Tuesday 9 April 2019

Demography and Democracy in India


Dr. Devendra Kothari
Population and Development Analyst
Forum for Population Action

Is emerging demography subverting India’s democracy?

Demography encompasses the study of the size, structure, and distribution of population in terms of spatial or temporal changes in response to natural increase (birth - death) and net-migration (in-migration - out-migration). India is the seventh largest country by area and with more than 1.35 billion people; it is the second most populous country as well as the most populous democracy in the world. The UN Population Division expects that in the year 2030 India's population will surpass the population of China. At that time, India is expected to have a population of more than 1476 million while China’s population   is forecast to be at its peak of 1453 million and will begin to drop in subsequent years. Based on the analysis of recent data, the author, however, came to the conclusion that India will overtake China in the next 3-5 years that is before 2024.

During 1971–2011, the population India has more than doubled. It increased from 548 million 1971 to 1210 million in 2011 – an increase of 662 million in forty years. While India’s population growth rate has been declining over the years, the overall population will continue to grow as more than 50 per cent of the population is in the reproductive age group (15-49). India is expected to become the first political entity in the history of mankind to be home to more than 1.5 billion people by 2031, and its population is set to reach 1.7 billion by 2051.[1]  

There is a huge North-South divide emerging in the demographic map  of India. Out of the total population increase of 662 million between 1971 and 2011, 254 million were added by the Four Large North Indian (FLNI) States of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, nearly 39 percent of India’s demographic growth. In contrast, the contribution of the Four South Indian (FSI) States of Andhra Pradesh (including Telangana), Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu was to 117 million – 18 percent of the total demographic growth of the country. Further, out of total expected population increase of 312 million between 2011and 2031, 249 million will likely to be added by the FLNI States that is nearly 80 percent of total expected increase. On the other hand, only 26 million or 8 per cent of the total increase is anticipated to occur in the FSI States.

This is mainly due to the population stabilization efforts made by the FSI States as compared to the FLNI states. The Total Fertility Rate (TFR) which signifies the average number of children per woman during her reproductive period should have been 2.1 if goal for 2010 set out in the National Population Policy 2000 had been achieved. The Four South Indian States and some other states have achieved this on or before the 2010. We are a very long way from reaching that goal in the FNI where about 40 per cent of the population lives. At the current rate of decline, it will take many decades to achieve the TFR of 2.1 (Table 1).  Special measures are vitally necessary to reduce the fertility in these states.

Table 1 Trend in number of children per woman, selected states of India
State
Number of children per woman (Total Fertility Rate)

1981
2011
2016
2031-36*
Bihar
5.7
3.6
3.3
2.8
Madhya Pradesh
5.2
3.1
2.8
2.3
Rajasthan
5.2
3.0
2.7
2.5
Uttar Pradesh
5.8
3.4
3.1
2.6
INDIA
4.5
2.4
2.3
2.2
Andhra Pradesh
(including Telangana)
4.0
1.8
1.7
NA
Karnataka
3.6
1.9
1.8
NA
Kerala
2.8
1.8
1.8
NA
Tamil Nadu
3.4
1.7
1.6
NA
Based on data obtained from:  Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India . * Projected figures, The Future Population of India, PFI, New Delhi and PRB, Washington DC.

The emerging demographic scenario has very serious consequences not only on sustainable development both economic and social, but also on the functioning of democracy. Democracy is a system of government that allows the citizens to cast vote and elect a government of their choice. India became a democratic state after its independence from the British rule in 1947.  

Voting is very important in a democratic nation because it provides people an opportunity to voice their opinion and vote for what they believe in, it holds elected officials accountable for their behavior while in office, and it prevents a minority from dictating the policies of a majority.  Every Indian citizen, above 18 years of age, can exercise the right to vote in India. There is no discrimination based on a person’s caste, creed, religion, gender or education when it comes to providing the right to vote.

Article 81 of India’s Constitution laid down that every state (and Union territory) will be allotted seats in the Lok Sabha in such a manner that the ratio of population to seats should be as equal as possible across states. The Lok Sabha, the lower house of the Parliament of India, is made up of the elected Members of Parliament (MPs). Each MP represents a single geographic constituency. The maximum strength of the House allotted by the Constitution of India is 552. The Constitution gave the provision to regulate the number of representatives to the Lok Sabha. So it decreased the number of representatives from 20 to 13 from Union Territories. So currently the strength of Lok Sabha is 545 (530 from States, 13 from Union Territories and 2 Anglo Indians to be nominated by the President of India).  

The 42nd amendment Act, adopted by the Parliament in 1976, decreed that the population to be taken into consideration for the next 25 years would be the number in the 1971 census. The rationale was that family planning was a national imperative and states would have little incentive to pursue it if success meant their share of political power would go down. The freeze on reapportioning seats between states and UTs was further extended by the 84th amendment Act in 2001 till 2026. 

At the time of the apportioning of seats based on the 1971 census, all big states had a Lok Sabha MP representing roughly 1 million to about 1.05 million, hardly a huge disparity, as shown in Table 2.  With the seats having remained unchanged but population growth having varied widely, today (based on the projected 2021 mid-year population) the average MP in Rajasthan  would represent over 3.3 million while the one in Tamil Nadu or Kerala represents less than 1.9 million (Table 2). In effect, therefore, the voter in Rajasthan has a lesser say in who runs India than the one in Tamil Nadu. MPs from smaller states and UTs, of course, represent even fewer people, but that has always been the case and is inevitable since even the tiniest UT cannot have less than one MP. The situation will further deteriorate in the coming years, as population of Four Large North Indian States jumps.

 Table 2 Trend in average number of persons per Lok Sabha seat by selected States
State
No. of

seats
Average Number of persons/Lok Sabha seat (in million)
1971
2001
2011
2021*
2031*
Bihar
40
1.05
2.07
2.60
3.06
3.62
Madhya Pradesh
29
1.03
2.08
2.51
2.88
3.26
Rajasthan
25
1.03
2.26
2.74
3.33
3.88
Uttar Pradesh
80
1.05
2.08
2.50
3.05
3.55
INDIA
543
1.01
1.89
2.22
2.52
2.80
Andhra Pradesh (including Telangana)
42
1.03
1.80
20.2
2.14
2.32
Karnataka
28
1.05
1.88
2.18
2.34
2.50
Kerala
20
1.06
1.59
17.0
1.85
1.91
Tamil Nadu
39
1.05
1.59
16.5
1.81
1.87
Based on data obtained from: Census of India and Election Commission of India. * Projected figures, The Future Population of India, PFI, New Delhi and PRB, Washington DC.

This sort of unbalanced or brainsick voting representation, as seen in the Rajasthan,   has created many distortions in the democracy. For example, the caste politics has become an integral part of elections especially in the FLNI States. Political parties select their candidates on the basis of caste composition in the constituency. The voting in elections and mobilization of political support from top to bottom moves on the caste lines. Political bargaining is also done on the caste lines. In 1971, prospective MPs used to take help from other castes to win the election; now due to increased population of their own castes, they, generally, do not need support of other castes.  And this is a regretful development in the functioning of democracy  in India in the last couple of decades. 

Further, there will be a huge North-South divide in India’s democracy, if we do not redistribute the seats in Lok Sabha as per the latest census figures. In that Case, the voice of the populous FLNI States is less valued than that of the FSI States. Between them, the four southern states of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala account for just 19 percent of the estimated population in 2021, but get 129 or 24 per cent of Lok Sabha seats (Table 3). On the other hand, the FLNI States of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, the most populous Hindi states, account for 39 percent of the population, but get only 174 seats (32% of total seats). Kerala is smaller than Jharkhand (35.4 million versus 37.3) and only slightly smaller than Assam (34.6) in terms of population in 2018, but gets 20 Lok Sabha seats while Jharkhand and Assam get a paltry 14 each.

Table 3 Emerging North-South Demographic & Democracy Divide
Item
India
Four North Indian  States 
Four South Indian  States
Lok Sabha Seats 

seats
% of total
Seats
% of total

543
174
32.0
129
23.8
Total Population
Year
population (in million
Population
( in million)
% of  population
 population
(in million)
% of total population
1971
548.2
181.4
33.0
135.3
24.7
2011
1210.6
445.1
36.8
252.2
23.1
2021*
1370.1
533.2
38.9
265.8
19.4
2031*
1522.6
620.4
40.7
278.7
18.3
Based on data obtained from:  Census of India and Election Commission of India. * Projected figures, The Future Population of India, PFI, New Delhi and PRB, Washington DC.


If the letter and spirit of the original provision (Article 81  of the constitution)  were to be implemented today, the composition of the Lok Sabha would change drastically with states like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Rajasthan gaining significantly and Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh including Telangana, Karnataka and Odessa losing out (Table 4). As per Times News Network, Uttar Pradesh would have added 13 seats in the forthcoming General election and Tamil Nadu lost ten.

Table 4 Current Lok Sabha seats and estimated Lok Sabha seats based on 2019 estimatred population, selected States
State
Current Lok Sabha seats
Lok Sabha seats based on estimated population   in 2019
2019 Gains/Loss

Uttar Pradesh
80
93
+13
Maharashtra
48
51
+3
West Bengal
42
40
-2
Andhra Pradesh & Telangana
42
37
-5
Bihar
40
44
+4
Tamil Nadu
39
29
-10
Madhya Pradesh
29
33
+4
Karnataka
28
26
-2
Gujarat
26
27
+1
Rajasthan
25
31
+6
Odessa
21
18
-3
Kerala
20
15
-5
Assam
14
14
-
Jharkhand
14
14
-
India
543
543
--

What are the chances that the one man/woman one vote principle will see a comeback in 2026 as now stipulated? “Don’t bet on it. The southern states and others like West Bengal and  Odessa that  have been among the more successful in bringing down population growth will – not without reason – cry foul at being victimized’ for their success. ” [2] We might well see a repeat of 1976 and 2001 in coming years.  But to satisfy the voters of the FLNI States, the Government of India may redistribute the Lok Sabha seats based on the forthcoming Census of 2021, just like the present government did in case of the 15th Finance Commission in 2017. GOI has recommended the use of Census 2011 instead of the norm of considering Census 1971, and this change has led to political protests and accusations of bias as many states that have done well in controlling population will end up receiving less money from the Central Tax pool.  If government takes such step in the redistribution of Lok Sabha seats, it may lead to balkanization of India.

In place of taking such drastic steps, the Government of India must strengthen family planning programme in the FLNI States. The people of these and similar states are not against small family norms.[3]  Simply building awareness will not achieve tangible outcomes. While general knowledge about family planning is almost universal, access to modern methods of contraception services and products is a big problem in many states of north India. This has a direct impact on the health of women who have to bear the consequences of repeated unwanted pregnancies and unsafe abortions; also in giving birth to undernourished children with poor chances of survival or proper human development. India must, therefore, ensure that every child is a wanted one. Here, HDPlus framework, as proposed by the author, could be of great utility in addressing the issue of unwanted fertility. (For details, refer at: https://kotharionindia.blogspot.com/2019/01/future-of-india-is-now.html). The framework’s focus is on the child and mother thus strengthening the Democracy in India. [4]





[1] For details, refer: The Future Population of India, PFI, New Delhi and PRB, Washington DC, 2007.

[3] Kothari, Devendra. 2014b. “Managing Unwanted Fertility in India: Way Forward”, --   in Suresh Sharma and William Joe.   (eds.):   National Rural Health Mission: An Unfinished Agenda, Bookwell, New Delhi.

[4] For details, see:  Kothari, Devendra. 2019. Nurturing Human Development: A Strategy for New India, New Delhi: Paragoan International Publishers.