountainsofAfghanistanorNepal,forinstance,andthelowlandsoftheMaldivesIslandsortheGangesDelta inBangladesh.RegionalgeographicdiversityisalsotobefoundwithinIndiaproper:HimachalPradesh,aHimalayanstate,bearsnoresemblancetothecoastalregionsofKeralaorTamilNadu.Thisgeographicdiversitygoeshandinhandwithdemographic,economicandsocialheteregoneity.

Large demographic disparities

SouthAsiancountriesareofveryunequalsize(Table3).ThepopulationoftheMaldives(306,000inhabitants)bearsnocomparisonwiththatofIndia(1,169billioninhabitantsin2007).Threeoftheregion’seightcountriesaccountfor95%of thetotalpopulation,andnearly three-quartersof theregion’sinhabitantsliveinIndia.SouthAsiancountriesalsodifferintermsofpopulationdensity,whichrangesfrommorethan1,100inhabitantspersq.kminBangladesh,toanaverageofjust14inhabitantspersq.kminBhutan.

Thepopulationofthesecountriesisgrowingatavariablepace.AccordingtoUNestimates,theaveragerateofpopulationgrowthinAfghanistanwasnearly3.8%fortheperiod2000-2005,comparedwithscarcelymorethan0.4%forSriLanka.Theprogressofdemographictransitionisalsodifferent.Infantmortalitywasestimatedat11‰inSriLankaintheearly2000s,butexceeded160‰inAfghanistan,whereas fertility,whichfell toonly2childrenperwomaninSriLankaiscloserto7inAfghanistan.

WithinIndiaproper(Map2),thereareconsiderabledemographicdisparitiesintermsofpopulationsize,rateofpopulationgrowthandpopulationdensity,tonamejustthreecriteria.Forexample,inthe2001census,themostdenselypopulatedstateinthecountry,UttarPradesh,hadapopulationof166million–largerthanthatofPakistanorBangladesh–whereastheleastpopulatedstate,Sikkim,hadpopulationofscarcelymorethan540,000.TheUnion

(4)Thesystemisbasedonadualdatacollectionsystem:acontinuousprocessofbirthanddeathregistrationinasampleofvillagesandurbanenumerationblocks,andanindependentretrospectivesurveyovera six-monthperiod.Matching thedata from these two sourcesmakes itpossible todistinguish events registered by both sources, from those that are partially registered or notregisteredbyoneofthesources.Inthesetwocases,acheckiscarriedoutinthefieldbyavisittothehouseholdsconcerned.Thesystemdoesnotprovideameansforestimatingeventsthatmighthavebeenomittedbybothsources(MariBhatetal.,1984).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 14 23/06/2008 14:36:16


15

territory(5)oftheLakshadweepIslandshasthesmallestpopulation,withjustover60,000inhabitantsin2001(Table4).Intheperiod1991-2001,thepopulationinIndia’svariousstatesandterritoriesgrewatvariablerates,withanannualaverageof5%inNagaland,3.8%intheTerritoryofDelhi,1.8%inPunjab(arateclosetotheIndianaverage,whichis1.93%),1.3%inAndhraPradeshand1.1%inTamilNadu.Populationdensityalsovariessharplybetweenregions.In2001itstoodat324inhabitantspersq.kmforIndiaasawhole,butjust13persq.kminArunachalPradesh,astatethatstretchesfromtheHimalayanmountainstotheBrahmaputraValley,andexceeded900inhabitantspersq.km

inWestBengal,partlybecauseofthecityofCalcutta.Populationdensityisparticularlyhigh in the territoriesofDelhiandChandigarh,(9,294and7,903inhabitantspersq.kmrespectively)becauseofintenseurbanization.Buturbanizationisnotthesolereasonforhighpopulationdensity.InKerala,astatewhereonly26%ofthepopulationlivesinurbanareas,densityexceeded800inhabitantspersq.kmin2001.

Sharp socioeconomic inequalities

Anexaminationofthethreesignificantvariablesforacountry’sdevelopmentconsideredtoplayavitalroleinacountry’sdemographictransition,namelyliteracy,GDPandurbanization,revealssharpcontrastsbetweenthecountries.Forexample,whilenearlyallwomenovertheageof15yearsareliterateintheMaldives(96%)andinSriLanka(nearly90%),theliteracyrateisbelow50%inIndia,under40%inBangladesh,35%inPakistanandNepal,andaslowas13%inAfghanistan(Table5).Likewise,thereisathree-folddifferenceinpercapitaincomebetweenNepal(USD1,490intermsofpurchasingpower

(5)Indiaiscomposedof28statesand7unionterritories.Delhi,PuducherryandChandigarhareincludedamong the territories.Each state is administeredbyaGovernor andaprimeminister,whiletheterritoriesaregoverneddirectlyatfederallevel,representedbyaLieutenantGovernor.

Table 3. Population, surface area and density in South Asian countries in 2007

CountryNumber

of inhabitants(thousands)

Land area*(thousand sq.km)

Population density (inhab. per sq.km)

Maldives 306 0.3 1,020

Bhutan 658 47.0 14

Sri Lanka 19,299 66.0 292

Afghanistan 27,145 652.0 42

Nepal 28,196 147.0 192

Bangladesh 158,665 144.0 1,102

Pakistan 163,902 796.0 206

India 1,169,016 3,287.0 357

* Total surface area minus inland waters.Sources: United Nations (2007a) and Pison (2007).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 15 23/06/2008 14:36:16

J. Véron

16

parity)andSriLanka(USD4,390).Andalthoughthecountriesintheregionarenotyetheavilyurbanized,considerablediscrepanciesexistnonetheless.Theproportionofcity-dwellersinPakistan,themosturbanizedcountryintheregion,isthreetimeshigherthaninBhutan(36%versus12%).

Likethedemographicindicators,thesocioeconomicindicatorsvaryfromoneregiontoanotherinIndia.Accordingtodatafromthe2001census,withrespecttotheIndianaverageof54%,femaleliteracyratesrangefrombelow34%inBiharandapproximately88%inKerala.Thewealthofthestatesvaries

Map 2. Administrative India (states, union territories and neighbouring countries)

Jharkhand

Hary

ana

Punjab Uttar-anchal

Jammu &Kashmir

HimachalPradesh

NEPALBHUTAN

CHINA

Assam

Arunachal

PradeshSikkim

Manipur

Nag

alan

d

Tripura

Meghalaya

Mizoram

MYANMAR(BURMA)

BAY OF BENGAL

ARABIAN SEA

INDIAN OCEAN

PAKISTAN

AFGHANISTAN

LAK

SHA

DW

EEP SEA

BANGLADESH

West Bengal

Ined 2008

Andhra Pradesh

Tam

il Na

du

SRILANKA

Kerala

Goa

Karnataka

MaharashtraOrissa

Uttar Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh

Rajasthan

Gujarat

Bihar

Chhattisg

arh

Delhi

Daman & DiuDadra &

Nagar Haveli

Pondicherry

AN

DA

MA

N &

NIC

OBA

R ISLAN

DS

LAKSH

AD

WEEP

(IND

IA)

400 km0

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 16 23/06/2008 14:36:17


17

enormouslyasdoes theproportionofcity-dwellers. InGoa, India’smosturbanizedterritory,theproportionisnearly50%,comparedwiththeotherextremeof10%inHimachalPradesh.

Table 4. The 28 states and 7 union territories of India by population in 2001

State or union territory PopulationPopulation density

(Inhabitants per sq.km)

Lakshadweep Island* 60,650 1,894

Daman & Diu* 158,204 1,411

Dadra & Nagar Haveli* 220,490 449

Andaman & Nicobar Islands* 356,152 43

Sikkim 540,851 76

Mizoram 888,573 42

Chandigarh* 900,635 7,903

Puducherry* 974,345 2,029

Arunachal Pradesh 1,097,968 13

Goa 1,347,668 363

Nagaland 1,990,036 120

Manipur 2,166,788 107

Meghalaya 2,318,822 103

Tripura 3,199,203 304

Himachal Pradesh 6,077,900 109

Uttarakhand 8,489,349 159

Jammu and Kashmir 10,143,700 99

Delhi* 13,850,507 9,294

Chhattisgarh 20,833,803 154

Haryana 21,144,564 477

Punjab 24,358,999 482

Assam 26,655,528 340

Jharkhand 26,945,829 338

Kerala 31,841,374 819

Orissa 36,804,660 236

Gujarat 50,671,017 258

Karnataka 52,850,562 275

Rajasthan 56,507,188 165

Madhya Pradesh 60,348,023 196

Tamil Nadu 62,405,679 478

Andhra Pradesh 76,210,007 275

West Bengal 80,176,197 904

Bihar 82,998,509 880

Maharashtra 96,878,627 314

Uttar Pradesh 166,197,921 689

India 1,028,610,328 324

* Union territories.Source: Banthia (2001), http://www.censusindia.net

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 17 23/06/2008 14:36:17

J. Véron

18

PopulationbreakdownbyreligionisalsohighlydiverseinSouthAsiancountries,asshowninTable6.InBangladeshandPakistan,thevastmajorityofthepopulationisMuslim.In2001,90%ofBangladeshiswereMuslimand,in1998,morethan96%ofPakistanis.ThepopulationofNepalismorethan80%Hindu,whereasBuddhism,thesecondreligioninorderofimportance,nowonlyaccountsfor justover10%ofthetotalpopulation.HinduismisalsothemajorityreligioninIndia(81%).ThereareotherreligionsinIndiabutwiththeexceptionofIslam(13%ofthepopulation),theyareverymuchaminority.TheproportionofChristiansisjustabove2%andthatofSikhsisevenlower,whileBuddhistsaccountforlessthan1%ofthetotalIndianpopulation.

Theothercountriesdonothavedetailedstatisticsontheirreligiouscomposition.AfghanistanisanIslamicRepublicandapproximatelyfourfifths

Table 5. Literacy, standard of living and urbanization in South Asian countries

Literacy rate of women aged 15

or over in the 2000s (%)

Per capita GNI in USD (PPP)

in 2004

Percentage urbanized in 2005

(%)

Afghanistan 13 – 23

Bangladesh 41 1,870 26

Bhutan – 1,969 31

India 48 3,139 29

Maldives 96 – 34

Nepal 35 1,490 16

Pakistan 35 2,225 35

Sri Lanka 89 4,390 15

Sources: UNDP (2006), United Nations (2008).

Table 6. Population breakdown by religion in five South Asian countries (%)

CountryReligion

Hindu Muslim Buddhist Christian Sikh Jain Other(a)

Bangladesh (2001) 9.2 89.6 0.7 0.3 – – 0.2

India (2001) 80.5 13.4 0.8 2.3 1.9 0.4 0.7

Nepal (2001) 80.6 4.2 10.7 0.5 – – 4.0(b)

Pakistan (1998) 1.6 96.3 – 1.6 – – 0.5

Sri Lanka (2001) 7.8 8.5 76.7 7.0 – – –

(a) Other religion or non-specified.(b) Of which 3.6% Kiranti.Sources: Census of India, 2001; Census of Pakistan, 1998; Census of Sri Lanka, 2001; Census of Nepal, 2001.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 18 23/06/2008 14:36:17


19

ofitsinhabitantsareMuslim.InBhutan,MahayanaBuddhism(6)isthestatereligion.ThelawinBhutanguaranteesreligiousfreedom,andHinduismispracticedincertainareasofthecountry.Thisfreedomissomewhattheoretical,however,withthegovernmentpreventingtheestablishmentofnon-Buddhistmissionsinthecountryortheconstructionofnon-Buddhistreligiousbuildings.TheNepaleseconstitutiondescribesthecountryasa“HinduKingdom”butHinduismisnotastatereligionandin2006theHouseofRepresentativesdeclaredNepaltobea“secularstate”.IslamisthestatereligionintheMaldives,whereasinSriLankamorethanthree-quartersofthepopulationontheislandisBuddhist.HeretheMuslim,ChristianandHinducommunitieseachaccountforjust8%ofthetotalpopulation.

Althoughfour-fifthsofthepopulationofIndia isHindu,thereligiouscompositionvariesbetweenstates,andHinduismisnotthemajorityreligioneverywhere.Theproportionisover94%inOrissa,ChhattisgarhandinHimachalPradesh(whereitevenexceeds95%)butHindusonlyrepresent8%ofthepopulation inNagalandand4%inMizoramwhichbothhaveamajorityChristianpopulation.TheproportionofMuslims,whichwasslightlyover13%inthecountryasawholein2001,isunder2%inPunjab,butcloseto25%inKeralaandWestBengal,morethan30%inAssam,67%inJammuandKashmirand95%intheLakshadweepIslands.Thereare fewChristians inIndia;nationallythefigurestandsat2.3%,butthisrisesto19%inKerala,27%inGoa,70%inMeghalayaand90%inNagaland.Sikhs,whorepresentlessthan2%oftheIndianpopulation,constitute16%ofthepopulationinChandigarhand60%inPunjab.InIndialessthan1%ofthepopulationisBuddhist,butinSikkimBuddhistsaccountformorethan28%.

IV. A history strongly marked by population movements

Frequent migration waves in the past

MajorpopulationmovementshaveoccurredinthecourseofSouthAsia’shistory,whichexplainsthediversityofthepopulationsinthevariouscountriesof theregion.Afghanistan, locatedinthemainpathoftheCentralAsianinvasionsofsouthorsouthwestAsia(7),hasaPashtunmajoritybutisalsopeopledbyTajiks,Hazaras,Uzbeks,aswellasbyAimak,TurkmenandBaluch.

(6)MahayanaBuddhism,orthe“GreatVehicle”isaformofBuddhismthatappearedintheearlyChristianeraandreintroducescertainprinciplesBuddhahaddiscarded,suchassalvationthroughdevotionandritual.

(7)AroundthemiddleofthesecondcenturyBC,Indo-AryanpopulationscrossedAfghanistanontheirwaytotheIndusValley.In637AfghanistanwasinvadedbyArabs,thenbyGenghisKhanintheearlythirteenthcenturyandtakenbyTamerlaneinthefourteenthcentury.ForseveralcenturiesitwastheobjectofnumerousdisputesbetweenMongolsandPersians.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 19 23/06/2008 14:36:17

J. Véron

20

TheNepalesearetheproductofthreemajormigrations(8)fromIndia,TibetandCentralAsia,whileBangladeshwassettledbyTurks,Arabs,PashtunandPersians.SriLankawasuninhabiteduntilaPrinceofBengalsettledtherearound540BCwithasuiteof700personswhobecametheancestorsoftheSinghalesepeoplefromwhommostcontemporarySriLankansaredescended(CICRED,1974b).

Fromancienttimes,manygreatcivilizationsoccupiedthevastterritorythatwas Indiabefore thepartitionofWestandEastPakistan in1947(9).Populationmovementshaveplayedamajorroleintheriseandfallofcivilizations.InthebeginningofthethirdmillenniumBC,theInduscivilizationflourishedandextendedfromtheIndianPunjabtotheArabianSea.Itderiveditsstrengthfromitsproductiveagriculturebasedontherichalluvialsoilandabundantwatersupplies,whichprovidednumerouscrops includingcotton.TownsdevelopedandtherewerenumerousexchangeswithWesterncivilizations,especiallywithSumerandEgypt.Thiscivilizationdisappearedaround1500BC,probablybecauseoftheAryaninvasionornaturaldisasters(10)(ESCAP,1982).Around500BC,theAryancivilizationdevelopedandspreadeastwardstotheGangesValley.Agriculturealsoflourishedandthepopulationgrew,partlyasaresultofnewwavesofAryanmigrationfromCentralAsia.TheAryanspushedtheDravidians,whooriginallyinhabitedtheIndusValley,furthersouthandtheDravidiancivilizationsubsequentlyflourishedinsouthernIndia.ForalongtimesouthernIndiawasdividedintonumerouskingdomsengagedinincessantwaragainsteachother.

InthenorthofIndia,theMauryaEmpireextendedfromAfghanistantoBengalviathesouthernHimalayas,andreacheditsapogeeunderAshoka(273-232BC).Then, fromtheearlyfourthcenturyAD,theGuptaEmpireextendedfromtheIndustotheBrahmaputraRiverstoincludealargepartoftheIndianpeninsula.Thisregionsubsequentlyenjoyed200yearsofpeaceandpoliticalstabilityuptotheinvasionoftheHunsattheendofthefifthcentury.TheMogulEmpirefollowedfromthesixteenthtoseventeenthcentury,afterwhichthePortuguese,Dutch,BritishandFrenchtradersarrived.TheEastIndiaCompany(11)establishedduringtheMogulperiodgreatlyadvancedBritain’sdominationofIndia.

(8)Australoid peoples came from the south in the fourth century BC, then Mongols speakingaTibeto-Burmanlanguageoccupiedtheeastandthecentreofthecountryafewcenturieslater.ThethirdmigrationinthesecondcenturyBCwastheIndo-AryanpopulationfromthesouthandthewestintothehillsandvalleysofKathmandu(Bista,1977).

(9)EastPakistanbecameBangladeshin1971.

(10)MajorearthquakesmayhaveledtoadryingoftheIndusvalleybecauseofthewatersbeingdivertedtotheGangesRivercatchment.

(11)TheBritishEastIndiaCompanywasatradingcompanythatobtainedthetradingmonopolyoftheIndianOceanfromQueenElisabethI.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 20 23/06/2008 14:36:18


21

The British influence

All thecountriesofSouthAsiahavebeensubjectedtostrongBritishinfluence.InAfghanistan,theBritishfoughttheRussiansforcontrolofthecountryfromtheendofthe1830s.Between1838and1842,thefirstAfghanwarendedwiththedefeatoftheBritisharmy,butinthesecondAfghanwarof1878-1880theBritisharmyconqueredKabulandfreedKandahar.In1919,athirdAfghanwarresultedinthatcountry’sindependence.AfterawarthatwasintendedtocontroltheexpansionistaimsoftheGurkhas,NepalcameunderBritishrulein1815andremainedsountil1923,whenGreatBritainrecognizedNepal’sindependence.TheannexationofAssambytheBritishinthe1820sstirreduptensionsontheBhutaneseborderandconflictsensueduntilatreatywassignedin1910thatmadeBhutanaBritishprotectorate.Fromthemidtwentiethcentury,BhutanwaslargelyunderIndiandominancewhileSriLankawasunderBritishrulefrom1815to1948.ItwastheBritishwhointroducedteaplantationstotheislandthatwasthencalledCeylon.TheMaldiveswereaBritishprotectoratefrom1887to1965.

Indiawasalmostentirelyadministeredby theBritish fromthemidnineteenthcenturyuntil independencein1947(12).TheBritishunifiedthecountry,inparticularbyconstructingarailwaynetwork.Theycarriedoutirrigationwork,setupcommunicationsnetworks,developedtheminingindustry,cultivatedjuteandtea,etc.Togetaclearerpictureofthepopulationonitsterritories,theBritishgovernmentconductedafirstcensus,knownasthe1872census,butwhichinfactstretchedovertheperiod1867-1872.Thefirstdetailed“instant”censuswasconductedin1881.Fromthattimeuntilthepresentday,colonialIndiaandlaterindependentIndiahastakenacensuseverydecade,themostrecentin2001.

Population diversity and political tensions

Thepoliticalhistoryofthisregion,likethediversityofitspopulationsintermsoforiginorreligion,hasgivenrisetonumerousconflicts,someofwhichcontinuetothisday.

TheindependenceofIndiaandthepartitionofEastandWestPakistanin1947,resultedinmajorpopulationmovements,withHindusmigratingfromPakistantoIndiaandMuslimssettlinginPakistan(13).In1971,EastPakistanfoughta“liberationwar”withWestPakistan,accusedofpoliticalandeconomicdominance,resultinginEastPakistan’ssecessionandtheformationofBangladeshinDecemberofthesameyear.TheproblemofKashmirremainsasourceoffrictionbetweenIndiaandPakistan,whohaveclashedthreetimesonthatissue.AnychangingorcrossingofbordersbetweenIndianandPakistani

(12)Upuntilthen,India’shistorywasalsothatofPakistanandBangladesh.

(13)Accordingtofiguresthataresometimesquotedbutwhichhaveyettobeverified,10millionpeopleweredisplacedduringPartition,and500,000diedintheconflict.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 21 23/06/2008 14:36:18

J. Véron

22

Kashmiralwaysleadstoconfrontations,particularlysincetheMuslimsonthePakistanisidetendtobeincreasinglyradical.Afghanistanhasalsobeenattheheartofaseriesofconflictsoverthepastthirtyyears,withtheSovietinvasionof1979,thetakeoverbytheTalibanin1996,thetopplingoftheirregimeinthe2001war,andincessantguerrillawarfareeversince.SriLankahasseenviolentconfrontationsbetweenthemajoritySinghalesepopulationandtheTamils.TheMaldivesbecamearepublicin1968,butenduredacoup20yearslaterduringwhichtheMaldiviansobtainedhelpfromtheTamils,themselvesinconflictwiththeSriLankanauthorities.However,withIndianhelp,theMaldivesgovernmentresistedthecoup.Bhutansufferedfromethnicviolencebetween1991-1993andinIndiaviolenceregularlyeruptsbetweenvariouscommunities.TheIndiangovernmenthadtocontainseparatistSikhsinthe1980sandconsiderabletensionshaveexistedbetweenfundamentalistHindusandMuslims fornearly20years.Bangladesh isalsosubject to Islamistviolence.

V. Population and growth since 1950

Sustained population growth

Intheearly1950s,thedemographicgrowthrateintheSouthAsiancountries(AppendixTableA.3)wastwiceashighinsomecountriesasinothers,rangingfrom1.54%inAfghanistanto3.09%inBhutan.Severalcountrieswereatthehigherendofthescale–SriLanka,withannualpopulationgrowthof2.8%,wasnotfarbehindBhutan,andPakistan,thoughgrowingmoreslowly,wasstillabove2%.Duringthefollowingdecades,allthecountriesexceptSriLankawitnessedanaccelerationoftheirdemographicgrowth.TheannualgrowthrateinIndiarosefrom1.73%in1950-1955to2.26%thirtyyearslater,in1980-1985.Duringthesameperiod,thatofBangladeshincreasedfrom1.98%to2.47%andthatofPakistanfrom2.15%to3.63%.Between1980-1985and2000-2005,allthecountries,withtheexceptionofAfghanistan,recordedaslowdowninpopulationgrowth(Figure1).InAfghanistan,overtheperiod1980-1985,thenaturalgrowthratewaslargelypositive,butthewarwiththeSovietUnionpromptedmassivemigrationofrefugeestoPakistanandIranthatledtonegativetotalpopulationgrowth(14).

SriLankahasprovedtobeanexception,withasteadydecreaseinthepopulationgrowthratesincetheearly1950s: from2.8%in1950-1955, itdroppedto2.1%in1970-1975,1.4%in1980-1985,1.1%in1990-1995andfinally0.4%in2000-2005,i.e.adeclinetovirtuallyzeropopulationgrowthinthespaceoffiftyyears(AppendixTableA.3).

India,whichsetupitsfirstfamilyplanningprogrammeintheearly1950shasseenitspopulationgrowthrateslowdownoverthepasttwentyyears,

(14)Figureshavebeenputforwardof2.5to3millionrefugeesinPakistanand1.5millioninIran.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 22 23/06/2008 14:36:18


23

thoughin1990-1995itwasstillabove2%perannum.AlthoughtheIndianauthoritieshavebeentryingtostabilizethepopulationgrowthrateformanyyearsnow,thefigurewasstill1.62%perannumin2000-2005.Duringthesameperiod,thepopulationgrowthratesinPakistanandBangladeshremainedabove1.8%,whichmeansthatifthereisnochange,thepopulationofthesecountrieswilldouble in less than fortyyears.Asa resultof thesehighdemographicgrowthratesoveraperiodofahalfacentury,thepopulationofSouthAsiatripledbetween1950and2005,climbingfrom478millionto1,580millioninhabitants.

Figure 1. Population growth rate in South Asia between 1980-1985 and 2000-2005

Ined 004 08 Growth rate in 2000-2005 (%)

Growth rate in 1980-1985 (%)

– 3 – 1 43 1 – 2 2 0

Bhutan

Sri Lanka

2

1

0

3

4

Pakistan

Maldives India

Nepal Bangladesh

Afghanistan

Source: United Nations (2006a).

South Asia in 2040: a forecast increase of 600 million inhabitants

AccordingtothemediumvariantprojectionsoftheUnitedNations(2006revision),thepopulationintheregionwillcontinuetogrowduringthenextfewdecades,reachingatotal2,200millioninhabitantsin2040,i.e.600millioninhabitantsmorethantoday.Itsshareinthetotalworldpopulationwillincreaseslightly,from23.3%in2005to25.3%in2040.Accordingtothesemeanvariantprojections,inthirtyyearstime,Indiawillhaveapopulationof1,600millioninhabitants,Pakistan268million,Bangladesh239million,Afghanistan66million,Nepal47million,SriLankaabout20million,Bhutan900,000andtheMaldives476,000.Bythen,IndiawillbemorepopulatedthanChina,withitsestimated1,450millioninhabitants.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 23 23/06/2008 14:36:19

J. Véron

24

Projections drawn up in India on the basis of the 2001 census andrevisedin2006leadtoaslightlylowerpopulationin2025thanthefigureput forward by the United Nations (1,389 million against 1,447 million),but the difference – nearly 60 million – needs to be put into perspective,as it only corresponds to slightly more than two years of births in India.In 2026, the final year of these projections, it is forecast that India willhave about 1,400 million inhabitants (Table7). The most populated state,UttarPradesh,willhaveapopulationof249millioninhabitants,equivalenttotheentirepopulationofIndiain1911.ThreeotherStateswillhavemorethan100millioninhabitants:Maharashtra(133million),Bihar(114million)andWesternBengal (101million).AndraPradesh,MadhyaPradesh(15) andRajasthan will have 94 million, 88million and 82 million inhabitants in2026.

Table 7. Population of Indian States of more than 20 million inhabitants in 2001 (in thousands) projected to 1 March 2026

State Projected population in 2026 (thousands)

Andhra Pradesh 94,073

Assam 35,602

Western Bengal 100,534

Bihar 113,847

Chhattisgarh 28,591

Gujerat 69,258

Haryana 31,087

Jharkhand 37,356

Karnataka 66,933

Kerala 37,254

Madhya Pradesh 87,729

Maharashtra 133,333

Punjab 31,345

Rajasthan 81,501

Tamil Nadu 71,857

Uttar Pradesh 248,763

India 1,399,838

Source: Office of Registrar General & Census Commissioner (2006). http://www.jsk.gov.in/projection_report_december2006.pdf

(15)Three new States were created after the 1991 census, namely Uttaranchal, Jharkhand andChhattigarh,bydividingupthehighlypopulousIndianstatesofUttarPradesh,BiharandMadhyaPradesh.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 24 23/06/2008 14:36:19


25

VI. Diversified demographic transitions

Acomparisonofdemographictransition“models”overhalfacentury(Figure2)doesnotindicatethatthereisatypeoftransitionspecifictotheregion;neitherdoesitshowanyhighlycontrastedtransitionsbetweenthedifferentcountries.TheonlymodelsthatreallystandoutarethoseofAfghanistanandSriLanka,thefirstbecauseofitshighbirthrateandthesecondbecauseofitssharpfertilitydecline.

AccordingtotheUnitedNationsdata–2006revision(2007a)–themortalityratesvaryconsiderablybetweenthetwomostextremecountries(AppendixTableA.3).Inthefirsthalfofthe1950s,theoverallmortalityratewasnearly37‰inAfghanistan,againstalittlemorethan11‰inSriLanka.Intheothercountriesoftheregion,itvariedfrom23‰to28‰atthebeginningofthe1950s.Ageneraldropinmortalityoccurredandthecrudemortalityratesforallcountriesin2000to2005werebetween6.5‰and8.7‰,withtheexceptionofAfghanistan,withanestimatedrateof21.6‰forthesameperiod.

AfghanistanandSriLankaalsorepresentextremesituationsintermsofbirthrates.TherehasbeenlittlechangeinAfghanistanoverthelastfiftyyears,withagrossestimatedrateof52.1‰in1950-1955and49.7‰in2000-2005.Ontheotherhand,duringthesameperiod,thebirthratecontinuedtofallinSriLankaandwasmorethanhalvedbetween1950-1955and2000-2005,droppingfrom39.9‰to16.3‰.Intheothercountriesintheregion,thebirthrate,stillveryhighatthebeginningofthe1950s(between43‰and49‰),alsodroppedbyhalfinfiftyyears,tobetween22‰and30‰in2000-2005,levelsthatremainwellabovethatofSriLanka.Onlythislastcountry(Figure1)isintheprocessofcompletingitsdemographictransition.

AlthoughIndiaregisteredadownwardtrendinitsbirthrateoverhalfacentury,itisstillfarshortofthetargetfixedbytheIndiangovernmentineachfive-yearplan,whichmeansthatbirthrateandfertilitytargetsarefrequentlyrevised(RajanandVéron,2006).ThefactthatIndiahasayoungpopulationmaintainsbirthratesathighlevels:thisagestructureeffect(thenumberofwomenofchild-bearingageishigh)explainswhytheoveralldropinfertilityonlypartiallyleadstoadecreaseinthebirthrate.Butobservedfertilityisalsohigherthantargetedfertility,duetolimitedaccesstocontraception,particularlyinthepoorestareaswherethepopulationislesseducated.

ThedemographictransitionintheSouthAsiancountriesoverthepasthalfcenturycanalsobeanalysedintermsofthedemographicgrowthratesatthebeginningandendoftheperiod.InAfghanistan,forexample,theannualpopulationgrowthrateincreasedfrom1.54%in1950-1955to2.81%in2000-2005,duetothefairlyregulardecreaseinthedeathrate,whilethebirthrateremainedpracticallyconstant(Figure2A).Ontheotherhand,inBangladesh(Figure2B), thegrowthrateremainedpractically thesame(1.99%at thebeginningand1.95%attheendoftheperiod).Thedownwardtrendinthe

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 25 23/06/2008 14:36:19

J. Véron

26

Figure 2. The demographic transition in South Asia (changes in birth and death rates)

0

30

40

10

50

20

60 Ined 005 08

Births

Deaths

A. Afghanistan

Rate (‰)

0

30

40

10

50

20

60 Ined 006 08

B. Bangladesh

Rate (‰)

0

30

40

10

50

20

60 Ined 007 08

C. Bhutan

Rate (‰)

0

30

40

10

50

20

60 Ined 008 08

D. India

Rate (‰)

0

30

40

10

50

20

60 Ined 009 08

E. Maldives

Rate (‰)

0

30

40

10

50

20

60 Ined 010 08

F. Nepal

Rate (‰)

0

30

40

10

50

20

60 Ined 011 08

G. Pakistan

Rate (‰)

0

30

40

10

50

20

60 Ined 012 08

H. Sri Lanka

Rate (‰)

1950

-55

1960

-65

1970

-75

1980

-85

1990

-95

2000

-05

1950

-55

1960

-65

1970

-75

1980

-85

1990

-95

2000

-05

r = 1.54%

r = 2.81% r = 1.99%

r = 1.96%

r = 1.46%

r = 1.99% r = 1.73%

r = 1.64%

r = 1.57%

r = 1.79%

r = 2.14%

r = 1.98%

r = 1.58%

r = 2.15%

r = 0.90%

r = 2.85%

Births

Deaths

Births

Deaths

Births

Deaths

Births

Deaths

Births

Deaths

Births

Deaths

Births

Deaths

n = 52.1

m = 36.7

n = 49.7

m = 21.6

n = 48.4

m = 28.5

n = 27.8

m = 8.2

n = 46.7

m = 26.8

n = 22.4

m = 7.8

n = 43.3

m = 26.0

n = 25.1

m = 8.7

n = 45.2

m = 27.3

n = 22.2

m = 6.5

n = 43.9

m = 28.1

n = 30.2

m = 8.7

n = 44.5

m = 23.1

n = 27.5

m = 7.7

n = 39.9

m = 11.4

n = 16.3

m = 7.3

Source: United Nations (2006)

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 26 23/06/2008 14:36:20


27

deathandbirthrateswasofthesameorder,althoughthedropinmortalitytookplaceearlier.Thedecreaseinthebirthratewassubsequentlymorerapid,however.InBhutan(Figure2C),thegrowthratein1950-1955,thesameasthatofBangladesh(1.99%)atthebeginningoftheperiod,fellsharplyto1.46%in2000-2005.InBhutan,thebirthratedroppedmorequicklythanthedeathrate.InIndia(Figure2D),thegrowthrateislessthan0.1pointlowerthanitwasfiftyyearsago.Duringthelasthalf-century,infact,thepopulationgrowthofIndiaincreasedsubstantially,reaching2.3%in1980-1985,butthensloweddownconsiderably(decreaseofmorethan0.6points).IntheMaldives(Figure2E),thepopulationgrowthratedropped0.2pointsinthefiftyyearperiod:themortalityratedecreasedregularlywhilethebirthrateremainedhighforalongperiodbeforedroppingdrasticallyoverthelasttwentyyears.InNepal(Figure2F),thepopulationgrowthrateincreasedsharply,from1.58%to2.15%,withthedeathratedroppingmorequicklythanthebirthrate,evenifthelatterhaspickedupoverthelast tenyears.InPakistan(Figure2G),thepopulationgrowthratedroppedslightly, from2.14%atthebeginningofthe1950sto1.98%atthestartof2000.ThetransitionhadalreadybeguninSriLanka(Figure2H)inthe1950s,whichexplainstherapidpopulationgrowthatthattime(2.85%).Thedeathratewasalreadyonthedecline,whilethebirthratewasstillhigh.Today,thetransitionhasbeencompletedandthepopulationgrowthrateinSriLankaisbelow1%.

VII. A continuing tradition of early and intense nuptiality

Femalenuptiality,whichwasparticularlyearlyinIndiaattheendofthenineteenthcentury,withameanageatfirstmarriageofonly13in1886-1891,wasstillearlyinthe1950s,despiteamarkedincreaseinage(16intheperiodfrom1951-1961)(ESCAP,1982).Menmarriedmuchlater,atameanageof20in1886-1891and22.3in1951-1961.InBangladeshandPakistan,femalenuptialitywasstillveryearlyatthebeginningofthe1950s,withameanageatfirstmarriageof14.4years,differingconsiderablyfromthatofmen,whomarriedatameanageof22.4years(ESCAP,1981).Dataconcerningthe1960sinKarachiindicatemuchlaterfemalenuptialityinurbanareas(averageageof19in1962)andlittledifferencebetweensocialgroups(CICRED,1974a).Inthedecadefrom1961to1971,themeanageatfirstmarriageforwomenwasestimatedat17inIndia(16).InSriLanka,itwasalreadymuchhigherinthe1960sthanintheothercountries,withameanageof23in1961(CICRED,1974b).

Thecountrieswhererecentnuptialitydataisavailable(Bangladesh,IndiaandNepal)arecharacterizedbyacontinuingtraditionofveryearlyand

(16)Withlargeregionalvariationssincethedataestablishedperdistrictfor1971showameanageatfirstmarriageforwomenrangingfrom13to23yearsofage(Goyal,1988).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 27 23/06/2008 14:36:20

J. Véron

28

practicallyuniversalfemalenuptiality(Tables8a,8band8c).Accordingtothe2004Bangladeshdemographicandhealthsurvey,themedianageofwomenatfirstmarriageisbelow15forthe20-49agegroup.Nuptialityonlyappearstobeslightlylaterinrecentcohorts(womenaged25-29atthetimeofthesurvey)–15yearsofageagainst14–evenifthedataarenotstrictlycomparablebecausefirstmarriageshavenotnecessarilyalltakenplaceinthemostrecentcohorts(iflatermarriagesarenumerous,themedianageatmarriagewillbehigher).InIndia,in2005-2006,themedianageatfirstmarriageforwomenaged20-50atthetimeofthesurveyis17.2,i.e.twoandahalfyearsmorethaninBangladesh.Onceagain,themedianageishigherforthemostrecentcohorts:forwomenaged20-24,itisnearlytwoyearshigherthanthatcalculatedfor

Table 8a. Percentage of married persons by age, and age at first marriage in Bangladesh, 2004

Age group (years)

Women

Percentage of women married for the first time by exact age (years)

Percentage of never-married

women

Median age at first

marriage15 18 20 22 25

15-19 26.7 – – – – 52.1 –

20-24 37.3 68.4 78.6 – – 15.2 16.0

25-29 50.5 79.7 87.6 91.3 94.4 4.2 15.0

30-34 54.2 83.7 90.5 94.1 97.1 1.2 14.7

35-39 58.7 84.6 93.5 96.3 97.8 0.4 14.5

40-44 61.6 88.7 95.0 97.2 98.3 0.3 14.2

45-49 71.4 91.7 95.8 97.5 99.0 0.0 13.9

20-49 52.4 80.5 88.4 – – 5.0 14.8

Age group (years)

Men

Percentage of men married for the first time by exact age (years)


men

Median age at first

marriage15 18 20 22 25

15-19 0.2 – – – – 96.6 –

20-24 0.4 4.4 15.3 – – 65.6 –

25-29 1.1 5.3 14.9 30.1 54.0 29.4 24.4

30-34 0.4 5.7 15.9 28.7 52.8 9.5 24.6

35-39 0.3 6.9 14.9 28.1 48.5 4.0 25.1

40-44 0.5 5.1 13.1 29.3 49.7 0.2 25.0

45-49 0.2 5.8 18.0 32.8 56.6 0.3 23.7

50-54 0.8 10.3 29.2 47.6 64.8 0.0 22.3

25-54 0.5 6.1 16.5 31.3 53.5 8.8 24.5

Source: DHS 2004.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 28 23/06/2008 14:36:20


29

womenaged45-49.InNepal,themedianageatfirstmarriagewasalso17in2006.InSriLanka,ontheotherhand,thenuptialitymodelisradicallydifferent,andwomenmarryatamuchlatermeanage–22.9years–in2003.Infact,thisfigurehadalreadybeenreachedatthebeginningofthe1960s,andsincethen,themeanageatfirstmarriageforwomenhasfluctuatedaround23years(CICRED,1974b).

Anotherwayofappreciatingtheprevalenceofearlymarriageistoconsidertheproportionofwomenalreadymarriedataspecificage:15,18,20,etc.(Tables8a,8band8c).InBangladesh,halfofallwomenaged25-29in2004werealreadymarriedat15,againstonequarterofIndianwomenand13%ofNepalesewomenin thesameagegroup.Thesesurveysconductedat the

Table 8b. Percentage of persons married by age, and age at first marriage in India, 2005-2006

Age group(years)

Women

Percentage of women married for the first time per exact age (years)


women

Median age at first

marriage15 18 20 21 25

15-19 11.9 – – – – 69.6 –

20-24 18.2 47.4 64.4 – – 24.3 18.3

25-29 25.4 55.4 72.4 78.6 91.3 5.8 17.4

30-34 28.5 61.2 76.5 82.0 93.2 1.8 16.8

35-39 31.0 63.4 79.1 84.3 83.8 1.1 16.6

40-44 32.4 64.6 79.8 85.5 94.6 0.8 16.5

45-49 32.9 64.2 79.1 85.1 94.5 0.6 16.5

20-49 26.9 57.9 74.0 – – 7.4 17.2

Age group (years)

Men

Percentage of men married for the first time by exact age (years)


men

Median age at first

marriage15 18 20 21 25

15-19 1.3 – – – – 95.4 –

20-24 2.8 9.5 18.8 – – 66.1 –

25-29 4.1 13.3 25.6 32.3 58.5 29.4 23.7

30-34 6.3 18.1 31.0 38.8 63.6 8.7 22.7

35-39 6.2 18.5 31.9 41.0 66.3 3.0 22.3

40-44 8.0 19.9 34.7 43.6 68.2 1.9 22.0

45-49 6.6 18.5 31.9 41.3 67.1 1.1 22.4

50-54 7.1 17.9 31.7 39.9 65.3 1.6 22.5

20-49 5.4 15.7 28.2 – – 22.0 23.4

Source: NFHS, 2005-2006.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 29 23/06/2008 14:36:20

J. Véron

30

beginningoftheyear2000showthat80%ofwomenaged25-29werealreadymarriedat18inBangladesh,60%inNepaland55%inIndia.Thegeneraltrendistowardsfemalemarriageatalaterage,withthepercentageofwomenmarriedat15,18,20,etc.decreasingfromonecohorttothenext.Formen,thedecreaseisnotasgeneralized,butacertainincreaseintheageofmalemarriagehasbeenobservedinIndiaandNepal.

Traditionally,menmarrylaterthanwomen,InBangladeshin2004,79%ofwomenaged20-24werealreadymarriedat20versusonly15%ofmenofthesameage;30%ofmenaged25-29weremarriedatage22whilethepercentageofwomenwasabove90%.The2006surveyinNepalshowsthatthedifferenceinmarriagebehaviourbetweenmenandwomenislessmarked:87%ofwomenaged25-29and56%ofmenwerealreadymarriedatage22.Thenuptiality

Table 8c. Percentage of persons married by age, and age at first marriage in Nepal, 2006

Age group (years)

Women

Percentage of women married for the first time by exact age (years)


women

Median age at first

marriage15 18 20 22 25

15-19 5.5 – – – – 67.7 –

20-24 10.2 51.4 70.9 – – 17.9 17.9

25-29 13.3 60.2 77.3 87.3 93.6 4.4 17.3

30-34 15.3 59.9 79.0 88.4 94.0 1.6 17.3

35-39 15.4 65.0 81.3 90.2 96.4 1.4 16.9

40-44 19.7 65.0 81.9 90.7 94.9 1.3 16.8

45-49 24.7 69.4 84.7 91.9 95.6 1.2 16.5

20-49 15.3 60.4 78.1 – – 6.0 17.2

Age group(years)

Men

Percentage of men married for the first time by exact age


men

Median age at first

marriage15 18 20 22 25

15-19 0.7 – – – – 89.5 –

20-24 1.8 15.5 32.9 – – 44.1 –

25-29 4.5 24.5 41.3 56.2 76.7 14.0 21.0

30-34 4.2 26.9 48.2 63.8 80.9 1.1 20.2

35-39 4.1 29.1 50.5 67.2 83.1 0.2 19.9

40-44 2.2 23.8 52.2 70.9 87.3 0.7 19.8

45-49 4.8 29.3 49.6 68.6 81.0 1.0 20.0

20-49 3.5 24.2 44.8 60.9 76.0 12.5 20.6

Source: DHS, 2006.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 30 23/06/2008 14:36:21


31

modelinIndiaissimilartothatinBangladesh,withmenmarryingmuchlaterthanwomen,althoughthenumberofmenalreadymarriedatage20ishigherinIndia(26%)thaninBangladesh(15%).RegionaldataonageatfirstmarriageshowabroaddiversityinnuptialitybehaviourinIndia(NFHS,2005-2006).WhileacrossIndia,46%ofwomenaged18-29werealreadymarriedatage18,thefigurewasmuchlowerinGoa(12%)andashighas64%inBihar.Thedifferencesarealsolargeformen:27%ofIndianmenaged21-29werealreadymarriedat21,witharangeextendingfromonly2%inKeralatomorethan49%inRajasthan.

InBangladesh,IndiaandNepal,femalecelibacyremainsextremelyrare:thehighestproportionofwomenaged45-49whohavenevermarriedisobservedinNepalwhereitstandsatjust1.2%.Celibacyalsoremainsexceptionalamongmen:theproportionofsinglemenaged45-49isinthesameorderofmagnitudeasthatofwomen.Thesefiguresapplytotheoldergenerations:anincreaseintheageofmarriagemaybeaccompaniedbyanincreaseinpermanentcelibacyamongthemostrecentcohorts.

VIII. An ongoing fertility transition

The mean number of children per woman varies by a factor of two

FertilityinallthecountriesofSouthAsiawasstillhighintheearly1950s,ranging from5.7childrenperwomaninSriLankato7.7inAfghanistan(AppendixTableA.5).Atthattime,fertilityrateswerecomparableinIndiaandNepal(5.9and6.1childrenperwoman),substantiallyhigherinPakistan,BangladeshandBhutan(6.6-6.7childrenperwoman),andevenhigherintheMaldives(7childrenperwoman)thoughstillbelowthelevelforAfghanistan(7.7).

Between1950-1955and2000-2005,fertilitydeclinedsharplyinallcountriesof theregion,except inAfghanistanwhere,accordingtoUnitedNationsestimates,itcontinuedtofluctuatebetween7.5and8childrenperwoman.Overthisfifty-yearperiod,themeannumberofchildrenperwomanfellbyaround40%inNepalandPakistan,by47%inIndia,byover50%inBangladeshandBhutan,by60%intheMaldivesandby65%inSriLanka.WomeninSriLankahadslightlyover2childrenonaveragein2000-2005andthefertilitytransitionthereiscomplete,whereasinAfghanistanithasyettostart.Intheothercountriesthefertilitytransitionisunderway,thoughtheprocessismoreorlessadvanceddependingonthecountry:today,themeannumberofchildrenperwomanis2.8intheMaldivesand2.9inBhutan,3.1inIndiaand3.2inBangladesh,3.7inNepaland4.0inPakistan.Afghanistanisverymuchtheexception(Figure3).

Inmostofthecountries,womenstillbegintheirreproductivelifeveryearly,afactrelatedtoearlymarriageandthenotableabsenceofout-of-wedlock

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 31 23/06/2008 14:36:21

J. Véron

32

births(Table9).In2004,medianageatfirstchildbirthinBangladeshwasbelow18,bywhichagenearly33%ofadolescentshavealreadystartedchildbearing.InIndia,onthebasisof theNFHS-3survey(2005-2006),medianageatfirstchildbirthis20.Theproportionofwomenaged15-19whohaveevergivenbirthrisesrapidlywithage:1.3%at15years,4.1%at16,8.6%at17,17.9%at18and29.7%at19(17). InSriLanka,however,childbearingbeginsmuchlaterandthisisnotarecentphenomenon:in1987,meanageatfirstchildbirthwasalready24years,andin2000itwas23years.

Table 9. Median age at first birth (women aged 20-49) and proportion of adolescents (women aged 15-19) who have started childbearing

Median age at first birth (in years) Proportion of adolescents who

have started childbearing (in %)25-29 40-49

Afghanistan – – –

Bangladesh (2004) 17.7 16.9 32.7

Bhutan – – –

India (2005-2006) 19.9 20.2 12.1

Maldives – – –

Nepal (2006) 19.6 20.1 21.4

Pakistan (1990-1991)* 21.0 22.6 15.7

Sri Lanka (2000) 23.2** –

* The most recent DHS survey for Pakistan dates from 2006 but the results are not yet available.** Mean age at first birth.Sources: DHS and NFHS-3 surveys.

Thepatternsofage-specificfertilityin2000-2005thatemergefromthe UnitedNationsdatarevealtheprogressofthefertilitytransitionineachcountryoftheregion(Table10andFigure4).Thetransitionhasnotyetbegunin

(17)Asever,theuseofregionaldatahighlightsthediversityofIndia:theproportionofwomenaged15-19whohavehadalivebirthis12.1%forIndiaasawhole;itisonly2.1%inHimachalPradeshandcloseto21%inJharkhand.

Figure 3. Total fertility rates from 1960-1965 to 2000-2005

Ined 013 08 8

0

2

6

4

TFR 2000-2005

8 0 2 6 4 TFR 1960-1965

Sri Lanka

Afghanistan

Pakistan Nepal

India Bangladesh

Maldives Bhutan


02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 32 23/06/2008 14:36:21


33

Afghanistan,iscompleteinSriLanka,andisunderwayintheothercountriesofSouthAsia.Thetrendin age-specificfertilityfollowsasimilarcourseintheMaldives,India,Bangladesh,BhutanandNepal,althoughtheratesateachagemaydiffer.Pakistandiffersfromtheothercountriesinhavingasubstantiallyhigherleveloffertilityfromthe25-29agegrouponwards,reflectinglowerlevelsofcontraceptivepractice.

Betweenacountryattheendofthedemographictransition,likeSriLanka,andonestillengagedinit,likeIndia,thetrendsinage-specificfertilitypresent

Table 10. Age-specific fertility rates in 2000-2005 in the countries of South Asia (‰)

CountryAge

15-19Age

20-24Age

25-29Age

30-34Age

35-39Age

40-44Age

45-49

Afghanistan 131.9 356.9 378.3 276.9 195.8 101.3 54.7

Bangladesh 149.2 195.0 147.7 90.4 44.1 16.1 2.2

Bhutan 50.9 163.0 157.2 98.8 63.9 37.1 10.6

India 68.9 228.8 177.5 89.5 40.1 12.9 4.9

Maldives 26.2 146.2 162.6 123.7 75.2 22.7 4.8

Nepal 122.2 231.2 184.0 114.4 63.0 17.2 4.4

Pakistan 22.0 166.3 233.1 193.0 112.0 52.1 20.4

Sri Lanka 28.3 70.2 109.4 100.3 71.7 22.0 2.1

Source: United Nations, 2007a.

Figure 4. Age-specific fertility rates in 2000-2005 in the countries of South Asia

Ined 014 08Age-specific fertility rates (‰)

Age group15-19 25-29 45-4935-3920-24 40-4430-34

150

50

0

250

200

100

300

350

400

Afghanistan

BhutanBangladesh

India

NepalMaldives

Sri LankaPakistan


02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 33 23/06/2008 14:36:22

J. Véron

34

sharpcontrasts(Tables11aand11b;Figures5aand5b).InSriLanka,afertilitydeclineatallagesbetween1963and2000wasexplainedbyahighlevelofcontraceptivepractice(70%contraceptiveprevalencein2000),whilerelativelylowfertilityratesatyoungeragesareduetolatemarriage:thefertilityrateisbelow30perthousandatages15-19andslightlyabove80perthousandatages20-24.ThemainfeatureofthefertilitytrendinIndiaisadeclineafterage25.Theage-specificfertilityratestillstandsat90perthousandatages15-19in2005-2006andexceeds200perthousandatages20-24.Theage-specificfertilitycurveforIndia ischaracteristicofapopulationinwhichcontraceptivepracticeiswellestablishedbutwherelaterentryintochildbearing,resultingfromincreasedageatmarriageanduseofcontraceptionintheearlyyearsofunion,isnotyetwidespread.Wewillreturntothispointbelow.ThefertilityrateinBangladeshisevenhigherthaninIndiaatages15-19(135perthousandin2004)butslightlyloweratages20-24(192versus209perthousand)andsimilaratages25-29.InNepal,thefertilityratein2006islowerthaninBangladeshatages15-19(closeto100perthousand)butsubstantiallyhigher,however,atages20-24(234perthousand).Atages25-29,fertilityistenpointshigherthaninIndiaandBangladesh.

Table 11a. Age-specific fertility rates in Sri Lanka between 1963 and 2000 (‰)

Age groups 1963 1975 1987 1993 2000

15-19 52 31 38 35 27

20-24 228 146 147 110 83

25-29 278 161 161 134 118

30-34 240 158 122 104 98

35-39 157 126 71 54 40

40-44 46 43 23 14 8

45-49 7 6 3 4 1

Sources: World Fertility Survey for 1975; DHS surveys for 1987, 1993 and 2000.

Table 11b. Age-specific fertility rates in India between 1970-1972 and 2005-2006 (‰)

Age groups 1970-1972 1980-1982 1992-1993 1998-1999 2005-2006

15-19 103 89 116 107 90

20-24 254 246 231 210 209

25-29 259 231 170 143 139

30-34 203 165 97 69 62

35-39 134 100 44 28 25

40-44 63 46 15 8 7

45-49 27 21 5 3 3

Sources: SRS for 1970-1972 and 1980-1982; NFHS for 1992-1993, 1998-1999 and 2005-2006.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 34 23/06/2008 14:36:22


35

Thesurveysconductedsince2000revealfertilitydifferencesthatvarybyplaceofresidence,butmostmarkedlybywomen’seducationallevel(Table12).Whiletheurban-ruralfertilitydifferencesarenon-negligible:0.7childrenperwomaninBangladeshin2004,0.9inIndiain2005-2006and1.2inNepalin

Figure 5a. Age-specific fertility rates in Sri Lanka, 1963-2000 (‰)

Ined 015 08Rate (‰)

Age group

15-19 25-29 45-4935-3920-24 40-4430-34

150

50

0

250

200

100

300

1963

19871975

19932000

Sources: 1963 census; World Fertility Survey 1975; DHS surveys 1987, 1993 and 2000.

Figure 5b. Age-specific fertility rates in India between 1970-1972 and 2005-2006

Ined 016 08Rate (‰)

Age group

15-19 25-29 45-4935-3920-24 40-4430-34

150

50

0

250

200

100

300

SRS 1970-1972

NFHS 1992-1993SRS 1980-1982

NFHS 1998-1998NFHS 2005-2006

Sources: Véron, 1997, and NFHS, 2005-2006.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 35 23/06/2008 14:36:23

J. Véron

36

2006,thedifferencesbywomen’seducationallevelareverywideeverywhere.InBangladesh,womenwithnoeducationhaveonaverage3.6childrenversusonly2.2forthemosteducatedwomen.InIndia,womenwithnoeducationhaveidenticalfertilitytocomparablewomeninBangladeshwhereashighlyeducatedwomen–with12yearsormoreofeducation–currentlyhaveonly1.8children.InNepalin2006,thereisadifferenceoftwochildrenbetweenwomenofthelowestandhighesteducationallevels.Inthisregionasintherestoftheworld,educationisakeyvariableinthefertilitytransition.

Thechangesinnetreproductionrates(18)summarizethechangesinmortalityandfertility.Withanetreproductionrateof0.96daughtersperwomanin2000-2005(TableA.5),itappearsthatthepopulationofSriLankaisnotquitereplacingitself.Overthesameperiod,thenetreproductionrateforAfghanistanremainedhigh,ataround2.3.Fortheothercountries,thenetreproductionrateisbetween1.2(MaldivesandBhutan)and1.7(Pakistan).

(18)Thenetreproductionrateofabirthcohortistheratioofthenumberofdaughtersborntothewomenofthiscohorttothenumberofthesewomenatbirth.Theperiodnetreproductionrateistheequivalentmeasurecalculatedusingcross-sectionaldata.Anetreproductionrateofonemeansthatthecohortexactlyreplacesitself(itssizeisconstant).

Table 12. Total fertility rate by women’s place of residence and educational level

Place of residence

Educational level

Urban Rural IlliterateIncomplete

primary

Completed primary or

intermediate level

Completed secondary or higher

At least 10 years of education

Bangladesh

1999-2000 2.45 3.54 4.12 3.30 3.42 2.40 – –

2004 2.50 3.20 3.60 3.30 2.90 2.20 – –

India

1993 2.70 3.67 4.03 3.01 2.49 2.15 – –

1998-1999 2.27 3.07 3.47 2.64 2.26 1.99 – –

2005-2006 2.06 2.98 3.55 2.45* 2.51** 2.23*** 2.08**** 1.8*****

Nepal

1996 2.85 4.83 5.08 – 3.78 2.51 – –

2006 2.10 3.30 3.90 2.80 2.30 1.80 – –

Pakistan

1990-1991 4.90 5.60 5.70 4.90 4.50 3.60 – –

* less than 5 years of education, ** 5-7 years of education, ***8-9 years of education, ****10-11 years of education, *****12 years or more of education.Sources: DHS and NFHS surveys.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 36 23/06/2008 14:36:23


37

Fertility is linked to social and health development

Theinverserelationshipbetweenfertilityanddevelopmentisgenerallyconfirmedbyacountry-by-countrycomparisonoftotalfertilityratesfortheperiod2000-2005withthehumandevelopmentindexfor2004.Thecountrieswherefertilityishighesttendtobethoseforwhichthedevelopmentindicatorsarelowest(Figure6).Forexample,fertilityinNepalandPakistanismuchhigherthaninSriLanka,whilethehumandevelopmentindexismuchlower.However,thisrelationshipisnotverystrong:thedevelopmentindicatorsforBhutanandPakistanarevirtuallyidenticalwhereasthefertilitydifferencebetweenthetwocountriesisofonechildperwoman;fertilityinBhutanispracticallythesameasintheMaldives(2.91and2.81childrenperwomanin2000-2005, respectively),while thehumandevelopment indexshowsasubstantialdifference(0.54inBhutan,0.74intheMaldives).ThecoefficientofdeterminationR2forthisrelationshipisslightlyabove0.6.

Thecorrelation–positivethistime–betweenfertilityandinfantmortalityisalsoobservedover theperiod2000-2005.InSriLanka, lowfertility iscombinedwithlowinfantmortality,whileinAfghanistanfertilityandinfantmortalityarebothhigh(Figure7).Thecoefficientofdeterminationiscloseto0.98, indicatingaparticularlystrongcorrelation.Thispositivecorrelationbetweenfertilityandinfantmortalityisobservedinallworldregions(TabutinandSchoumaker,2004;TabutinandSchoumaker,2005;Guzmanetal.,2006).

Figure 6. Relationship between total fertility rate in 2000-2005 and human development index in 2004

Ined 017 08TFR 2000-2005

HDI 2004

0.40 0.60 0.800.700.50 0.550.45 0.750.65

3.0

2.0

1.5

4.0

3.5

2.5

4.5

R2 = 0.6112

Sri Lanka

Pakistan

Nepal

IndiaBangladesh

MaldivesBhutan

Sources: United Nations (2007a) and UNDP (2006).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 37 23/06/2008 14:36:24

J. Véron

38

Fertilitydeclineisrelatedtoeconomicandsocialdevelopmentbutcanalsoresult,atleastpartially,fromtheimplementationofpopulationpolicies.ThecaseofIndiaisinterestinginthisrespect.Intheearly1950sitwasthefirstmajorcountrytoinitiateafamilyplanningprogramme,andthentoattemptaveritablepopulationpolicy(Srinivasan,1995).Thepaceofpopulationgrowthacceleratedinsubsequentdecades,andthetargets,notablyforthebirthrate,provedover-ambitiousandhadtoberevisedseveraltimes(RajanandVéron,2006).Thisdoesnotmeanthatthefamilyplanningprogrammeshadnoeffectatall,sinceat this timeIndia’spopulationwasgettingyounger,withtheconsequencethatthebirthratedecreasedlessthanfertility.However,without“modernization”(19),thefertilitytransitionwouldcertainlyhavebeenmuchslower(Visaria,1995;VisariaandVisaria,1995).

Wide disparities in fertility still exist in India

Attheregionallevel,thehistoryofthefertilitytransitioninIndiabreaksdownintothreephases:anearlyfertilitydeclineconfinedtoKeralastateinthe1960s;emergenceofadivisionbetweenlowfertilityinthesouthandhighfertility inthenorthinthe1970sand1980s;ageneralizeddeclineinthesubsequentperiod,thoughwithlargedifferencespersistingin2005.

(19)The term “modernization” generally refers to improvements in the education and generalstatusofwomen,andtourbanization,industrializationandthedevelopmentofcommunications(transportationandmedia).

Figure 7. Relationship between total fertility rate and infant mortality rate, 2000-2005

Ined 018 08TFR 2000-2005

Infant mortality rate (‰)

0 200100 15050

5

2

0

7

6

4

1

3

8

R2 = 0.979

Sri Lanka

Pakistan

Nepal

India

Bangladesh

Maldives

Bhutan

Afghanistan


02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 38 23/06/2008 14:36:25


39

Inthe1950s,fertilityinIndiaasawholestillstoodat6.3childrenperwoman(20),butitwasalreadyslightlylower–5.6children–inthesouthernIndianstateofKerala(Table13).Keralaisthestatewherefertilitydeclinedearliest.Thetotalfertilityratefellthereto5intheperiod1961-1971,whileforIndiaasawholeitheldsteadyat6childrenperwoman.Thegapwidenedinthefollowingyears.AccordingtotheNFHS-2,fertilityinKeralawasbelow2childrenperwomanintheperiod1996-1998.Indeed,for1994theSampleRegistrationSystemgaveavalueforfertilityhalfthatofthenationalvalue:1.7versus3.5.Themostrecentsurvey(NFHS-3)findsadifferenceof0.75childrenperwomanbetweenKeralaandIndiaasawhole.ManystudieshaveattemptedtoexplainthereasonsforthesingularcourseoffertilitychangeinKerala(ZachariahandPatel,1984;MariBhatandRajan,1997).ThehigheducationallevelofwomenandthepoliticalspecificityofKerala–astatethatbecamecommunistin1957withtheaimofreducingsocioeconomicinequalitiesandimprovingthehealthofthepopulation–haveoftenbeeninvokedtoaccountforthisearlierdemographictransition.Inreality,changewasofanextremelygeneralnature(RajanandVéron,2006).Improvementswereindeedmadeintheeducationofwomen,butbothageatmarriage(21)andcontraceptiveprevalencealsoincreasedconsiderably.Programmeswerealsosetuptopromotematernalandchildhealth,and in1985thegovernment launchedaprogrammeofuniversalvaccination,oneresultofwhichwastomakethepopulationmorefamiliarwiththehealthservices.Thisprogrammeseemstohavebeenasimportantasspecificfamilyplanninginitiativesinmakingcouplesgivemore

(20)Periodfertilityisestimatedat5.8childrenperwomanfortheyears1881-1891;itthenfluctuatesaroundthisvaluebeforeexceeding6childrenperwomanintheearly1950s(MariBhat,1989).

(21)ForZachariah,30%ofthefertilitydeclineintheperiod1968-1978resultedfromtheincreaseinageatmarriage(Zachariah,1997).

Table 13. Fertility changes in Kerala and in India (number of children per woman)

Year Kerala India

Censuses1951-19611961-19711971-1981

5.605.003.40

6.306.005.20

SRS1981-19851994

2.601.70

4.503.50

NFHS1990-19921996-19982005-2006

2.001.961.93

3.392.852.68

Sources: Mari Bhat and Rajan (1997), SRS, NFHS, NFHS-2 and NFHS-3.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 39 23/06/2008 14:36:25

J. Véron

40

thoughttothe“quality”ofchildren,knowntobeafactorinfertilityreduction(Zachariahetal.,1994).ThestateofKeraladidnothaveaparticularlyadvancedlevelofeconomicdevelopment,norwasithighlyurbanized.Itoffersanexampleofatransitionlinkednottoeconomicdevelopmentorurbanizationbuttochangesinthesocialsphere,andinthissenseitdidnotfollowthestandardpatternoftransition.Thereafter,Kerala’sdemographicsingularitygavewaytoanorth-southdivisionofIndia.

ThefertilitytransitioninIndiaduringthe1990swascharacterizedbylargefertilitydifferencesbetweenthecountry’snorthernandsouthernstates(22)(NairandVéron,2002).Atthattime,fertilityinthesouthernstates–Kerala,TamilNadu,KarnatakaandAndhraPradesh–was2childrenperwoman,whereaswomeninthenorthernstates–UttarPradesh,Bihar,MadhyaPradeshandRajasthan–werestillproducing3-4childrenonaverage(Table14).Nosinglefactorcanaccountforthesecontrastsinfertility(Véron,2000).Levelsofinfantmortalityandfertilityarecertainlybothlowerinthesouthernstates,butthechangingrelationshipovertimebetweenthesetwoindicatorsvariesfromstate tostate,as thecovariation inthese indicatorsover theperiod1981-1994shows.OnFigure8,eachdotrepresentsacombinationoffertilityandinfantmortalityatagivenpointintime,andeachbrokenlineplotsthecovariationinfertilityandinfantmortalityinonestatebetween1981and1994.Overthisperiod,thecombinedfertilityandinfantmortalityvaluesareconsistentlylowerinthefoursouthernstatesthaninthenorthernstates,and

(22)The contrast between north and south is widely used, but a more precise classification ofIndianstatesdistinguishesthestatesofthenorth-east,thecentre,thenorth,etc.Referencehereistothestandarddistinction.

Table 14. Total fertility rate in the northern and southern states of India in the 1990s (number of children per woman)

Region and state 1980-1982 1990-1992 1996-1998

Northern states

Uttar Pradesh 5.8 4.82 3.99

Bihar 5.7 4.00 3.49

Madhya Pradesh 5.2 3.91 3.31

Rajasthan 5.4 3.63 3.78

Southern states

Andhra Pradesh 3.9 2.59 2.25

Karnataka 3.6 2.85 2.13

Tamil Nadu 3.4 2.48 2.19

Kerala 2.9 2.00 1.96

India 4.5 3.39 2.85

Sources: Visaria (2004), NFHS and NFHS-2.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 40 23/06/2008 14:36:25


41

thetwodistinctgroupsareidentifiedclearlyinFigure8.Thusthebrokenlinefurthest tothe leftonFigure8representsthiscovariationof fertilityandinfantmortalityinKeralabetween1981and1994.Itisseenthatinsomeyearsfertilityhasfallensubstantiallywithoutanyclearreductionininfantmortality.Generallyspeaking,atstatelevel,nocloserelationshipbetweenfertilityandinfantmortality isobserved.Variation inoneof these indicatorsmaybeaccompaniedbynoclearchange,orevenbyanincreaseintheother,thusproducingasomewhaterratictrajectoryovertime.Theothervariablesusuallyconsideredhaveequallylimitedexplanatorypower.ThoughthestatesinthenorthofIndiaare lessurbanizedthanthose inthesouth,andfertility isinvariablylowerinurbanthaninruralareas,thedegreeofurbanizationdoesnotexplainthefertilitylevel inastate:Biharis lessurbanizedthanUttarPradesh,yetfertilitywaslowerthereintheearly1990s,andKerala,thoughlessurbanizedthanTamilNadu,alsohadlowerfertility(Table15).Thescaleoffertilitydifferencesbetweenurbanandruralareasvarieswidelywithinstates.Ruralfertilityexceedsurbanfertilityby8%inTamilNaduwhilethedifferenceis45%inUttarPradesh.Arelationshipalsoexistsbetweenfemalelevelofeducationandfertility:moreeducatedwomenhavefewerchildren.Onitsown,however,theeducationallevelofmothersdoesnotexplainthefertilitydifferences:in1991-1992,fertilityamongilliteratewomenranged,foranationalaverageof4children,from2.31inKeralato5.36inUttarPradesh.Fertilityalsoriseswiththeproportionofpeoplelivingbelowthepovertyline.However,comparableproportionslivingbelowthepovertyline(43%inMadhya

Figure 8. Covariation in infant mortality and fertility in the northern and southern states of India, 1981-1994

Ined 019 08Mean number of children per woman

Infant mortality rate (‰)

0 180120 16080 100 14040 6020

5

2

0

6

4

1

3

7

Northern states

Southern states

Source: Véron and Naïr, 2000.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 41 23/06/2008 14:36:26

J. Véron

42

Pradeshand45%inTamilNadu)canbeassociatedwithverydifferentfertilitylevels(3.9and2.5childrenperwoman,respectively).Equally,thedifferencesinfertilitybetweenstatesarenotexplainedbythereligiouscompositionofthepopulation,eventhoughatthenationallevelthenumberofchildrenperwomandoesvarybyreligion(withadifferenceofoneadditionalchildforMuslimsrelativetoHindusin1990-1992).InTamilNadu,MuslimandHinduwomenproducethesamenumberofchildren,whereasthefertilityofHindusin1990-1992rangedfrom1.7childrenperwomaninKeralato4.7inUttarPradesh(23).

ThemostrecentdataforIndia,takenfromNFHS-3,showpersistentlystrongspatialdisparitiesinfertility,rangingfrom1.79childrenperwomaninGoaandAndhraPradeshto4inBihar(Table16).Replacingthenorth-southdivisionofIndiabyafinergeographicalsubdivision–thatsplitsthecountryintonorth,centre,east,north-east,westandsouth–doesnotcauseanyhomogeneousregionstoappearalthoughthepreviousdemarcation linesdisappear.Thus,underthepartitioningforNFHS-3,whatistermedthenorthregioncontainsHimachalPradeshwherefertilitywas1.94childrenperwomanandRajasthanwhereitwas3.21childrenperwoman.Inthenorth-eastregion,fertilityrangesfrom2.02inSikkimto3.80inMeghalaya.Thesouthernstates,however,remainrelativelyhomogeneousintermsoffertility,whichiseverywhereatsub-replacementlevel.

(23)SeeGandotraetal.,1998foradetailedanalysisoftheseregionaldifferences.

Table 15. Urbanization and fertility in India in the early 1990s

Region and state

Percentage urban

Total fertility rate (number of children per woman)

Ratio of rural fertility to

urban fertility*Urban areas Rural areas

Northern States

Uttar Pradesh 19.9 3.58 5.19 145

Bihar 13.2 3.25 4.15 128

Madhya Pradesh 23.2 3.27 4.11 126

Rajasthan 22.9 2.77 3.87 140

Southern States

Andhra Pradesh 26.8 2.35 2.67 114

Karnataka 30.9 2.39 3.09 129

Tamil Nadu 34.2 2.36 2.54 108

Kerala 26.4 1.78 2.09 117

India 25.7 2.70 3.67 136

* Ratio of mean number of children per woman in rural areas to mean number of children per woman in urban areas (as a percentage).Sources: census of 1991; NFHS 1992-1993.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 42 23/06/2008 14:36:26


43

Thestagereachedinthefertilitytransitionineachstatedependsonthelevelofdevelopment,butnosingledominantfactorcanbeidentified.Thuswhilethepooreststatesareindeedthosewherefertilityremainshighest,thecorrelationbetweenthemeannumberofchildrenperwomanandtheproportionofthepopulationlivingbelowthepovertylineislessthan0.40,andthesameproportionofpeoplelivingbelowthepovertylinecanbeassociatedwithsharplycontrastedfertilitylevels.Inthemid2000s,fertilityinIndiawasonaverage

Table 16. Total fertility rate (number of children per woman) in the states of India in 1990-1992, 1996-1998 and 2005-2006

State 1990-1992 1996-1998 2005-2006

NorthDelhiHaryanaHimachal PradeshJammu and KashmirPunjabRajasthanUttarakhand

3.023.992.97

–2.923.63

–

2.402.882.142.712.213.78

–

2.132.691.942.381.993.212.55

CentreChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshUttar Pradesh

–3.904.82

–3.313.99

2.623.123.82

EastBiharJharkhandOrissaWest Bengal

4.00–

2.922.92

3.49–

2.462.29

4.003.312.372.27

North-eastArunachal PradeshAssamManipurMeghalayaMizoramNagalandSikkimTripura

4.253.532.763.732.303.26

––

2.522.313.044.572.893.772.75

–

3.032.422.833.802.863.742.022.22

WestGoaGujaratMaharashtra

1.902.992.86

1.772.722.52

1.792.422.11

SouthAndhra PradeshKarnatakaKeralaTamil Nadu

2.592.852.002.48

2.252.131.962.19

1.792.071.931.80

India 3.39 2.85 2.68

Source: NFHS, NFHS-2 and NFHS-3.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 43 23/06/2008 14:36:26

J. Véron

44

2.68childrenperwomanand21.8%ofthepopulationlivedbelowthepovertyline,yetforsimilarfertilitylevels,asinGujaratandOrissa(2.42and2.37childrenperwoman,respectively)theassociatedproportionsinpovertydivergedwidely:12.5%ofthepopulationintheformerand39.9%inthelatter.

Thedifficultyofidentifyingsimpledeterminantsoffertilityattheaggregatelevelofstateswasclearlyillustratedseveralyearsagobyamultivariateanalysisoftherelationshipbetweenfertilityandwomen’seducation,whichalsoconsideredtheindirecteffectsoffemaleeducationviainfantmortalityandageatmarriage(SharmaandRetherford,1990).Themodel’sexplanatorypowerwasnotimprovedbyintroducingthelevelofurbanization.Whentheresidualsweremapped,thedeviationsfromthevalueexplainedbythemodelexhibitedgeographicalcontiguitybysize,suggestingtheinfluenceofregionalorlocalfactors(religion,customs,andsuchlike).Thecomplexityoftheprocessesatworkwashighlightedinageographicalanalysisof the fertility transition insouthernIndiabyC.Z.GuilmotoandI.S.Rajan(2005),whichshowedthattheexplanationneedstoincludefamilyplanningprogrammes,socioeconomictransformations,andchangingreproductiveattitudes,andtakeintoaccountlocalcontextsandthechangesaffectingthem.Theseauthorsalsoviewedthereductioninfertilityastheconsequenceofasocialchangethatdiffusedgraduallybetweenneighbouringpopulations(GuilmotoandRajan,1998and2001).

IX. Diversity in attitudes and behaviour towards contraception

Varying levels of contraceptive practice

ThedataoncontraceptioninthecountriesofSouthAsia,thoughvariableinbothquantityandquality(UnitedNations,2005),areadequatetoshowthediversityofattitudesandbehaviourtowardscontraception(Figure9).Whilecontraceptionremainspracticallynon-existentinAfghanistan,wherefewerthan5%ofwomenaged15-49 inunionsuseanymethod,contraceptiveprevalenceinSriLankaalreadystoodatthehighlevelof70%in2000.Thesituationintheothercountriesisalsovaried:theproportionofwomen(24)usingsomeformofcontraceptionis18.8%inBhutan,27.6%inPakistan,39.3%inNepal,48.2%inIndiaand58.1%inBangladesh.

Theuseofmoderncontraceptionalsovariesconsiderablybetweencountries.InBhutan,barely19%ofwomeninaunionandofchildbearingageuseanymeansofcontraception(25),butmodernmethodsareusedexclusively:3%areprotectedbyfemalesterilization,8%bymalesterilization,2%bythepill,4%byinjectionorimplant,1%byIUD,andfewerthan0.5%byuseofthecondom.Bycontrast,moderncontraceptionrepresentsonly73%oftotalcontraception

(24)Asbefore,thesearewomenaged15-49,marriedorinaunion.

(25)Thedataarelessrecentthanthosefortheothercountries,anddatefrom1994.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 44 23/06/2008 14:36:27


45

inPakistanand71%inSriLanka.However,theproportionsofwomenusingmoderncontraceptionarehighestinIndia,BangladeshandSriLanka,whichtogetheraccountfornearly50%ofallthewomenconcerned.

Thecondomisnotwidelyusedinthisregion.Thehighestproportionofusers(5.5%ofallwomenofchildbearingageinaunion)isobservedinPakistan.UseoftheIUDisequallylimited,withthehighestproportion(5.1%)observedinSriLanka.ThepillispopularonlyinBangladesh,whereitisusedby26%ofallwomeninaunion,representing45%ofwomenusingsomemethodofcontraception.IntheMaldives,wherecontraceptiveprevalenceis42%,itsuseisonlyhalfasfrequent,andSriLanka,thethirdcountrywherethismethodisinuse,hasonly6.7%ofusers.Voluntarysterilization,mainlyfemale, iswidelyemployedbycouplesinSouthAsiaforlimitingfamilysize.AmongwomenofchildbearingagesintheMaldives,10%areprotectedbyfemalesterilization,andtheproportionsare15%inNepal,21%inSriLankaand34.2%inIndia.InSouthAsia,aselsewhereintheworld,thereisaclearinverserelationshipbetweenfertilityandcontraception(Figure10).

Sterilization is the main birth control method in India

Attitudestowardsfemaleandmalesterilizationareextremelydiverseinthisworldregion.Sterilizationisnon-existentinAfghanistan,andisnotwidelypractisedinBhutan,BangladeshandPakistan(ofthesethemaximumisinPakistan,where7%ofwomeninaunionareprotectedbyfemalesterilization).Asmentioned,theproportionofwomenaged15-49relyingonsterilizationto

Figure 9. Contraceptive prevalence in the countries of South Asia in the 2000s

Ined 020 08 Prevalence (%)

50

20

0

70

60

40

10

30

80

Sri Lanka

Pakistan

Nepal India

Bangladesh

Maldives

Bhutan

Afghanistan

Any method

Modern method

Source: United Nations (2005).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 45 23/06/2008 14:36:27

J. Véron

46

regulatetheirfertilityissubstantiallyhigherelsewhere,butIndiastandsoutfromtheothercountries,sinceoverathirdofallwomenareconcerned(26).Malesterilizationforbirthcontrolpurposes,ontheotherhand,iseverywhereatalowlevel,withtheexceptionofBhutanwhere8%ofwomeninaunionareprotectedbythesterilizationoftheirspouseorpartnerand3%bytheirownsterilization.

Recoursetosterilization,andessentiallyfemalesterilization,hasbeenwidespreadinIndiasincethemid1980s(RajanandVéron,2006).In2005-2006,66%ofmarriedwomenaged15-49hadbeensterilized,andtheproportionwas77%amongthoseusingmoderncontraception,whereasonly1%wereprotectedbysterilizationoftheirhusband.TrendsoverthelastfifteenyearsincontraceptionandintherelativeimportanceofsterilizationcanbefollowedusingthethreeNFHS surveys conducted in India (Table17). Between1992-1993 and2005-2006,contraceptiveprevalenceincreasedby15percentagepoints,takingtooveronehalftheproportionofwomenofchildbearingageandinaunionwhonowusecontraception,against41%atthestartofthe1990s.Overalongperiod,sterilizationandinparticularmalesterilizationwasencouragedinIndia(27),

(26)The prevalence of female sterilization for contraception is slightly higher in India than inChina (34.2% and 33.5% respectively) but lower than in Brazil (40%), Puerto Rico (45.5%) andtheDominicanRepublic(45.8%).ThevalueforCanadais30.6%,makingitthedevelopedcountrywherecontroloffertilitythroughfemalesterilizationismostcommon.

(27)FormoredetailsonthehistoryofsterilizationinIndia,andinparticulartheapparentshiftawayfromstateprovisionofmalesterilizationtowardsfemalesterilizationsolicitedbycouples,seeRajanandVéron(2006).

Figure 10. Relationship between the total fertility rate and contraceptive prevalence (all methods) in the 2000s

Ined 021 08TFR

Contraceptive prevalence (%)

0 8040 6020

5

2

0

7

6

4

1

3

8

Sri Lanka (2000)

Pakistan (2000-2001)

Nepal (2006)India (2005-2006)

Bangladesh (2004)

Maldives (1999)

Afghanistan (2000)

Bhutan (1994)


02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 46 23/06/2008 14:36:28


47

untiltheexcessescommittedduringthestateofemergency(1975-1977)ledthecentralgovernmenttoissuestatementsinfavourofreversiblemethodsofcontraception.Inspiteofthis,femalesterilizationremainsbyfarthemostcommonmeansusedbyIndiancouplesforcontrollingtheirfertility,andevenincreasedbyafurther10percentagepointsbetween1992-1993and2005-2006.Officialpronouncementsintendedtopromotemaleratherthanfemalesterilizationhavehadlittleeffect.Theproportionofcouplesrelyingonmalesterilizationhasremainedsmallandhasactuallydeclinedoverthelastfifteenyears.Allinall,couplesjudgefemalesterilizationtobethesimplestmeansofcontrollingtheirfertility:77%ofsterilizedwomenhavechosenthisoptiondirectlywithoutpreviouslyusinganothermethodofbirthcontrol.Ageatsterilizationistendingtodecrease:themedianageofwomenatsterilizationfellfrom26.6in1992-1993to25.5in2005-2006.Of100sterilizedwomeninthemostrecentsurvey,38weresterilizedatage20-25and35atage25-30.

Country-widedataonsterilizationinIndiaconceallargeregionaldisparities.Only8%ofcouplesareprotectedbyfemalesterilizationinthestateofManipuragainst63%inAndhraPradesh;andwhereaswomen’smedianageatsterilizationis30intheformer,itisalittleover23inthelatter.

X. Overall mortality decline, but widely separated extremes

A general improvement in life expectancy

Asintherestoftheworld,mortalityhasdeclinedinallcountriesoftheregionsince1950(Figure11andTable18).Theregion’stwoextremesareAfghanistan,wherelifeexpectancyatbirthisamongthelowestintheworld(42yearsin2000-2005),andSriLanka,wherethemeanlengthoflife,closeto71yearsin2000-2005,(i.e.nearly30yearslonger)isabovetheworldaverage.

Table 17. Contraceptive methods used in India in the 1990s and 2000s (prevalence in %)

Contraceptive method used 1992-1993 1998-1999 2005-2006

All methods 40.7 48.4 56.3

Modern methods 36.5 42.8 48.5

Female sterilization 27.4 34.2 37.3

Male sterilization 3.5 1.9 1.0

Condom 2.4 3.1 5.2

Pill 1.2 2.1 3.1

IUD 1.9 1.6 1.7

Traditional methods 4.3 5.6 7.8

Population: women aged 15-49 living in union.Sources: NFHS, NFHS-2 and NFHS-3.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 47 23/06/2008 14:36:28

J. Véron

48

Theothercountriesare inintermediatepositions.Althoughthemortalitytransitionsinthesecountriesdiffer insomerespects, theincreasesinlifeexpectancyatbirtharecloselycomparable,andin2000-2005thepopulationsofBangladesh,Bhutan,India,theMaldives,NepalandPakistanallhadlengthsoflifebetween61and66years.ThesecountriesareclosingthegapwithSriLanka,wheretherateofprogressisslowingsomewhat,althoughin2000-2005,lifeexpectancytherewasstillfiveyearslongerthanintheMaldives,thetop-rankingintermediategroupcountry.

Genderdifferencesinmortalityhavealsoevolvedsubstantiallyoverthelastfiftyyears.Intheearly1950s,lifeexpectancyatbirthwaslowerforwomenthanformenineverycountryoftheregionexceptBhutan,asisshownbytheindexbasedonthefemale/maleratiooflifeexpectanciesatbirth(Figure12).Thisresultwas indirectcontradictionwiththebiologicalnormsthatareresponsibleformenhavinghighermortalitythanwomenatallagesandthat,intheabsenceofsexdiscrimination,leadtoashorterlifeexpectancyformalesthanforfemales.In1950-1955,thisindexstoodattheparticularlylowlevelof94intheMaldivesandinPakistan, indicatinga largefemalemortalitydisadvantage.Themaleadvantagehasdisappearedineverycountryoverthelastfiftyyears.In2000-2005,thelifeexpectanciesatbirthofmenandwomeninAfghanistanandtheMaldiveswereidentical.Elsewhere,womenarelivinglongerthanmen.ThemostfavourablerelativesituationforwomenisinSriLanka,wheretheratiois112(Figure12).Inthepast,thefemalelifeexpectancy

Figure 11. Life expectancy at birth, 1950-2005 (in years)

Ined 022 08Life expectancy (years)

Years1950-1955 1970-1975 2000-20051990-19951960-1965 1980-1985

45

35

30

25

55

50

40

60

70

65

75

AfghanistanMaldives

BangladeshNepal

BhutanPakistan

IndiaSri Lanka


02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 48 23/06/2008 14:36:29


49

disadvantagewasexplainedinpartbymaternalmortality,butthiswasnottheonlyfactorinvolved.Lifetablesfortheyears1945-1947inSriLanka,andfor1970-1972inIndia,showanexcessfemalemortalityatallagesfrombirthuptoaroundage40(ESCAP,1982)duetosexinequalityinlevelsofcare,attentionandeducation.Discriminationagainstgirlsstillexists,particularlyincertainstatesofIndia.Itoccurschieflybeforebirthand,inthecountrieswherethesituationinthisrespectisleastfavourable,women’slifeexpectancyisatminimumequaltomen’s.Levelsofmaternalmortalitystilldivergewidelytoday:thenumberofmaternaldeathsper100,000birthsis92inSriLankaandestimatedat1,900inAfghanistan(Table18).

AlthoughthenumbersofHIV-positivepersonscanbelargebecauseofpopulationsize–inIndiaespecially(28)–prevalenceratesforHIV/AIDSremainrelativelylowintheregion.ThemaximumisobservedinNepalwheretherateamongpersonsaged15-49is0.5%comparedwithaworldaverageof0.8%(29).Theprevalencerateof0.9%initiallygivenforIndiain2005wassubsequentlyreviseddownwardsonthebasisoftheresultsfromNFHS-3(30)whichfoundaprevalencerateof0.28%inthe15-49agegroup.Theepidemicaffectsmenmorethanwomen,andurbanmorethanruralpopulations(Table19).Italsoaffects

(28)ThefirstcasesofAIDSinIndiawererecordedin1986.Serologicaltestsshowedthatamong102prostitutes tested in Chennai (Madras), 10 were HIV positive. However, the Indian healthauthoritiesdidnottakeimmediatestepstocombattheepidemic,believingthathigh-risksexualbehaviourwasexceptionalinIndia(multiplepartners,inparticular,wereuncommon).

(29)TheHIVprevalenceratefortheadultpopulationis5%inSub-SaharanAfrica.

(30)ThisisthefirstsurveyinIndiatoincludeasectiononHIVtesting.

Table 18. Life expectancy since the 1950s, maternal mortality in 2000 and HIV prevalence in 2005

Country

Life expectancy (in years) Maternalmortality

rate in 2000

(per 100,000births)

HIV prevalence

rate at ages 15-49

in 2005 (%)

1950-1955

1960-1965

1970-1975

1980-1985

1990-1995

2000-2005

Afghanistan 28.8 32.0 36.1 39.9 41.7 42.1 1,900 < 0.1

Bangladesh 37.5 41.2 45.3 50.0 56.0 62.0 380 < 0.1

Bhutan 36.1 37.7 41.8 47.9 54.5 63.5 420 < 0.1

India 37.4 43.6 50.7 56.6 60.2 62.9 540 0.9

Maldives 38.9 45.2 51.4 57.1 61.0 65.6 110 –

Nepal 36.2 39.4 44.0 49.6 55.7 61.3 740 0.5

Pakistan 43.4 47.7 51.9 56.2 60.8 63.6 500 0.1

Sri Lanka 57.6 62.2 65.0 68.8 70.4 70.8 92 < 0.1

Sources: United Nations (2007a), WHO and UNAIDS.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 49 23/06/2008 14:36:29

J. Véron

50

thestatesofIndiaindifferentways,asshownbytheregionalvariationsinprevalence(menandwomencombined):0.07%inUttarPradesh,0.34%inTamilNadu,0.62inMaharahtra,0.69%inKarnataka,0.97%inAndhraPradeshand1.13%inManipur(prevalenceintheotherstatesis0.13%)(31).Amongwomen,theprevalencerateislowerforthosewithnoeducationthanforthosewithatleastfiveyearsofeducation(0.27%and0.49%respectively)butthendeclinesaseducationallevelrises(0.07%forwomenwithatleast12yearsineducation).Amongmen,therateishighestforthosewithnoeducation(0.5%).Itislower

(31)InManipur,theHIVprevalencerateamongmenaged15-54isdoublethatamongwomenaged15-49(1.59%against0.79%).ExceptinTamilNaduwhereitislowerthanthatforwomen,themaleprevalencerateeverywhereelseishigherthanthefemalerate,thoughtoalesserdegree.

Figure 12. Differential mortality index in 1950-1955 and 2000-2005 (female/male ratio of life expectancies at birth)

Ined 023 08Index

100

85

80

110

105

95

90

115

Sri Lanka

Pakistan

NepalIndia

Bangladesh

Maldives

Bhutan

Afghanistan

1950-1955

2000-2005

Interpretation: The value 100 represents equality.Source: Based on United Nations (2006a) data.

Table 19. HIV/AIDS prevalence rate in the adult population (aged 15-49) in India, 2005-2006 (in %)

Women Men Overall

Urban areas 0.29 0.41 0.35

Rural areas 0.18 0.32 0.25

Total 0.22 0.36 0.28

Source: NFHS-3 survey.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 50 23/06/2008 14:36:29


51

forthosewithatleastfiveyearsofeducation(0.36%)thenrisesagainforthosewithbetweenfiveandsevenyearsofeducationandsubsequentlyfallswithlengthofeducation(theprevalencerateis0.16%formenwithmorethan12yearsineducation).Wenotethatthehighestprevalenceratesareobservedforwomenwhohadsexualintercoursewithahigh-riskpartnerinthe12monthsbeforethesurvey(rate2.23%)andforthosewhodidnotuseacondom(rate2.83%).Prevalenceratesformeninthesamecategoriesareconsiderablylower.

ForanumberofcountriesinSouthAsia,the2005UnitedNationsreportonmortalitygivesvaluesformaleandfemalelifeexpectancyatbirthandatages15and60at twoseparateperiods intime(Table20).Thedecline in

Table 20. Male and female life expectancy at birth, at age 15 and at age 60 (in years)

Country Years Men Women Years Men Women

Afghanistan – – – – – –

Bangladesh

At birth 1974 45.8 46.6 1994 58.7 58.3

Age 15 1974 46.3 46.1 1994 53.0 51.4

Age 60 1974 14.4 14.0 1994 15.1 15.0

Bhutan – – – – – –

India

At birth 1961-1970 46.4 44.7 1993-1997 60.4 61.8

Age 15 1961-1971 45.0 44.0 1993-1998 53.1 55.8

Age 60 1961-1972 13.6 13.8 1993-1999 15.5 17.5

Maldives

At birth 1982 53.4 49.5 1999 72.1 73.2

Age 15 1982 48.0 43.4 1999 59.2 60.2

Age 60 1982 9.2 8.2 1999 18.8 19.3

Nepal

At birth 1981 50.9 48.1 2001 60.1 60.7

Age 15 1981 47.3 46.9 – –

Age 60 1981 13.8 14.4 – –

Pakistan

At birth 1976-1978 59.0 59.2 2001 64.5 66.1

Age 15 1976-1979 56.8 56.3 2001 56.9 58.8

Age 60 1976-1980 19.3 19.3 2001 18.8 20.1

Sri Lanka

At birth 1967 64.8 66.9 1991 68.9 73.6

Age 15 1967 55.8 57.7 1991 – –

Age 60 1967 17.0 17.8 1991 – –

Source: United Nations (2006b).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 51 23/06/2008 14:36:30

J. Véron

52

mortalityatyoungeragesaccountsforsomeoftheriseinlifeexpectancyatbirthbutisnottheonlyfactorinvolvedsincelifeexpectanciesatage15arealsorising.Lifeexpectanciesatage60arefollowingamoredisparatecoursethoughthetrendisupward.

Early-age mortality remains high in most countries

Infantmortalityfellthroughouttheregionbetween1960-1965and2000-2005(Table21andFigure13).SriLankaandAfghanistanareagain intheextremepositions:bythe1960s, infantmortality inSriLankawasalready

Figure 13. Infant mortality between 1960-1965 and 2000-2005

Ined 024 08260

0

80

240

160

60

220

140

40

200

120

20

180

100

Infant mortality 2000-2005 (‰)

2600 80 24016060 22014040 20012020 180100

Infant mortality 1960-2005 (‰)

Sri Lanka

Afghanistan

Pakistan

NepalIndiaBangladesh

Maldives Bhutan


Table 21. Infant mortality since the early 1950s

Infant mortality rate (‰) Change (%)

1952 1972 1992 2002 1952-1972 1972-1992 1992-2002

Afghanistan 275.3 211.6 171.1 168.1 – 23 – 19 – 2

Bangladesh 200.5 148.0 89.0 61.3 – 26 – 40 – 31

Bhutan 184.8 149.2 87.5 52.7 – 19 – 41 – 40

India 165.7 116.8 77.2 62.5 – 30 – 34 – 19

Maldives 185.2 120.6 65.1 45.8 – 35 – 46 – 30

Nepal 210.9 156.1 90.6 64.5 – 26 – 42 – 29

Pakistan 168.6 127.6 87.0 75.4 – 24 – 32 – 13

Sri Lanka 76.6 49.9 17.0 12.4 – 35 – 66 – 27


02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 52 23/06/2008 14:36:30


53

muchlowerthaninmostcountriesofSouthAsia,whileinAfghanistaninfantmortality was among the highest in the world. Considerable progress hasbeenachievedintheothercountriesoftheregion,thoughinfantmortalitywasstill relativelyhigh in theearly2000s:46‰in theMaldives,53‰inBhutan, 61‰ in Bangladesh, 63‰ in India, 65‰ in Nepal and 75‰ inPakistan.

According toUnitedNationsestimates(2007a),under-fivemortality inAfghanistanhasnotdecreasedoverthelasttenyears:itwas257‰in1990-1995and252‰in2000-2005.At14‰in2000-2005,under-fivemortalityinSriLankabearsnocomparisonwiththatinAfghanistan(Table22).Thenext best level of under-five mortality is in the Maldives, where the ratedeclined considerably in the 1990s but still stood at 59‰ in 2000-2005.Infantandchildmortalitylevelsintheothercountrieswereverysimilarin1990-1995,withallratessituatedbetween124‰and128‰,buttenyearslaterhadbecomemoredisparate,rangingfrom108‰inPakistanto78‰inBhutan.

Child health is closely correlated with mother’s level of education

ChildmortalitylevelsreflectthepersistentdisparitiesinchildhealthinSouthAsia.Theproportionsofdeliveriesattendedbyskilledhealthpersonnel,thepercentageofmalnourishedchildrenandthelevelsofchildvaccinationcoverageprovidefurtherproofofthisdiversity(Table22).

Table 22. Child mortality, delivery conditions, malnutrition and vaccination

Country

Mortality rate (‰) Deliveries attended by skilled

health personnel

(%)

Children malnourished

(%)

Children vaccinated

(%)Neonatal

(2004)

Below1 year (2000-2005)

0-5 years

(2000-2005)

Afghanistan 60 168 252 14 (2003) 53.6 (1997) –

Bangladesh 36 61 83 13 (2004) 50.5 (2004) 73.1 (2004)

Bhutan 30 53 78 51(2005) 47.7 (1999) –

India 39 62 90 48 (2006) 51.0 (1998/99) 42.0 (1999)

Maldives 24 46 59 70 (2001) 31.9 (2001) –

Nepal 32 64 88 19 (2006) 57.1 (2001) 82.8 (2006)

Pakistan 53 75 108 31 (2005) 41.5 (2001) 35.1 (1991)

Sri Lanka 8 12 14 97 (2000) 18.4 (2000) 67.3 (1987)

(a) Children receiving the full set of vaccinations (BCG, DPT, polio and measles).(b) Children under five with stunted growth.Sources: United Nations, World Health Statistics 2007, DHS surveys and United Nations (2007a).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 53 23/06/2008 14:36:31

J. Véron

54

Theconditionsofbirthvarywidely.InSriLanka,97%ofdeliveriesareattendedbyskilledhealthpersonnel,against70%intheMaldives,around50%inBhutanandIndia,14%inAfghanistanand13%inBangladesh.Theproportionofchildrenvaccinatedisalsoanindicatorofhealthconditions.Thoughtherelevantdataarenotavailableforallthecountriesoftheregionandsomeareoutofdate, inthe2000stheproportionofchildrenvaccinatedagainstthemaindiseasesexceeds70%inBangladeshand80%inNepal(32).

DataforIndiaoninfantmortalityin2005-2006highlighttheimpactofareaofresidenceandmother’slevelofeducationonchildhealth(Table23).Infantmortality,whichhasanaveragevalueforIndiaof57‰in2005-2006,variesby20pointsdependingonwhethertheareaofresidenceisurbanorrural.Forchildrenunderone,themortalityratevariesby44pointsaccordingtowhetherthemothershavereceivednoeducation(70‰)ormorethan12yearsofeducation(26‰).InIndiaaselsewhereintheworld,themortalitydifferentialsareevenlargeratages1-5.Theconditionsofdeliveryaremuchmorefavourableinurbanareasthaninruralareas,sincewellover70%ofurbanbirthsareattendedbytrainedhealthpersonnel,comparedwithlessthan40%ofruralbirths.Similarly,theconditionsofbirthvaryconsiderablywiththemother’seducationallevel,rangingfrom26%ofdeliveriesattendedbytrainedpersonnelforwomenwithnoeducationto91%forwomenwithat least12yearsofeducation.Thepercentageofchildrenreceivingthebasicvaccinationsvariesbyalmost20pointsdependingonwhetherthemotherlivesinanurbanorruralarea,andbynearly50pointsbetweenthe leastandmosteducatedwomen.

(32)InNepal,83%ofchildrenaged1-2arefullyimmunizedatthetimeofthesurvey,while93%areBCGvaccinatedagainsttuberculosis,85%arevaccinatedagainstmeaslesand89%havereceivedthefirstdoseoftheDPT(diphtheria,pertussis,tetanus)vaccine.

Table 23. Child mortality, delivery conditions and vaccination by area of residence and educational level of mother, India, 2005-2006

Total

Area of residence

Mother’s level of education (years of shooling)

Urban RuralNo

educationBelow

55-7 8-9 10-11 12+

Infant mortality (‰) 57.0 41.5 62.2 69.7 66.0 49.5 41.5 36.5 25.9

Mortality 1-5 years (‰) 18.4 10.6 21.0 29.9 13.8 11.5 5.6 3.6 3.9

Mortality 0-5 years (‰) 74.3 51.7 82.0 94.7 78.8 60.5 46.9 40.0 29.7

Deliveries attended by trained personnel (%) 46.6 73.5 37.5 26.1 45.0 56.9 67.1 80.3 91.0

Children aged 1 or 2 receiving the main vaccinations (%) 43.5 57.6 38.6 26.1 46.1 51.8 59.7 66.1 75.2

Source: NFHS-3.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 54 23/06/2008 14:36:31


55

HealthinequalitiesthusremainextremelylargeinSouthAsia,whethercomparisonisbetweencountriesorbetweensocioeconomicstrata inthepopulationofasinglecountry.Indiaintroducedanewhealthpolicyin2002(33).Amongitsclearlystatedobjectives,basedontheprincipleofequity,isthatofreducingtheinequalitiesinaccesstohealthcareassociatedwithurbanversusruralresidenceorwithdifferencesinthedevelopmentlevelofstatesorintheeconomicstatusofpopulations.However,itwillbesomeyearsbeforeitseffectsbecomevisible.

XI. Age structures: demographic windows of opportunity

Young populations

Medianage,acrude indicatorofagestructure, reveals threesharplycontrastingsituationsinheritedfrompasttrendsinmortalityandfertility(Table24).AcontrastisagainobservedbetweenAfghanistan,wherethefertilitytransitionhashardlystartedandthepopulationisparticularlyyoung(medianage16.4),andSriLanka,wherethetransitioniscompleteandthepopulationismucholder(medianage29.5).Intheothercountries,allofwhichareengagedinthefertilitytransition,medianagesrangefrom20to24.

In2005,allthecountriesofSouthAsiawiththeexceptionofSriLankahadpopulationswithlargeproportionsofyoungpeople.ExceptinSriLanka,wheretheproportionwas24%,theunder-15smakeupoverathirdofthepopulation(Table23).Theproportionofyoungpeopleunder15isaround40%inNepalandreaches47%inAfghanistan.

Table 24. Indicators of age-sex structure in the countries of South Asia, 2005

CountriesMedian age

(years)Under-15s

(%)Over-60s

(%)Sex ratio

(%)

Afghanistan 16.4 47.0 3.7 107.5

Bangladesh 22.2 35.2 5.7 104.9

Bhutan 22.3 33.0 6.9 111.1

India 23.8 33.0 7.5 107.5

Maldives 21.3 34.0 5.6 105.3

Nepal 20.1 39.0 5.8 98.2

Pakistan 20.3 37.2 5.9 106.0

Sri Lanka 29.5 24.2 9.7 97.7


(33)Thepreviousnationalpolicyonhealthdatedfrom1983.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 55 23/06/2008 14:36:31

J. Véron

56

Usingtheproportion–nottheabsolutenumber–ofpeopleover60asthecriterionofpopulationageing,itisclearthattheprocesshasmadelittleimpactsofarinthecountriesoftheregion.OnlyinSriLankaistheproportionofover-60scloseto10%,asaconsequenceofthelongstandingfertilitydecline,whereasitis7.5%inIndiaandbelow7%intheothercountries.

Populationprojectionsto2020showthatSriLankawillseeamarkedageingofitspopulationintheyearsahead,withtheproportionofover-60sexceeding17%bythatyear(AppendixTableA.11).Thenext“oldest”countrywillbeIndia,with10%ofitspopulationover60.Everywhereelse,theover-60swillstillrepresentless–insomecasesmuchless–thanone-tenthofthepopulation.Theproportionofpersonsaged60andoveriscurrentlyverylowinAfghanistan(4%)andisunlikelytochangebetweennowand2020.

ThepopulationsinthecountriesofSouthAsiaarealsodifferentiatedbytheirsexratios.ThelargestmalesurplusesarefoundinBhutan,AfghanistanandIndia;menareintheminorityinNepalandSriLanka,wheretherewere98malesfor100femalesin2005.

ThelargeseximbalanceatbirthaffectingseveralEastandSoutheastAsiancountries,amongthemChina,isnotobservedinthisregionexceptinIndia,andthenonlyinthecountry’snorth-weststates.Wewillreturnlatertothisseximbalancethatreflectsstrongdiscriminationagainstgirlchildreninthesestates.

Age distributions reflect the progress of the demographic transition

Thestageofdemographictransitionreachedbythecountriesoftheregionisillustratedbytheiragestructures(Figures14A-14H).ThefertilitydeclineinSriLankabeganmanyyearsago,asshownbythenarrowerbaseofthepyramidstartingfromthe35-39agegroup.Despitean“echo”effect(34),cohortsizehasfallencontinuouslysince1980-1985.ComparedwithSriLanka,thefertilitytransitionhascomelaterinBhutanandtheMaldives,butcohortsizehasbeenfallinginbothcountriesforthelasttwentyandtenyearsrespectively.ThebaseofthepopulationpyramidforPakistanisstartingtocontract,whilethepyramidsforBangladesh,IndiaandNepalareverysimilar,withasyetnomajordecreaseinnumbersatyoungages.Despiteadeclineinfertility,thenumbersofbirthsarenotyetfalling,becausethepopulationofchildbearingageisstilllarge.Afghanistan,finally,presentsanagestructurecharacteristicofacountrywithhighfertilityandhighmortality.

Between2005and2020,theproportionofpeopleaged15-60,i.e.intheworking-agepopulation,willincreaseinallthecountries(exceptAfghanistan).

(34)In2005,thelargersizeofthepopulationaged20-24relativetothoseaged25-29or30-34isaresultofhighbirthratesaroundtwentyyearsearlier,whentherelativelylargecohortsofwomenreachedchildbearingage.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 56 23/06/2008 14:36:31


57

Figure 14. Population pyramids of the countries of South Asia in 2005

20 10 0

Men

0 10 20

Women

Ined 027 08

C. BHUTAN

0-4

10-14

20-24

40-44

60-64

30-34

50-54

70-74

90-94

80-84

100 +Age

20 10 0

Men

0 10 20

Women

Ined 028 08

D. INDIA

0-4

10-14

20-24

40-44

60-64

30-34

50-54

70-74

90-94

80-84

100 +Age

20 10 0

Men

0 10 20

Women

Ined 025 08

A. AFGHANISTAN

0-4

10-14

20-24

40-44

60-64

30-34

50-54

70-74

90-94

80-84

100 +Age

20 10 0

Men

0 10 20

Women

Ined 026 08

B. BANGLADESH

0-4

10-14

20-24

40-44

60-64

30-34

50-54

70-74

90-94

80-84

100 +Age

20 10 0

Men

0 10 20

Women

Ined 029 08

E. MALDIVES

0-4

10-14

20-24

40-44

60-64

30-34

50-54

70-74

90-94

80-84

100 +Age

20 10 0

Men

0 10 20

Women

Ined 030 08

F. NEPAL

0-4

10-14

20-24

40-44

60-64

30-34

50-54

70-74

90-94

80-84

100 +Age

20 10 0

Men

0 10 20

Women

Ined 031 08

G. PAKISTAN

0-4

10-14

20-24

40-44

60-64

30-34

50-54

70-74

90-94

80-84

100 +Age

20 10 0

Men

0 10 20

%

Women

Ined 032 08

H. SRI LANKA

0-4

10-14

20-24

40-44

60-64

30-34

50-54

70-74

90-94

80-84

100 +Age

%% %

Source: United Nations, 2006a.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 57 23/06/2008 14:36:32

J. Véron

58

Furtherincreasecanbeexpectedevenincountrieswheretheproportionofpeopleaged15-60wasalreadyhighin2005,likeBhutanandtheMaldives(60%).Thisrelativeincreaseintheworking-agepopulation,beforethereductionintheeconomicallyinactiveyoungpopulationiscancelledoutbytheincreaseintheinactiveolderpopulation,constitutesthe“demographicwindow”.Atthispointcountrieshaveanopportunityfordevelopment,sincethedependencyratioisfavourabletowealthcreation,thankstothereducedpublicburdenofeducationcostsfortheyoungandofhealthandpensioncostsforolderpeople.InBhutan,peopleaged15-60willrepresent67%ofthepopulationin2020.Forthecountriesinapositiontobenefit,thedemographicwindowrepresentsanopportunity.Buttheadvantageisapotentialone,andforittoberealized,theworking-agepopulationmustbeemployedinthefullsenseoftheterm,withlowunder-employmentorunemployment.SriLankadiffersfromtheothercountriesinthatitisalreadybenefitingfromthedemographicwindow(theproportionaged15-60iscurrently66%andwillprobablydescendto62%by2020).

XII. A relatively low urban-rural ratio

Moderate urbanization but strong urban growth

InSouthAsia,likeelsewhereintheworld,thecriteriausedforclassifyingpopulationsas“urban”arenotallthesame.ThedefinitionofurbaninIndiacanbeadministrative(localitiespossessingamunicipalcharter,etc.)orbasedonacombinationofcriteria:numberof inhabitants,populationdensity,proportionofmeninnon-agriculturaloccupations.InneighbouringSriLanka,onlypopulationsin“municipalzonesandzoneswithanurbancouncil”areclassifiedasurban(Table25).InPakistan,anurbansettlementisalsodefined

Table 25. Criteria for defining urban populations in four countries of South Asia

Country Definition of “urban”

India Towns and cities: localities possessing a municipal charter, a committee for a municipal zone or designated urban zone or grouped zone (cantonment) or localities with a population of 5,000 or more inhabitants, a population density of 1,000 or more inhabitants per square mile or 400 per sq.km, definite urban characteristics, and with three-quarters of adult males in non-agricultural employment.

Maldives Male (capital)

Pakistan Localities possessing a municipal charter or a municipal committee and grouped zones (cantonments)

Sri Lanka Urban sector: comprising all the municipal zones and zones possessing an urban council.

Source: United Nations (2007b).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 58 23/06/2008 14:36:32


59

inuniquelyadministrativeterms.InNepal,localitiesneeded5,000inhabitantstobeclassifiedasurbaninthe1961censusand9,000insubsequentcensuses.Thecriteria forpopulationsizeanddensity,continuousbuilt-upareaandoccupationalstructurehaveallchangedovertime,andsince1999thedefinitionbasedonpopulationsize,annualincomeandinfrastructurevariesbetweenecologicalzonesaccordingtocomplexrules(UnitedNations,2008)(35).ThedefinitionofurbaninBangladeshissimilartothatinIndiabutmorecomplexsince italso includespublicamenities,access towater,educational level,etc.

ThecountriesofSouthAsiaarestillnotheavilyurbanized(Table26).InPakistan,thecountrywiththeregion’shighestpercentageurbanin2005,only35%ofthepopulationlivedintownsorcities.ThelowestlevelsofurbanizationareobservedinSriLankaandNepal,wherebarely15%oftheinhabitantsareurbandwellers.InIndia,lessthan30%ofthepopulationtodaylivesintownsorcities,whichisthreetimesmorethanin1901andtwicethelevelin1941,butstillasmallproportioncomparedwiththeworldaverage(50%).

Table 26. Percentage urban, 1950-2005, and projections to 2030

Country 1950 1975 2005 2030

Afghanistan 5.8 13.3 22.9 36.2

Bangladesh 4.3 9.8 25.7 41.0

Bhutan 2.1 7.9 31.0 56.2

India 17.0 21.3 28.7 40.6

Maldives 10.6 17.3 33.9 60.7

Nepal 2.7 4.8 15.8 30.6

Pakistan 17.5 26.3 34.9 49.8

Sri Lanka 15.3 19.5 15.1 21.4


Althoughtheproportionofpeoplelivingintownsandcitiesisrisingatamoderatepace,thetotalurbanpopulationinSouthAsiahasgrownsharplyoverfiftyyears.Itnumbered73.7millionin1950and433.2millionin2005,representingnearlyasix-foldincrease(Figure15).Indiaaccountedformuchofthisurbangrowth,sinceofthe433.2millionurbandwellersinSouthAsiain2005,three-quarterslivedinIndia.Thepaceofchangeintheurbanpopulationdiffersbetweencountries,andinsomeinstancesvariesgreatlybetweenperiodswithinthesamecountry.InAfghanistan,inparticular,theurbanpopulationgrewatanannualrateof6%intheperiod2000-2005,buttheratewasnegativeintheperiod1980-1985(36)thenreached8.5%intheyears1990-1995.Forthe

(35)http://esa.un.org/wup/source/country.aspx

(36)Asmentioned,thewarwiththeSovietUnionledtolarge-scaleemigration,withmanypeopletakingrefugeinPakistanorIran.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 59 23/06/2008 14:36:32

J. Véron

60

urbanpopulationofBangladesh,therateiscurrently3.5%,butwasinexcessof10%between1975and1980.InBhutan,therateofurbanpopulationgrowthsince1950hasfluctuatedaroundanannualaverageof5%.TheurbangrowthrateinIndiaclimbedfrom2.6%in1950-1955to3.8%in1970-1975thenslowedtoitspresentlevelof2.3%.LikeBangladesh,theMaldivesexperiencedaperiodofrapidurbangrowth,witharateof10%in1970-1975.Between1970and2000,theurbanpopulationinNepalgrewbyover6%ayearonaverage,whereasinPakistantheratewasbetween4%and4.5%overseveraldecades.AgainthepatternforSriLankaissingular:thegrowthraterosefrom2.8%in1950-1955to4.3%in1965-1970,thenfellbacktobelow1%andiscurrentlyclosetozero(0.15%in2000-2005).

AccordingtoUnitedNationsforecasts,Pakistanwillremainthemosturbanizedcountryintheregionupto2030,withnearlyoneintwoinhabitantslivinginurbanareas.UrbanizationinSriLanka,meanwhile,atslightlyover20%,willstillberemarkablylow.InBangladeshandIndia,40%ofthepopulationwillbeurban.Althoughthislevelmightbeconsideredmoderatein2030,itrepresentsatotalof590millionurban-dwellersinIndiaalone.

Five of the world’s thirteen largest cities are in South Asia

ThecountriesofSouthAsiaareverydifferentinsize,andtheircapitalcitieslikewise.Delhihad15millioninhabitantsin2005,Katmanduwellbelowonemillion,andMale,capitaloftheMaldives,only89,000(Table27).

ThecitywiththemostspectaculargrowthoverthelastfiftyyearsisDhaka,whosepopulationincreasedthirty-fold intheperiod1950-2005.Thecity

Figure 15. The urban population of South Asia and India, 1950-2005

Ined 033 08Urban population (millions)

Year

1950 20051990 20001980 1985 19951970 19751960 19651955

350

100

0

450

250

300

400

200

50

150

500

India

South Asia


02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 60 23/06/2008 14:36:33


61

Tab

le 2

7. P

op

ula

tio

n c

han

ge

in s

elec

ted

cap

ital

an

d la

rges

t ci

ties

bet

wee

n 1

950

and

200

0 an

d f

ore

cast

s fo

r 20

15

Co

un

try

Cit

ies

Pop

ula

tio

n (

in t

ho

usa

nd

s)R

atio

Perc

enta

ge

of

tota

l p

op

ula

tio

n

in 2

005

Perc

enta

ge

of

urb

an

po

pu

lati

on

in

200

519

5019

7520

0020

0520

1520

05/1

950

2005

/197

5

Afg

hani

stan

Kab

ul17

167

41,

963

2,99

44,

666

17.5

4.4

10.0

43.8

Bang

lade

shD

haka

417

2,17

310

,159

12,4

3016

,842

29.8

5.7

8.8

35.0

Bhut

anTh

imph

u3

860

8514

3

Indi

aD

elhi

1,36

94,

426

12,4

4115

,048

18,6

0411

.03.

41.

44.

7

Kol

kata

(C

alcu

tta)

4,51

37,

888

13,0

5814

,277

16,9

803.

21.

81.

34.

5

Mum

bai

(Bom

bay)

2,85

77,

082

16,0

8618

,196

21,8

696.

42.

61.

65.

7

Mal

dive

sM

ale

––

––

––

––

–

Nep

alK

athm

andu

104

180

644

815

1,28

07.

84.

53.

019

.1

Paki

stan

Isla

mab

ad36

107

595

736

1,00

820

.46.

9

Kar

achi

1,04

73,

989

10,0

2011

,608

15,1

5511

.12.

97.

421

.1

Sri L

anka

Col

ombo

400

572

639

652*

701

1.6

1.1

3.4

22.5

* es

timat

e.So

urc

e: U

nite

d N

atio

ns, W

orld

Urb

aniz

atio

n Pr

ospe

cts:

the

20

05 R

evis

ion.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 61 23/06/2008 14:36:33

J. Véron

62

becamethecapitalofthenewlycreatedBangladeshin1971.Between1975and2005,theseven-foldincreaseinthepopulationofIslamabadwasfasterthanthatofDhaka,wherepopulationincreasedsix-fold.ThepopulationsofKabulandKatmandugrewbyafactorof4.4-4.5overthesameperiod.Infiftyyears,thepopulationofDelhihasgrownmorethanten-fold,increasingfrom1.4millionin1950to15millionin2005.

Thedemographicweightofthecapitalcitiesintheirrespectivecountriesalsovaries.Delhiishometolessthan2%ofthepopulationofIndia,whereas10%ofthatofAfghanistanlivesinKabul.TheinhabitantsoftheAfghancapitalrepresent44%ofthatcountry’surbanpopulation,whereasthepopulationofKathmandurepresentslessthan20%ofNepal’surbanpopulationandthatofDelhilessthan5%ofIndia’s.

TheurbanizationprocessissingularinIndiaonaccountofthepopulationsizeanditsrateofgrowthinthetwentiethcentury.Along-termcomparisonwiththeUnitedStateshasshownthatnotonlyisthepercentageurbanlowerinIndiabutitisnotcatchingupwiththeAmericanlevel,eventhoughIndiahasa largerurbanpopulationthantheUnitedStates(Véron,1987).Indiaalreadyhadanumberoflargecitiesattheendofthenineteenthcentury:in1891,744,000peoplelivedinCalcutta,822,000inBombay,453,000inMadrasand415,000inHyderabad(Davis,1951),Inthe2001census,Indiacounted34urbanagglomerationswithoveronemillioninhabitantsandsixwithoverfivemillioninhabitants:Mumbai(formerlyBombay,16.4million),Kolkata(Calcutta,13.2million),Delhi(12.9million),Chennai(formerlyMadras,6.6million),HyderabadandBangalore(eachwith5.7million).

Onagloballevel,of21urbanagglomerationswithover10millioninhabitantsin2005,fiveofthem–notallcapitalcities–wereinSouthAsia:Dhaka,Delhi,Kolkata,MumbaiandKarachi.Thesefiveurbanagglomerationsareamongthe13largestintheworld.

XIII. A lack of data on international migration

ThecountriesofSouthAsiaareemigrationcountries.Threetypesofmigrationcanbeidentified:migrationleadingtopermanentsettlementinEurope,AustraliaandNorthAmerica;labourmigrationtocountriesintheMiddleEast;andseasonalmigration,mostlylocalizedinborderregions,likethatintoIndiafromBangladeshandNepal(IOM,2005).ThelargestmigrationflowsaretotheGulfcountries.Whennovisaisrequiredtoenteraneighbouringcountry–asisthecasebetweenIndiaandNepal,betweenIndiaandBhutanandbetweenBhutanandNepal(Khadria,2005)–cross-bordermigrationisindistinctfrominternalmigration.Whereavisaisrequired,asisthecaseforBangladeshandIndia,aproportionof thismigrationis illegal.This localmigrationinvolvesprimarilythepoorestpopulations,suchasthefarmersfromtheNepalvalleyswhogotonorth-eastIndiaatharvesttime.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 62 23/06/2008 14:36:33


63

Inthelastfewyears,therangeofdestinationcountriesforSouthAsianmigrantshasbroadened(Khadria,2005).Increasingly,migrantsareattractedtoJapan,HongKong,SouthKorea,Malaysia,SingaporeandTaiwan.ExamplesincludeplantationworkersinMalaysia(manyBangladeshis),domesticstaffinSingaporeandconstructionworkersinSouthKorea(Nepaleseinparticular).Migrantsincludelargenumbersofwomen,mainlyinthedomesticservicesector.Highlyqualifiedmigrants,meanwhile,leaveforEurope,NorthAmericaorAustralia.

Afghanistanexperiencedlarge-scalepopulationmovementsduringthewarwiththeSovietUnionbetween1979and1989.Allthreemaintypesofmigration–correspondingtopermanentsettlementinEurope,NorthAmericaorAustralia;labourmigrationtotheMiddleEastandcertainSouth-EastAsiancountries;andcross-bordermoves,suchasmigrationtoIndia–occur inBangladeshthoughtherespectivescaleoftheseflowsisnotknown.PakistanisalsoleavetheircountrytosettleinEurope,NorthAmericaorEastAsia,enteringeitherlegally,orasstudents(someofwhomlaterseektostayon),or,forthepoorest, illegally.SriLankatoo isexperiencing large-scale internationalmigration.PoliticalreasonsarecausingTamilstoleavethecountryandseekpoliticalrefugeestatusintheWest(Etiemble,2004).TheGulfcountriesremainamajordestinationformigrantsfromSriLanka.Womenaccountfor70%ofthismigration,reflectingthehighdemandinthesecountriesforfemaledomesticworkers.

MigrationisagrowingphenomenoninIndia,thoughitsin-depthstudyislimitedessentiallytoKerala.Asurveyfromthelate1990shasbeenusedtoanalyse the impactofmigrationonpopulationagestructure, family life(temporaryseparationofspouses),averageeducational level(throughtheselectivityofmigration),poverty,unemployment,etc.(Zachariahetal.,2003).Itemerges,forexample,thatwomenwithamigranthusbandinaGulfcountryhavehighstatusbecausetheyreceiveremittancesintheirownnamebutareweigheddownbyincreasedresponsibilitiesduetotheirhusband’sabsence,andby loneliness:60%would like theirhusbandtocomehome.Returnmigrationisbecomingmuchmorecommon,raisingtheissueofreintegratingmigrantsintothesocietyoforigin.Fortypercentofreturnmigrantssetuptheirownbusiness,butaproportionofreturneeshavegreatdifficulty inreintegratingKeralasocietyand, thoughstillofworkingage,donotfindemploymentanduse theirsavings tomaintainahighstandardof living(Zachariahetal.,2002;Zachariahetal.,2006).

Theeconomicimportanceofinternationalmigrationforeachcountrycanbemeasuredfromthefinancialtransfersmadebyitscitizensresidentabroad.In2004,migration-relatedtransfersrepresentedavaryingbutinsomecaseslargeproportionofgrossnationalincomeinthecountriesofSouthAsia:12.1%inNepal,8%inSriLanka,5.5%inBangladesh,4.2%inPakistan,3.2%inIndiaand0.4%intheMaldives(UnitedNations,2006c).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 63 23/06/2008 14:36:34

J. Véron

64

Sendingcountriescanalsobereceivingcountries.TheUnitedNationsestimatesthat191millionpeopleworldwidelivedoutsidetheircountryofbirthin2005,representing3%oftheworldpopulation(37)(UnitedNations,2006c).TheSouthAsiancountrywiththelargestnumberof foreign-bornpersonsisIndia,wheretheytotal3.7million(38).Thismigrantstockistheeighthlargestintheworld,thoughitrepresentsamere0.5%ofIndia’stotalpopulation(AppendixTableA.12).Pakistancurrentlyhassome3.3millionforeign-bornresidents,equivalentto2.1%ofthetotalpopulation.Themigrantstockthusdefinedis1millioninBangladesh(0.7%ofthepopulation),819,000inNepal(3%),368,000inSriLanka(1.8%),43,000inAfghanistan(0.1%),10,000inBhutan(0.5%)and3,000intheMaldives(1%).

XIV. Access to education remains unequal

Accesstoeducationplaysalargeroleinthepopulationdynamicsofallcountries,affecting factors suchas thepaceofdemographic transition,contraceptivepracticeorchildhealth.

ThecountriesofSouthAsiapresentcontrastingsituationsintermsofliteracy.Intheearly2000s,literacyamongadultsoverage15wasabove90%inSriLankaand96%intheMaldives(Table28).ThecontrastwithAfghanistan,whereonly28%oftheadultpopulationisliterate,isparticularlysharp.Literacylevelsarearound50%inBangladesh,NepalandPakistanandover60%inIndia.

Overlayingthesedifferencesinliteracylevelsarevaryingdegreesofgenderinequality(Figure16).ThesituationintheMaldivesandSriLankaisoneof

(37)In1960,thenumberofpeoplelivingoutsidetheircountryofbirthwasestimatedat75million,or2.5%oftheworldpopulation.

(38)TheIndiancensusof1991countednearly3.4millionmigrantsoriginatingfromBangladesh,with2.6millionsettledinWestBengal(Nanda,2005).

Table 28. Literacy rates of adults aged 15 and over in the 2000s

Rate (%)

Afghanistan (2000) 28.0

Bangladesh (2001) 47.5

Bhutan –

India (2001) 61.0

Maldives (2000) 96.3

Nepal (2001) 48.6

Pakistan (2005) 49.9

Sri Lanka (2001) 90.7

Source: Unesco (http://unesdoc.unesco.org/).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 64 23/06/2008 14:36:34


65

highequality,withliteracylevelsataround90%formenandwomenalike.InNepalandPakistan,ontheotherhand,inequalityismarkedandthefemaleadultliteracyrateislessthan60%ofthemaleadultrate.ThisformofinequalityisgreaterstillinAfghanistanwherefemaleliteracyratesrepresented29%ofthemaleratein2000.

ThepopulationofIndiahasahighereducationallevelthanneighbouringcountrieslikeBangladeshandPakistan,butinthisdomain,aselsewhere,thecountryhasextremeregionaldisparities(Banthia,2001).In2001,theaverageliteracyrateofthepopulationaged7andoverwas65%,butstoodatover90%inKeralaandbelow48%inBihar.Formen,theaverageliteracyrateis76%andvariesbetweenamaximumof94%inKeralaandaminimumof60%inBihar,whileforwomentheaverageis54%withamaximumof88%inKeralaandaminimumof34%inBihar.

XV. Increasing vulnerability

Insomecountriesoftheregion,violentconflictorextremetensionshavecreatedaclimateof insecuritythat isunfavourabletodevelopmentatthepresenttime.However,increasedvulnerabilityofthepopulationsofSouthAsiaineconomic,socialandecologicaltermsisalsoalegacyofrapidpopulationgrowthinthepast.

Economic and social vulnerability

Severalpopulations areparticularly vulnerable today in economic andsocial terms. In some regions of India, strong discrimination against girl

Figure 16. Literacy rates of men and women aged 15 and over in the 2000s

Ined 034 08100

0

40

20

80

60

Female literacy rates (%)

1000 4020 8060Male literacy rates (%)

Sri Lanka

Afghanistan

Pakistan

Nepal

India

Bangladesh

Maldives

Source: Unesco (http://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 65 23/06/2008 14:36:34

J. Véron

66

childrenisreflectedinsex-selectiveabortionpractices.Resultsfromthe2001Indiancensusshowingahighsexratiointheyoungpopulationrevealedtheextent of discrimination against girl children in the north-west of thecountry(39).InthePunjabandinHaryana,whichcountamongIndia’smostdeveloped states, this discrimination was such that the sex ratio in thepopulationaged0-6reached130boysfor100girlsinsomedistrictsandevenhigher levels in the district of Fatehgarh Sahib (Nanda and Véron, 2004).Women’seducationallevelisrelativelyhighinthePunjab(thefemaleliteracyratewas64%in2001),yetfemalefoetusesarenonethelessabortedinlargenumbers, the result of a traditional boy preference that may have beenrekindledbyfallingbirthrates(40).Inrecentyears,thegovernmenthasmadeefforts to stamp out the practice of sex-selective abortion via informationcampaignsandsanctionsagainstpractitionerswhotellcouplesthesexofanunbornchild,butwithoutmuchapparentsuccess.ForIndiaasawhole,thesex ratio of the 0-6 age group was 108.9in the 2005-2006 NFHS, against107.9inthe2001census.Thesexratiohasnotchangedinurbanareasbuthasriseninruralareas.

Vulnerabilityalsotakesotherforms(41).Vulnerablepopulationsincludechild workers, unemployed adults, and those, particularly at older ages,withoutaccesstoasystemofsocialprotection.AlthoughthedemographicweightofolderpeopleremainslimitedinSouthAsia,theirnumberisrisingand,inIndiaforexample,thequestionofpopulationageingisanemergingconcern (Bose and Shankardass, 2004). The country today has more than80million people over age 60 and by 2016 is likely to have more than110million.Sincehalfofallmenoverage60,andmorethan70%ofwomen,areeconomicallydependentonotherpeople,theireconomicsecurityissettobecomeacrucialissue.

Anotherformofvulnerabilityislinkedtotheproblemofurbanhousingamongthepoorestpopulationsasevidencedbythespontaneoussettlementsandshantytownsthatspringuponcityoutskirts.UN-Habitatestimatesthatover230millionpeople lived inshanty towns inSouthAsia in2001(42).Accordingtothesamesource,shantytown-dwellersnumbered30millioninBangladesh,36millioninPakistanand158millioninIndia.Inadditiontoeconomicandsocialvulnerability,thepopulationsmayalsofaceecologicalvulnerability.

(39)The district-level map of sex ratios in the population aged 0-6 shows this phenomenon tobeverycircumscribed in India (Dysonetal.,2004).Foran in-depthanalysis, see thearticlebyGuilmotointhisissue.

(40)The role played by declining fertility in the emergence of this form of discrimination is amatterfordebate(DasGupta,1987;DasGuptaandBhat,1997;BhatandZavier,2003).ThisformofdiscriminationagainstgirlshasnotaccompaniedfertilitydeclineinSouthernIndia.

(41)Theproblemoffoodsecurityalsoarises(forIndia,seeUNFPA,1997).

(42)UN-Habitat,http://ww2.unhabitat.org/programmes/guo/statistics.asp

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 66 23/06/2008 14:36:35


67

Environmental vulnerability

LivingconditionsforalargeproportionofthepopulationofBangladeshintheGanges-Brahmaputradeltaareparticularlyhazardous.Highpopulationdensitiesmeanthateachepisodeoffloodingproduceslargenumbersofvictims.ThehistoryofnaturaldisastersinBangladeshoverthelasttwohundredyearsrevealsthefullextentofthecountry’sexposuretoecologicalhazards(Table29).Inlate2007,theagriculturalsectorwasagainbadlyhitbyatropicalcyclone,withlossestonearly7millionpeople.

Table 29. Major disasters in Bangladesh over two centuries

Years Event Losses

1769-1776 Great famine of Bengal Nearly one-third reduction in the Bengal population, though impact was lighter in West Bengal

1784-1788 Floods and famine. Brahmaputra River changed its course

Unknown

1873-1874 Famine Unknown

1876 Bakerganj cycloneand tidal wave

Around 400,000 deaths

1884-1885 Famine Unknown

1897 Chittagong cyclone Around 175,000 deaths

1918-1919 Spanish influenza Around 400,000 deaths

1943 Bengal famine Between 2 and 2.5 million deaths

1947 Partition of India Unknown. Total deaths in partition numbered 1 million, but most occurred in the West

1970 Cyclone and tidal wave Between 200,000 and 500,000 deaths

1971 War of Independence Around 500,000 deaths

1974 Famine Official death toll 30,000, but some estimates are much higher (including reference to 500,000 deaths with 80,000 for the Rangpur district alone).

Source: W. Brian Arthur and Geoffrey McNicoll, “An analytical survey of population and development in Bangladesh”, Population and Development Review, 4(1), March 1978, p. 29, cited by Escap (1981).

Inothercountriesoftheregion,suchasIndia,theMaldivesorSriLanka,substantialproportionsofthepopulationareseverelyexposedtorisingwaterlevels.Theearlierperiodofrapidpopulationgrowthinthesecountriesbroughtalargeincreaseinpopulationdensities.InIndia,averagepopulationdensityrosefrom77inhabitantspersq.kmin1901to324in2001;itcurrentlystandsat over 800 inhabitants per sq.km in Kerala and 900in West Bengal. Theresultingpressureonlandhasledtoincreasedsettlementincoastalzones,whicharebarelyabovesealevel.Theconsequencesofthe2004tsunamiwereparticularlydisastrousinSriLanka,intheIndianstatesofTamilNaduandKerala,andintheMaldives,allofwhichhadlargepopulationslivingatsealevel. In India, it left 11,000 persons dead, 5,600 missing and around7,000injured. The worst affected Indian state, Tamil Nadu, alone counted

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 67 23/06/2008 14:36:35

J. Véron

68

8,000dead(43).InSriLanka,thetsunamicaused40,000deathsanddisplaced2.5 million persons. Rising water levels due to climate change threaten agrowing number of people in Bangladesh, India, the Maldives and SriLanka.

Conclusion

Todayhometoapopulationofaround1.6billionpeople,SouthAsiaisaregionofcontrastsinbothitsgeographyanddemography.WhereAfghanistaniscomposedmainlyofmountainsandincludesnumeroushighpeaks,mostofSriLankaisoccupiedbyplains.Itisbetweenthesetwocountriesalsothatthedemographiccontrastsaresharpest.MortalityinAfghanistan,thoughithasfallen,isstillextremelyhigh,sincelifeexpectancyatbirthscarcelyexceeds40years,whereas inSriLankamean lengthof lifewasover70years in2000-2005.AndwhereasdemographictransitionhasnotbeguninAfghanistan,inSriLankaitiscomplete.Oneconsequenceofthesechangesinmortalityandfertility isthatthepopulationofAfghanistanisstillextremelyyoung(medianage16in2005)whilethatofSriLankaismucholder(medianagecloseto30).Theothercountriesoftheregion–Bangladesh,Bhutan,India,theMaldives,NepalandPakistan–are in intermediatepositions foralldemographicindicators.Inallofthemthedemographictransitionisunderway.Mortalityhasfallenappreciablyandlifeexpectancyatbirthis62yearsminimum.Fertilityhasfalleneverywherethoughlargedifferencesremain:womeninBhutanandtheMaldivesproducefewerthanthreechildrenwhereasthefigureisstillfourinPakistan.

Fromademographicpointofview,SouthAsiaisheavilydominatedbyIndia,whoseterritorycontainsmorethantwo-thirdsoftheregion’spopulation.Afterafour-foldincreaseinitspopulationoverahundredyears,Indiasoughttolimitpopulationgrowththroughbirthcontrolprogrammesfromtheearly1950s,andtodaythecountry’sdemographictransitioniswelladvanced.Buttherearelargeregionaldisparities.TheNationalFamilyandHealthSurveyof2005-2006showsthatinfantmortality–average57‰forthecountryasawhole–rangesbystatebetween15‰(KeralaandGoa)and71‰(Chhattisgarh).Onfertility,theaverageforIndiais2.1childrenperwoman,andthevariationisbetween1.8(AndhraPradeshandGoa)and4(Bihar).

In terms of development, the different countries face broadly thesamechallenges:findingemployment for largeworking-agepopulations,reducingpoverty,creatingasystemofsocialprotectionforthepoorandtheold,andendingthevariousformsofdiscriminationagainstwomen.Otherchallengesaremorespecifictoparticularcountries.Bangladesh,PakistanandIndiamustfindwaystosustainthegrowthofurbanagglomerationswithover

(43)DatafromtheAsianDevelopmentBank.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 68 23/06/2008 14:36:35


69

10millioninhabitants,Thesameistrueforaccesstoeducation:inSriLankaandtheMaldivesthisisbarelyanissue–literacylevelsareabove90%–butthequestionofeducationis importantinBangladeshandPakistan(whereliteracyratesareonly48%and50%)andfundamentalinAfghanistan(whereliteracywasonly28%in2000).Thesecountriesalsofacethechallengeofreducinggenderinequalitiesinaccesstoeducation.

By2040,SouthAsiacanexpecttohave2.2billioninhabitants,representinganadditional600millioninhabitantswithrespecttoitspresentpopulation.Immensechallengeswillneedtobeovercomeifthecountriesofthisregionaretoachieveevenamodestdegreeofsustainabledevelopment.

Acknowledgements Theauthorwould liketothankCédricYaëlMathieuforhisvaluableandeffectiveassistanceincompilingthedatabase.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 69 23/06/2008 14:36:35

J. Véron

70

º»

STATISTICAL APPENDIX

Table A.1. Censuses, national fertility and health surveys and other national demographic household surveys in South Asia from 1960 to 2007

Country Censuses DHSOther demographic household surveys

Afghanistan 1979 – 2000, 2003, 2005

Bangladesh 1974, 1981, 1991, 2001 1993/94, 1996-1997, 1999-2000, 2001*, 2004, 2007

1975, 1995, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2006

Bhutan – – 2003, 2004

India 1961, 1971, 1981, 1991, 2001

1992-1993, 1998-1999, 2005-2006

2000, 2001, 2002, 2006

Maldives 1977, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000

– 2001, 2004

Nepal 1961, 1971, 1981, 1991, 2001

1987, 1996, 2001, 2006 1976, 1981, 1986, 2002

Pakistan 1961, 1972, 1981, 1998 1990-1991, 2006 1975, 2002, 2003, 2004

Sri Lanka 1963, 1971, 1981, 2000 1987, 1993**, 2000** 1975, 1985, 1994, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003

* Bangladesh Maternal Health Services and Maternal Mortality Survey 2001.** Surveys posted on the website of the Department of Census and Statistics, Sri Lanka, but not on the Macro International website.Sources: www.measuredhs.com, http://surveynetwork.org

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 70 23/06/2008 14:36:35


71

Tab

le A

.2. L

and

are

a an

d d

ensi

ties

in 2

000,

an

d p

op

ula

tio

n o

f th

e co

un

trie

s o

f So

uth

Asi

a, 1

950-

2040

Co

un

try

His

tory

Lan

d a

rea

(th

ou

san

d

sq. k

m)

Gro

ss

den

sity

(i

nh

ab. p

er

sq.k

m)

Den

sity

per

sq

. km

of

arab

le la

nd

Nu

mb

er o

f in

hab

itan

ts (

in t

ho

usa

nd

s)

Co

lon

izin

g

cou

ntr

yIn

dep

end

ence

in

1950

1970

1990

2000

2010

2040

Afg

hani

stan

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

1919

652

3226

28,

151

11,8

4012

,659

20,7

3730

,389

66,3

74

Bang

lade

shPa

kist

an19

7114

496

81,

725

43,8

5269

,817

113,

049

139,

434

166,

638

238,

600

Bhut

anU

nite

d K

ingd

om19

4947

1239

916

829

854

755

968

490

0

Indi

aU

nite

d K

ingd

om19

473,

287

318

652

371,

857

549,

312

860,

195

1,04

6,23

51,

220,

182

1,59

6,71

9

Mal

dive

sU

nite

d K

ingd

om19

650.

391

6–

8212

121

627

332

347

6

Nep

alU

nite

d K

ingd

om19

2314

716

61,

051

8,64

312

,155

19,1

1424

,419

29,8

9847

,185

Paki

stan

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

1947

796

181

678

36,9

4459

,565

112,

991

144,

360

173,

351

268,

506

Sri L

anka

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

1948

6628

52,

091

7,33

912

,342

17,1

1418

,714

19,5

7619

,671

Sou

rces

: Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Com

mon

Dat

abas

e (h

ttp

://u

nsta

ts.u

n.or

g/u

nsd

/cdb

/) a

nd W

orld

Pop

ulat

ion

Pros

pect

s: T

he 2

00

6 Re

visi

on (h

ttp

://w

ww

.un.

org

/esa

/pop

ulat

ion

/pub

licat

ions

/w

pp20

06

/wpp

200

6.ht

m);

FA

O S

tatis

tica

l Yea

rboo

k, 2

005

-20

06

for

arab

le la

nd; P

ison

(20

07),

“Th

e po

pula

tion

of

the

wor

ld”,

Pop

ulat

ion

& S

ocie

ties,

436

.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 71 23/06/2008 14:36:35

J. Véron

72

Tab

le A

.3. B

irth

rat

e, d

eath

rat

e an

d t

ota

l gro

wth

rat

e in

th

e co

un

trie

s o

f So

uth

Asi

a, 1

950-

2005

Co

un

try

Cru

de

bir

th r

ate

(‰)

Cru

de

dea

th r

ate

(‰)

Mea

n a

nn

ual

gro

wth

rat

e (%

)

1950

- 19

5519

60-

1965

1970

- 19

7519

80-

1985

1990

- 19

9520

00-

2005

1950

- 19

5519

60-

1965

1970

- 19

7519

80-

1985

1990

- 19

9520

00-

2005

1950

- 19

5519

60-

1965

1970

- 19

7519

80-

1985

1990

- 19

9520

00-

2005

Afg

hani

stan

52.1

52.2

51.5

51.1

52.1

49.7

36.7

32.5

27.8

24.1

22.6

21.6

1.54

1.97

2.37

– 2.

467.

323.

79

Bang

lade

sh48

.448

.643

.639

.933

.627

.828

.523

.518

.915

.011

.18.

21.

982.

502.

472.

472.

221.

89

Bhut

an46

.747

.746

.442

.335

.722

.426

.825

.621

.917

.112

.67.

83.

092.

633.

682.

57–

1.53

2.63

Indi

a43

.340

.737

.334

.330

.725

.126

.020

.215

.111

.69.

88.

71.

732.

042.

222.

262.

081.

62

Mal

dive

s45

.240

.940

.541

.736

.622

.227

.320

.815

.911

.88.

96.

51.

772.

012.

462.

992.

781.

57

Nep

al43

.943

.642

.040

.138

.130

.228

.124

.620

.215

.912

.08.

71.

491.

772.

172.

302.

512.

08

Paki

stan

44.5

44.2

42.9

44.1

38.7

27.5

23.1

19.3

15.6

12.9

9.8

7.7

2.15

2.47

2.74

3.63

2.46

1.82

Sri L

anka

39.9

34.3

30.2

25.3

20.4

16.3

11.4

8.9

7.5

6.3

6.5

7.3

2.82

2.46

2.05

1.39

1.10

0.43

Sou

rce

: Uni

ted

Nat

ions

(20

07a)

.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 72 23/06/2008 14:36:36


73

Tab

le A

.4. M

edia

n a

ge

at fi

rst

mar

riag

e (m

en a

nd

wo

men

), p

reva

len

ce o

f p

oly

gyn

y an

d p

rop

ort

ion

of

nev

er-m

arri

ed w

om

en

in t

he

cou

ntr

ies

of

Sou

th A

sia

Co

un

try

Dat

e o

f la

test

D

HS

surv

ey

Med

ian

ag

e at

firs

t

mar

riag

e (y

ears

)A

ge

d

iffe

ren

ce

bet

wee

n

spo

use

s

Perc

enta

ge

of

wo

men

in

po

lyg

amo

us

un

ion

sPe

rcen

tag

e o

f

nev

er-m

arri

ed

wo

men

ag

ed

40-4

9M

enW

om

enag

e 15

-49

age

35-4

4

Afg

hani

stan

–

Bang

lade

sh20

0424

.514

.89.

7

0.

2

Bhut

an–

Indi

a20

05-2

006

23.4

17.2

6.2

0.6

(age

45-

49)

Mal

dive

s–

Nep

al20

0620

.617

.23.

44.

46.

21.

2 (a

ge 4

5-49

)

Paki

stan

1990

-199

1, 2

006*

18

.6

4.5

4.2

0.4

Sri L

anka

1987

22

.4

5.1

* A

naly

sis

in p

rogr

ess.

Sou

rce

: DH

S su

rvey

s.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 73 23/06/2008 14:36:36

J. Véron

74

Tab

le A

.5. T

ota

l fer

tilit

y ra

te a

nd

net

rep

rod

uct

ion

rat

e in

th

e co

un

trie

s o

f So

uth

Asi

a

Co

un

try

Tota

l fer

tilit

y ra

te(a

)N

et r

epro

du

ctio

n r

ate(b

)

1950

- 19

5519

60-

1965

1970

- 19

7519

80-

1985

1990

- 19

9520

00-

2005

1950

- 19

5519

60-

1965

1970

- 19

7519

80-

1985

1990

- 19

9520

00-

2005

Afg

hani

stan

7.70

7.70

7.70

7.80

8.00

7.48

1.62

1.79

2.01

2.23

2.40

2.27

Bang

lade

sh6.

706.

856.

155.

254.

123.

221.

862.

072.

011.

871.

631.

38

Bhut

an6.

676.

676.

676.

425.

392.

911.

751.

832.

022.

192.

071.

25

Indi

a5.

915.

825.

264.

503.

863.

111.

631.

821.

861.

741.

561.

30

Mal

dive

s7.

007.

007.

006.

805.

552.

811.

902.

192.

452.

642.

281.

24

Nep

al6.

066.

065.

795.

515.

003.

681.

601.

741.

831.

931.

941.

55

Paki

stan

6.60

6.60

6.60

6.60

5.80

3.99

1.97

2.16

2.34

2.51

2.37

1.68

Sri L

anka

5.70

5.12

4.12

3.16

2.48

2.02

2.22

2.15

1.80

1.45

1.17

0.96

(a) S

um o

f age

-spe

cific

fert

ility

rate

s ob

serv

ed o

ver a

giv

en p

erio

d. T

he T

FR c

an b

e in

terp

rete

d as

the

aver

age

num

ber o

f chi

ldre

n th

at a

wom

an w

ould

bea

r thr

ough

out h

er re

prod

ucti

ve

life

if sh

e w

ere

to e

xper

ienc

e th

e fe

rtili

ty r

ates

of

the

peri

od a

t ea

ch a

ge. I

t do

es n

ot t

ake

mor

talit

y in

to a

ccou

nt.

(b) A

vera

ge n

umbe

r of

dau

ghte

rs t

hat

a w

oman

wou

ld b

ear

thro

ugho

ut h

er r

epro

duct

ive

life

if sh

e w

ere

to e

xper

ienc

e th

e fe

rtili

ty a

nd m

orta

lity

rate

s of

the

per

iod

at e

ach

age.

Sou

rce

: Uni

ted

Nat

ions

(20

07a)

, Wor

ld P

opul

atio

n Pr

ospe

cts:

The

20

06

Revi

sion

, htt

p:/

/ww

w.u

n.or

g/e

sa/p

opul

atio

n/p

ublic

atio

ns/w

pp20

06

/wpp

200

6.ht

m

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 74 23/06/2008 14:36:36


75

Tab

le A

.6. M

ost

rec

ent

ind

ices

of

leve

l, ti

min

g a

nd

ch

arac

teri

stic

s o

f fe

rtili

ty in

th

e co

un

trie

s o

f So

uth

Asi

a

Co

un

try

Dat

e

of

la

test

av

aila

ble

D

HS

surv

ey

Tota

l fe

rtili

ty

rate

Nu

mb

er

of

ch

ildre

n

at a

ge

40-4

9

Idea

l nu

mb

er

of

ch

ildre

n

at a

ge

25-3

4

Med

ian

ag

e at

fi

rst

bir

th

Perc

enta

ge

o

f ad

ole

scen

t w

om

en w

ho

hav

e w

ho

hav

e b

egu

n

child

bea

rin

g

Perc

enta

ge

o

f fe

rtili

ty

ach

ieve

d

bef

ore

ag

e 25

Inte

rval

b

etw

een

b

irth

s(m

on

ths)

Afg

hani

stan

–

Bang

lade

sh20

043.

004.

202.

317

.632

.754

.039

.3

Bhut

an–

Indi

a20

05-2

006

2.68

3.48

2.4

20.0

55

.831

.1

Mal

dive

s–

Nep

al20

013.

104.

002.

819

.918

.553

.033

.6

Paki

stan

1990

-199

15.

405.

404.

121

.315

.729

.029

.1

Sri L

anka

1987

2.80

2.

924

.0

32.7

Sou

rce

: DH

S su

rvey

s.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 75 23/06/2008 14:36:36

J. Véron

76

Tab

le A

.7. B

reas

tfee

din

g, p

ost

par

tum

sex

ual

ab

stin

ence

an

d c

on

trac

epti

on

in t

he

cou

ntr

ies

of

sou

th A

sia

Co

un

try

Dat

e

of

late

st

avai

lab

le

DH

S su

rvey

Med

ian

d

ura

tio

n

of

bre

astf

eed

ing

(m

on

ths)

Med

ian

d

ura

tio

n

of

po

stp

artu

m

abst

inen

ce

(mo

nth

s)

Co

ntr

acep

tive

pre

vale

nce

(%

)(w

om

en a

ged

15-

49, m

arri

ed o

r in

a u

nio

n)

Perc

enta

ge

o

f m

arri

ed

wo

men

ag

ed 4

0-49

re

mai

nin

g

child

less

All

met

ho

ds

Mo

der

n

met

ho

ds

Co

nd

om

Afg

hani

stan

–

4.

83.

60.

0

Bang

lade

sh20

0428

.82.

058

.147

.34.

31.

5

Bhut

an–

18.8

18.8

0.3

Indi

a20

05-2

006

24.4

2.3

48.2

42.8

3.1

2.2

Mal

dive

s–

42.0

33.0

6.0

Nep

al20

0129

.52.

139

.335

.42.

91.

8

Paki

stan

1990

-199

119

.82.

327

.620

.25.

53.

4

Sri L

anka

1987

22.7

4.2

70.0

49.6

3.7

2.7

Sou

rces

: DH

S su

rvey

s, S

tatc

ompi

ler;

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

, Sta

tisti

cs D

ivis

ion

(htt

p:/

/uns

tats

.un.

org

/uns

d/d

atab

ases

.htm

).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 76 23/06/2008 14:36:36


77

Tab

le A

.8. L

ife

exp

ecta

ncy

an

d in

fan

t m

ort

alit

y in

th

e co

un

trie

s o

f So

uth

Asi

a, 1

950-

2005

Co

un

try

Life

exp

ecta

ncy

(ye

ars)

Infa

nt

mo

rtal

ity

rate

(p

er t

ho

usa

nd

)

1950

- 19

5519

60-

1965

1970

- 19

7519

80-

1985

1990

- 19

9520

00-

2005

1950

- 19

5519

60-

1965

1970

- 19

7519

80-

1985

1990

- 19

9520

00-

2005

Afg

hani

stan

28.8

32.0

36.1

39.9

41.7

42.1

275.

324

5.6

211.

618

3.6

171.

116

8.1

Bang

lade

sh37

.541

.245

.350

.056

.062

.020

0.5

174.

114

8.0

120.

489

.061

.3

Bhut

an36

.137

.741

.847

.954

.563

.518

4.8

174.

114

9.2

117.

187

.552

.7

Indi

a37

.443

.650

.756

.660

.262

.916

5.7

140.

311

6.8

94.7

77.2

62.5

Mal

dive

s38

.945

.251

.457

.161

.065

.618

5.2

151.

812

0.6

93.6

65.1

45.8

Nep

al36

.239

.444

.049

.655

.761

.321

0.9

187.

015

6.1

122.

990

.664

.5

Paki

stan

43.4

47.7

51.9

56.2

60.8

63.6

168.

614

7.7

127.

610

8.0

87.0

75.4

Sri L

anka

57.6

62.2

65.0

68.8

70.4

70.8

76.6

62.6

49.

928

.917

.012

.4

Sou

rce

: Uni

ted

Nat

ions

(20

07a)

, Wor

ld P

opul

atio

n Pr

ospe

cts:

the

20

06

Revi

sion

, htt

p:/

/ww

w.u

n.or

g/e

sa/p

opul

atio

n/p

ublic

atio

ns/w

pp20

06

/wpp

200

6.ht

m

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 77 23/06/2008 14:36:36

J. Véron

78

Tab

le A

.9. C

on

dit

ion

s o

f d

eliv

ery,

mo

rtal

ity

and

hea

lth

of

child

ren

in t

he

cou

ntr

ies

of

Sou

th A

sia

Co

un

try

Pro

bab

ility

of

dyi

ng

(‰

)Pe

rcen

tag

e

of

bir

ths

wit

h a

t le

ast

on

e an

ten

atal

ex

amin

atio

n

Perc

enta

ge

o

f d

eliv

erie

s at

ten

ded

by

ski

lled

hea

lth

p

erso

nn

el

Perc

enta

ge

o

f ch

ildre

n

vacc

inat

ed(a

)

Perc

enta

ge

o

f ch

ildre

n

mal

no

uri

shed

(b)

Neo

nat

alB

elo

w o

ne

year

(200

5)A

ge

0-5

(200

5)

Afg

hani

stan

6016

525

752

(200

3)14

(200

3)

53.6

(199

7)

Bang

lade

sh36

5473

39(1

999-

2000

)13

(200

4)73

.1(2

004)

50.5

(200

4)

Bhut

an30

6575

51(2

005)

47

.7(1

999)

Indi

a39

5674

65(1

998-

1999

)48

(200

6)42

(199

9)51

(199

8-19

99)

Mal

dive

s24

3359

98(2

000)

70(2

001)

31

.9(2

001)

Nep

al32

5688

49(2

001)

19(2

006)

82.8

(200

6)57

.1(2

001)

Paki

stan

5380

100

31(2

005)

35.1

(199

1)41

.5(2

001)

Sri L

anka

812

1497

(200

0)67

.3(1

987)

18.4

(200

0)

(a) C

hild

ren

who

hav

e re

ceiv

ed a

ll va

ccin

es (

BCG

, DPT

, pol

io a

nd m

easl

es).

(b) C

hild

ren

unde

r 5

with

stu

nted

gro

wth

.So

urc

es: U

nite

d N

atio

ns, W

orld

Hea

lth S

tatis

tics

2007

, (ht

tp:/

/ww

w.w

ho.in

t/w

hosi

s/w

host

at20

07) ;

DH

S su

rvey

s.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 78 23/06/2008 14:36:37


79

Table A.10. Maternal mortality and HIV prevalence at ages 15-49 in the countries of South Asia

CountryMaternal mortality rate

in 2000(for 100,000 births)

Prevalence rate of HIV in 2005 in the population

aged 15-49 (%)

Afghanistan 1,900 < 0.1

Bangladesh 380 < 0.1

Bhutan 420 < 0.1

India 540 0.9

Maldives 110 –

Nepal 740 0.5

Pakistan 500 0.1

Sri Lanka 92 < 0.1

Sources: WHO, World Health Report 2005, p. 245 (http://www.who.int); UNAIDS, 2006 Report on the Global AIDS Epidemic, (http://www.unaids.org).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 79 23/06/2008 14:36:37

J. Véron

80

Tab

le A

.11.

Pro

po

rtio

ns

of

the

po

pu

lati

on

ag

ed u

nd

er 1

5 an

d o

ver

60, m

edia

n a

ge,

dep

end

ency

rat

io a

nd

sex

rat

io

in t

he

cou

ntr

ies

of

Sou

th A

sia,

195

0-20

20

Co

un

try

Perc

enta

ge

un

der

15

Perc

enta

ge

60+

Med

ian

ag

eD

epen

den

cy

rati

o in

200

5*

(%)

Sex

rati

o

in 2

005*

(%

) 19

5020

0520

2019

5020

0520

2019

5020

0520

20

Afg

hani

stan

42.6

47.0

45.0

4.5

3.7

3.7

18.6

16.4

17.3

9710

7.5

Bang

lade

sh40

.435

.229

.26.

95.

78.

020

.022

.226

.463

104.

9

Bhut

an43

.833

.024

.04.

36.

99.

118

.022

.329

.760

111.

1

Indi

a37

.533

.026

.75.

47.

510

.221

.323

.828

.161

107.

5

Mal

dive

s33

.134

.029

.08.

25.

67.

324

.721

.327

.561

104.

9

Nep

al38

.439

.032

.66.

65.

87.

121

.120

.123

.974

98.2

Paki

stan

37.9

37.2

31.5

8.2

5.9

7.6

21.2

20.3

25.3

7010

6.0

Sri L

anka

40.9

24.2

20.5

5.5

9.7

17.2

19.5

29.5

35.5

4497

.7

* Ra

tio

of t

he p

opul

atio

n ag

ed u

nder

15

and

over

65

to

the

popu

lati

on a

ged

15-6

5.So

urc

e: U

nite

d N

atio

ns (2

007

a), W

orld

Pop

ulat

ion

Pros

pect

s: T

he 2

00

6 Re

visi

on, h

ttp

://w

ww

.un.

org

/esa

/pop

ulat

ion

/pub

licat

ions

/wpp

200

6/w

pp20

06.

htm

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 80 23/06/2008 14:36:37


81

Table A.12. International migration, refugees and displaced populations in the countries of South Asia

Country

Migrant stock(a) in 2005 Net migration

rate(b) 2000-2005

(%)

Number ofrefugees(c)

in 2005 (thousands)

Population under UNHCR

mandate(d) in 2005

(thousands)

Number (in thousands)

Percentage of total

population

Afghanistan 43 0.1 16.0 0.0 911.7

Bangladesh 1,032 0.7 – 0.5 21.1 271.2

Bhutan 10 1.6* 0 to

India 5,700 0.5 – 0.3 139.3 139.6

Maldives 3 1.0 0.0

Nepal 819 3.0 – 0.8 126.4 538.6

Pakistan 3,254 2.1 – 2.4 1,084.7 1,088.1

Sri Lanka 368 1.8 – 1.6 0.1 354.8

* Figure corrected in accordance with the population size given by the United Nations (2006a)(a) Defined as the number of people born outside the country.(b) Defined as the annual number of immigrants minus the annual number of emigrants between 2000 and 2005 divided by the average total population of the country.(c) Persons with refugee status under the various international conventions currently in force.(d) Total number of foreign refugees, asylum seekers, return refugees and internally displaced individuals under UNHCR protection.Sources: United Nations (2006), International Migration 2006; UNHCR (2006), Statistical Yearbook 2005 (http://www.unhcr.fr/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/statistics/).

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 81 23/06/2008 14:36:37

J. Véron

82

Tab

le A

.13.

Dev

elo

pm

ent

ind

icat

ors

in t

he

cou

ntr

ies

of

Sou

th A

sia

Co

un

try

Perc

enta

ge

urb

an(a

) in

200

4

GN

I per

ca

pit

a

(USD

PPP

)(b)

in 2

004

Perc

enta

ge

of

illit

erat

es

aged

15

and

o

ver

in 2

004

Net

rat

e

of

pri

mar

y sc

ho

ol

enro

lmen

t

in 2

004

Hu

man

dev

elo

pm

ent

ind

ex(c

)

Hu

man

p

ove

rty

in

dex

(H

PI-1

)(d)

Gen

der

- re

late

d

dev

elo

pm

ent

ind

ex(e

)19

8020

04W

orl

d

ran

kin

g

2004

Afg

hani

stan

(f)

– –

– –

– –

––

–

Bang

lade

sh24

.71,

870

58.4

(g)

940.

366

0.53

013

744

.20.

524

Bhut

an10

.8*

1,96

9 –

– –

0.53

813

539

.0–

Indi

a28

.53,

139

39.0

900.

439

0.61

112

631

.30.

591

Mal

dive

s29

.2 –

3.7

90 –

0.73

998

16.9

–

Nep

al15

.31,

490

51.4

780.

336

0.52

713

838

.10.

513

Paki

stan

34.5

2,22

550

.166

0.38

80.

539

134

36.3

0.51

3

Sri L

anka

15.2

4,39

09.

397

0.65

30.

755

93

17.7

0.74

9

*The

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

(20

08

) giv

e a

perc

enta

ge u

rban

of

31.0

% f

or 2

005

.(a

) Uni

ted

Nat

ions

cal

cula

tion

s ba

sed

on n

atio

nal d

efini

tion

s.(b

) Per

cap

ita

gros

s na

tion

al in

com

e ca

lcul

ated

by

the

Wor

ld B

ank

in t

erm

s of

pur

chas

ing

pow

er p

arit

y (P

PP).

(c) C

ompo

site

inde

x m

easu

ring

hum

an d

evel

opm

ent,

incl

udin

g lif

e ex

pect

ancy

, ad

ult

liter

acy

rate

s, s

choo

l enr

olm

ent

rati

os a

nd p

er c

apit

a G

DP.

The

clo

ser

it is

to

1, t

he b

ette

r th

e si

tuat

ion.

(d) N

ot d

ated

. Com

posi

te in

dex

mea

surin

g de

priv

atio

ns in

hea

lth, e

duca

tion

and

sta

ndar

d of

livi

ng.T

he c

lose

r it

is t

o 0,

the

bet

ter

the

situ

atio

n.(e

) Inde

x ba

sed

on t

he s

ame

crite

ria a

nd t

ypes

of

mea

sure

as

the

HD

I, bu

t re

flect

ing

ineq

ualit

ies

betw

een

men

and

wom

en.

(f) U

ND

P ha

s no

t ca

lcul

ated

indi

ces

for

this

cou

ntry

.(g

) In 2

003

.So

urc

es: U

ND

P (2

00

6),

Hum

an D

evel

opm

ent

Repo

rt 2

00

6, (

http

://h

dr.u

ndp.

org

) ; U

nite

d N

atio

ns, U

Nst

at.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 82 23/06/2008 14:36:37


83

Tab

le A

.14.

Sch

oo

l en

rolm

ent

and

ad

ult

lite

racy

by

sex

in t

he

cou

ntr

ies

of

Sou

th A

sia

Co

un

try

Lite

racy

rat

e at

ag

e 15

an

d o

ver

(2

000-

2004

)N

et p

rim

ary

sch

oo

l en

rolm

ent

rati

o

(sch

oo

l yea

r en

din

g in

200

4)

Men

Wo

men

Ove

rall

F/M

rat

ioM

ale

Fem

ale

Ove

rall

F/M

(%

)

Afg

hani

stan

4313

280.

30 –

– –

–

Bang

lade

sh52

3343

0.63

9396

941.

03

Bhut

an–

––

––

––

–

Indi

a73

4861

0.66

9287

900.

94

Mal

dive

s96

9696

1.00

8990

901.

01

Nep

al63

3549

0.56

8474

790.

87

Paki

stan

6336

500.

5776

5666

0.73

Sri L

anka

9289

910.

97–

–98

–

Sou

rce

: Une

sco

(20

07),

EFA

Glo

bal M

onito

ring

Repo

rt.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 83 23/06/2008 14:36:37

J. Véron

84

Tab

le A

.15.

Ind

icat

ors

of

nu

pti

alit

y, f

erti

lity

and

sex

pre

fere

nce

in In

dia

, 199

8-19

99

Med

ian

ag

e

at fi

rst

mar

riag

e (y

ears

)

Tota

l fe

rtili

ty

rate

Med

ian

d

ura

tio

n

of

bre

ast-

fe

edin

g

(mo

nth

s)

Perc

enta

ge

of

child

ren

va

ccin

ated

Inte

rval

b

etw

een

b

irth

s(m

on

ths)

Idea

l n

um

ber

o

f ch

ildre

n

Pref

er t

o

hav

e m

ore

b

oys

th

an

gir

ls (

%)

Pref

er t

o

hav

e m

ore

g

irls

th

an

bo

ys (

%)

Perc

enta

ge

of

bir

ths

wit

h a

t

leas

t o

ne

ante

nat

al

exam

inat

ion

No

rth

Del

hi19

.02.

422

.669

.833

.62.

423

.12.

683

.5

Har

yana

16.9

2.9

24.3

62.7

30.0

2.5

37.5

0.5

58.1

Him

acha

l Pra

desh

18.6

2.1

24.1

83.4

29.4

2.2

25.9

0.6

86.8

Jam

mu

and

Kas

hmir

18.2

2.7

29.5

56.7

32.5

2.7

38.0

2.7

83.2

Penj

ab20

.02.

221

.272

.128

.02.

329

.10.

474

.0

Raja

stha

n15

.13.

825

.517

.329

.52.

847

.51.

347

.5

Cen

tre

Mad

hya

Prad

esh

14.7

3.3

36.0

22.4

30.2

2.9

42.5

2.9

61.0

Utt

ar P

rade

sh15

.04.

025

.821

.230

.43.

153

.31.

434

.6

East

Biha

r14

.93.

536

.011

.032

.33.

347

.92.

136

.3

Oris

sa17

.52.

536

.043

.732

.92.

737

.62.

179

.5

Wes

t Be

ngal

16.8

2.3

36.0

43.8

33.6

2.4

20.7

3.4

90.0

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 84 23/06/2008 14:36:38


85

Tab

le A

.15

(co

nt’

d).

Ind

icat

ors

of

nu

pti

alit

y, f

erti

lity

and

sex

pre

fere

nce

in In

dia

, 199

8-19

99

Med

ian

ag

e

at fi

rst

mar

riag

e (y

ears

)

Tota

l fe

rtili

ty

rate

Med

ian

d

ura

tio

n

of

bre

ast-

fe

edin

g

(mo

nth

s)

Perc

enta

ge

of

child

ren

va

ccin

ated

Inte

rval

b

etw

een

b

irth

s(m

on

ths)

Idea

l n

um

ber

o

f ch

ildre

n

Pref

er t

o

hav

e m

ore

b

oys

th

an

gir

ls (

%)

Pref

er t

o

hav

e m

ore

g

irls

th

an

bo

ys (

%)

Perc

enta

ge

of

bir

ths

wit

h a

t

leas

t o

ne

ante

nat

al

exam

inat

ion

No

rth

-eas

t

Aru

nach

al P

rade

sh18

.72.

530

.820

.529

.93.

241

.92.

561

.6

Ass

am18

.12.

336

.017

.030

.62.

938

.22.

960

.1

Man

ipur

21.7

3.0

29.3

42.3

31.8

3.6

36.5

4.8

80.2

Meg

hala

ya19

.14.

622

.614

.328

.54.

720

.916

.953

.6

Miz

oram

22.0

2.9

21.8

59.6

28.4

4.0

26.0

19.0

91.8

Nag

alan

d20

.13.

823

.114

.127

.54.

032

.76.

360

.4

Sikk

im19

.82.

827

.347

.432

.62.

222

.42.

169

.9

Wes

t

Goa

23.2

1.8

23.3

82.6

34.8

2.3

17.0

5.1

99.0

Guj

arat

17.6

2.7

22.0

53.0

29.0

2.5

33.2

1.8

86.4

Mah

aras

htra

16.4

2.5

23.8

78.4

29.0

2.3

27.1

1.9

90.4

Sou

th

And

hra

Prad

esh

15.1

2.3

25.0

58.7

31.1

2.4

19.8

2.7

92.7

Kar

nata

ka16

.82.

120

.060

.029

.72.

213

.01.

986

.3

Ker

ala

20.2

2.0

24.5

79.7

38.1

2.5

14.6

5.2

98.8

Tam

il N

adu

18.7

2.2

16.1

88.8

30.5

2.0

9.6

1.9

98.5

Ind

ia16

.42.

925

.442

.030

.82.

733

.22.

265

.4

Sou

rce

: NFH

S-2,

199

8-1

999.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 85 23/06/2008 14:36:38

J. Véron

86

º»

RefeRences

Banthia J.K., 2001, Census of India 2001, Provisional Population Totals, Paper 1 of 2001, Delhi.Bista D.B., 1977, “Patterns of Migration in Nepal”, Colloque international du CNRS 268. 1976,

Paris, CNRS, pp. 397-399.Bose a., shanKarDass M.K., 2004, Growing Old in India, Voices Reveal, Statistics Speak,

B. R. Publishing Corporation, Delhi.Census of inDia, 2001, Provisional Population Totals, Paper 1 of 2001, Series 1 India, Delhi.CiCreD, 1974a, The Population of Pakistan, Cicred Series, Paris.CiCreD, 1974b, The Population of Sri Lanka, Cicred Series, Paris.Das Gupta M., 1987, “Selective discrimination against females in rural Punjab”, Population and

Development Review, 13(1), pp. 77-100.Das Gupta M., Mari Bhat, p.n. M, 1997, “Fertility decline and increased manifestation of sex

bias in India”, Population Studies, 51(3), pp. 307-315.Davis K., 1951, The Population of India and Pakistan, Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University

Press.Dyson t., Cassen r., visaria L., 2004, Twenty-First Century India. Population, Economy, Human

Development, and the Environment, Oxford University Press.esCap, 1981, Population of Bangladesh, Country Monograph Series No. 8, United Nations,

New York, 1981.esCap, 1982, Population of India, Country Monograph Series No. 10, United Nations, New York,

1982.etieMBLe a., 2004, “Les Tamouls du Sri Lanka en France. L’emprise du politique”, Revue française

des Affaires sociales, 2, pp. 145-164.GanDotra M.M., retherforD r.D., arwin p., Luther n.y., vinoD K.M., 1998,

“Fertility in India”, National Family Health Survey Subject Reports, 9, May, IIPS Bombay and East-West Center, Honolulu.

GoyaL r.p., 1988, Marriage Age in India, B.R. Publishing Corporation, Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi.

GuiLMoto C.Z., raJan i.s., 1998, “Regional Heterogeneity and fertility Behaviour in India”, Working Paper no. 290, Centre for Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram.

GuiLMoto C.Z., raJan i.s., 2001, “Geographic Patterns of fertility Change”, in Srinivasan K. and Vlassoff M. (eds), Population-Development Nexus in India. Challenges for the New Millennium, Tata McGraw Hill, New Delhi, pp. 88-109.

GuiLMoto C.Z., raJan i.s., (eds), 2005, Fertility Transition in South India, Sage, New Delhi.GuZMán J.M., roDriGueZ J., MartíneZ J., Contreras J.M., GonZáLeZ, 2006, “La

démographie de l’Amérique latine et de la Caraïbe depuis 1950”, Population, 61(4-5), 623-734.internationaL institute for popuLation sCienCes (iips), 1995, National Family Health

Survey (MCH and Family Planning). India 1992-93. Bombay: IIPS.internationaL institute for popuLation sCienCes (iips) anD orC MaCro, 2000,

National Family Health Survey (NFHS-2), 1998-99, India, Mumbai, Bombay, IIPS.internationaL institute for popuLation sCienCes (iips) anD MaCro internationaL.

2007, National Family Health Survey (NFHS-3), 2005-06, India, Volume I., Mumbai, IIPS.ioM, 2005, World Migration. Costs and Benefits of International Migration, IOM, Geneva.KhaDria B., 2005, “Migration in South and South-West Asia”, Global Commission on

International Migration.Mari Bhat p.n. M., preston s., Dyson t., 1984, Vital Rates in India, 1961-1981, Committee

on Population and Development. Report No 24, National Academy Press, Washington.Mari Bhat p.n., 1989, “Mortality and Fertility in India, 1881-1961: A Reassessment”, in India’s

Historical Demography. Studies in Famine, Disease and Society, Dyson T. (ed.), Curzon Press, The Riverdale Company.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 86 23/06/2008 14:36:38


87

Mari Bhat p.n., raJan i.s., 1997, “Demographic Transition Since Independence”, in Kerala’s Demographic Transition, K.C. Zachariah and Rajan I.S., Eds, Sage, New Delhi, pp. 33-78.

Mari Bhat p.n., Zavier a.J., 2003, “Fertility Decline and Gender Bias in Northern India”, Demography, 40(4), pp. 637-657.

naïr p.s., véron J., 2002, “L’Inde: un milliard d’habitants en 2001”, in La Population du monde, Géants démographiques et défis internationaux, Les Cahiers de l’Ined 149, pp. 227-243.

nanDa a.K., véron J., 2004, “Child Sex Ratio Imbalances, Fertility Behaviour and Development in India: Recent Evidence from Haryana and Punjab”, Indian Social Science Review, Indian Council of Social Science Research, New Delhi, pp. 101-134.

nanDa a.K., 2005, “Population Movement from Bangladesh to India: What do the Census Data of 1981 and 1991 Reveal?”, India-Bangladesh. Strengthening the Partnership, CRRID, Chandigarh, pp. 85-128.

offiCe of reGistrar GeneraL & Census CoMMissioner, 2006, Census of India. Population Projections for India and States 2001-2026, Revised December 2006, Report of the technical group on population projections constituted by the National Commission on Population, New Delhi.

pison G., 2007, “The population of the world (2007)”, Population & Societies, 436.raJan i.s., véron J., 2006, “La politique de population de l’Inde face à l’inertie des évolutions

démographiques”, in Démographie : analyse et synthèse. Tome VII. Histoire des idées et politiques de population, Paris, INED, pp. 595-623.

sharMa o.p., retherforD r.D., 1990, Effect of Female Literacy on Fertility in India, Census of India 1981, New Delhi.

srinivasan K., 1995, Regulating Reproduction in India’s Population. Efforts. Results and Recommendations. Sage Publications. New Delhi.

taButin D., sChouMaKer B., 2004, “The demography of sub-Saharan Africa from the 1950s to the 2000s. A survey of changes and a statistical assessment”, Population, English Edition 59(3-4), 457-556.

taButin D., sChouMaKer B., 2005, “The demography of the Arab world and the Middle East from the 1950s to the 2000s. A survey of changes and a statistical assessment”, Population, English Edition, 60(5-6), 505-616.

unaiDs anD who, 2007, 2007, AIDS epidemic update (http://data.unaids.org/pub/EPISlides/2007/2007_epiupdate_en.pdf)

unfpa, 1997, India. Towards population and Development Goals, Oxford University Press, Delhi.uniteD nations, 2005, World Contraceptive Use 2005

(http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/contraceptive2005/WCU2005.htm)uniteD nations, 2006a, World Population Prospects, United Nations, New York.uniteD nations, 2006b, World Mortality Report 2005, United Nations, New York.uniteD nations, 2006c, International Migration 2006, United Nations, New York.uniteD nations, 2007a, World Population Prospects. The 2006 Revision. Highlights. New York,

United Nations. http://esa.un.org/unpp/uniteD nations, 2007b, Demographic Yearbook 2004, United Nations, New York.uniteD nations, 2008, World Urbanization Prospects. The 2007 Revision Population Database

(.http://esa.un.org/unpp/)un-haBitat. United Nations Human Settlements Programme

http://ww2.unhabitat.org/programmes/guo/documents/Table1.pdfunDp, 2006, Human Development Report 2006.véron J., 1987, “L’urbanisation indienne (1901-1981)”, Population 42(3), pp. 485-502.véron J., 1997, “La transition démographique en Inde”, Espace, Populations, Sociétés, 2-3.

pp. 135-144.véron J., naïr p.s., 2000, “The demographic transition in India: How to explain the north-

south divide?”, Paper presented at the conference of the Population Association of America (PAA), Los Angeles, 19 p.

visaria p., 1995, “Demographic transition and policy responses in India”, Demography India. 24(1), pp. 1-12.

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 87 23/06/2008 14:36:38

J. Véron

88

visaria L., visaria p., 1995, “India’s population in transition”, Population Bulletin, PRB, 50(3), October, Washington.

who, 2007, World Health Statistics 2007, Geneva http://www.who.int/whosis/whostat2007.pdf

ZaChariah K.C., suLeKa pateL, 1984, “Determinants of fertility decline in India, an analysis”, World Bank staff working papers, 699, Population and Development Series, Number 24, The World Bank, Washington.

ZaChariah K.C., raJan. i.s., sarMa p.s., navaneethaM K., Gopinathan nair p.s., Misra u.s., 1994, Demographic Transition in Kerala in the 1980s, Centre for Development Studies Monograph Series, Thiruvananthapuram.

ZaChariah K.C., Kannan K.p., raJan i.s., 2002, Kerala’s Gulf Connection. CDS Studies on International Labour Migration from Kerala State in India, Centre for Development Studies Thiruvananthapuram.

ZaChariah K.C., Mathew raJan i.s., 2003, Dynamics of Migration in Kerala. Dimensions, Differentials and Consequences, Orient Longman, New Delhi.

ZaChariah K.C., nair p.r., Gopinathan raJan i.s., 2006, Return Emigrants in Kerala. Welfare, Rehabilitation and Development, IDPAD Manohar.

unesCo, http://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=210

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 88 23/06/2008 14:36:38


89

JaCques Véron • The Demography of SouTh aSia from The 1950S To The 2000S. a Summary of ChangeS anD a STaTiSTiCal aSSeSSmenT

The countries of South Asia (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka) cover less than 4% of the Earth’s surface, but their combined population of some 1.6 billion inhabitants in 2007 represents nearly a quarter of the world total. India, the largest country in the region, alone has 1.17 billion inhabitants. This chronicle charts the main demographic trends since the 1950s, which are explained in part by the countries’ diverse levels of development. Their demographic transitions also exhibit broad diversity. There is no single transition model specific to the region, just as there is no single transition in India, as the comparison of its states makes clear. Except in Sri Lanka, where the process is complete, the fertility transition is ongoing, and the mortality transition is in general very advanced. The potential for demographic growth remains high in South Asia, and the United Nations expects the region’s population to grow by 600 million inhabitants up to 2040. The future course of demographic change has major implications for development, since most of the countries need to reduce poverty and raise educational levels while at the same time coping with rapid urban growth and addressing environmental issues.

JaCques Véron • la Démographie De l’aSie Du SuD DeS annéeS 1950 aux annéeS 2000. SynThèSe DeS ChangemenTS eT bilan STaTiSTique

Avec quelque 1,6 milliard d’habitants en 2007, l’Asie du Sud (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhoutan, Inde, Maldives, Népal, Pakistan et Sri Lanka) rassemble sur moins de 4 % de la superficie totale de la terre près du quart de la population mondiale et l’Inde, plus grand pays de cette région, compte à elle seule 1,17 milliard d’habitants. Cette chronique présente l’évolution, depuis les années 1950, des principaux indicateurs démographiques, qui s’explique en partie par le niveau de développement des différents pays. Les transitions démographiques apparaissent diversifiées : il n’existe pas un modèle de transition qui serait propre à la région, pas plus qu’il n’existe un modèle indien de transition comme le montrent, pour ce pays, les comparaisons entre États. À l’exclusion du Sri Lanka où elle est achevée, la transition de la fécondité est toujours en cours alors que celle de la mortalité est généralement bien avancée. Le potentiel de croissance démographique de l’Asie du Sud reste très élevé puisque, selon les Nations unies, la population de cette région devrait s’accroître de 600 millions d’habitants d’ici 2040. Les évolutions démographiques futures constituent un enjeu majeur de développement, puisque la plupart des pays doivent réduire la pauvreté, améliorer les niveaux d’instruction, gérer une forte croissance urbaine et mieux protéger l’environnement.

JaCques Véron • la Demografía De aSia Del Sur De loS añoS 1950 a loS añoS 2000. SínTeSiS De loS CambioS y balanCe eSTaDíSTiCo

Con cerca de 1 600 millones de habitantes en 2007, Asia del Sur (Afganistán, Bangladesh, Bhután, India, Maldivas, Nepal, Pakistán y Sri Lanka) reúne en menos del 4% de la superficie total de la tierra cerca de la cuarta parte de la población mundial y la India, país más grande de esta región, cuenta, éste sólo, con 1 170 millones de habitantes. Esta crónica presenta la evolución, desde los años 1950, de los principales indicadores demográficos, que se explica en parte por el nivel de desarrollo de los diferentes países. Las transiciones demográficas aparecen diversificadas. En efecto, no existe un modelo de transición específico de la región, ni tampoco existe un modelo indio de transición como lo muestran, para este país, las comparaciones entre Estados. Exceptuando a Sri Lanka en donde se encuentra acabada, la transición de la fecundidad está siempre en curso mientras que la de la mortalidad está generalmente bien avanzada. El potencial de crecimiento demográfico de Asia del Sur sigue siendo muy elevado puesto que, según las Naciones unidas, la población de esta región debería aumentar de 600 millones de habitantes de ahora a 2040. Las evoluciones demográficas futuras constituyen un reto mayor de desarrollo puesto que la mayoría de países deben reducir la pobreza, mejorar los niveles de instrucción, manejar un fuerte crecimiento urbano y proteger mejor el medio ambiente.

Jacques véron, Institut national d’études démographiques, 133 boulevard Davout, 75980 ParisCedex20,France,tel:33(0)156062176,e-mail:[email protected]

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 89 23/06/2008 14:36:39

02_INE_Pop0108_007_090.indd 90 23/06/2008 14:36:39

The Demography of South Asia from the 1950s to the 2000s

Documents

Transcript of The Demography of South Asia from the 1950s to the 2000s