Dr. Devendra
Kothari
Population
and Development Analyst,
Forum
for Population Action
The Two-Child Norm concept originates
from a rich history of population control efforts and overall concern about the
relationship between population growth and resource exhaustion, as advocated by
Thomas Robert Malthus, British economist, in his 1798 classic writings, An
Essay on the Principle of Population. He
argued that how unchecked population growth is exponential (1→2→4→8) while the growth of the food
supply was expected to be arithmetical (1→2→3→4). Many critics believe that the
basis of Malthusian theory has been fundamentally discredited in the years
since the publication of the Essay,
often citing major advances in agricultural techniques and modern reductions in
human fertility. Many modern proponents (Neo-Malthusianism), however,
believe that the basic concept of population growth eventually outstripping
resources is still fundamentally valid, and "positive checks" are
still likely in humanity's future if there is no action to curb population
growth. The
post discusses the relevance of the concept Two-Child Norm in emerging demographic scenario of India.
Shortly after independence in 1947,
Jawaharlal Nehru, the then Prime Minister of India, argued in favor of “family
limitation…. to promote the health and welfare of the people and development of
the national economy”.[1]
Nehru believed that
that a smaller population would mean better living conditions for the masses. In 1952,
India became the first country in the world to launch a national programme,
emphasizing family planning to the extent necessary for reducing birth rates
"to stabilize the population at a level consistent with the requirement of
national economy”.[2] The program received 100% funding from the central
government. The success of the family planning agenda was so dear to the heart
of the Government of India that even a separate department coined as Department
of Family Planning was carved out in the Ministry of Health in the year 1966.[3] This was done with an
objective to reinforce the population control program. Further, the National
Health Policy of 1983 emphasized the need for “securing the small family norm”,
and stated that
replacement levels of total fertility rate (TFR) that is 2.1
children per woman (or NRR 1) should be achieved by the year 2000 to initiate the process of population stabilization. [4]
In spite of these steps, sharp
declines in death rates were, however, not accompanied by a similar drop in
birth rates. India
witnessed rapid fall in death rare from 25.1 in 1951 to 9.8 in 1991 and less
steep decline in the birth rate from 40.8 in 1951 to 29.5 in 1991. The
population of India, which was only around 361.1 million in 1951 increased by more
than 2.4 times in a period of 40 years
to reach 846.4 million in 1991. The virtual stagnation in India’s population
growth at high level during seventies and eighties (average annual growth rate
hovering around 2.2%) was perceived by many as a failure of India’s family
planning program, urgently requiring stringent measures. [5] In
1991, the National Development Council (NDC) appointed a Committee on Population
under chairmanship of Sri. Karunakaran. The
Two-Child Norm (TCN) was recommended by the Committee in order to move India
towards its goal of replacement level fertility by 2010. The Committee also recommended
that any representative serving from the Panchayati Raj to the Parliament would
lose their seat if they had more than two children while serving in office. The Karunakaran Report was endorsed by NDC in 1993, but it was not discussed by the Indian parliament.
In
1993, the Indian Parliament passed the
73rd amendment of the Constitution that declared Panchayats as institutions of
self government at the village level. In 1994, the States of
Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Orissa and Rajasthan were the first few States to
introduce the TCN in Panchayats.
Madhya Pradesh and Himachal introduced the norm in 2000. Maharashtra introduced
it in 2003. The provision of TCN was introduced
in the Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 by inserting a
specific section and amending the act by introducing a cut off date for
implementation. For example, section 19(I) of the Panchayat Act of Rajasthan
debars and disqualifies a person to be a member of a panchayat if he/she has
more than two living children, one of whom is born on or after November 27,
1995. The number of children produced before the cut-off date is immaterial and
the law is not applicable to such a case. It was realized that given the
small number of elected representatives, imposing such a norm on them was most
unlikely to bring a reduction in the fertility level of the State as a whole.
However, the justification for this was sought in the underlying rationale that
community members would perceive the elected representatives as “role models” and
control their fertility. The TCN was later introduced in
the national as well as state- specific Population Policies of several states.
The
four states of Andhra Pradesh (1997), Rajasthan (December 1999), Madhya Pradesh
(January 2000), and Uttar Pradesh (July 2000), which recorded relatively high
rates of population growth during 1971-91, drafted their population policies in
the 1990s with the assistance of Futures Group International. They set goals to lower fertility to
replacement level in the shortest span of 4 to 16 years.
The
announcement of the National Population Policy 2000 by the Government of India in February 2000 and setting up of a National
Population Commission, under the leadership of then Prime Minister Mr. Atal
Behari Vajpayee and comprising eminent persons from all walks of life on May
11, 2000 reflected the deep commitment of the government to population
stabilization program. The immediate objective of the NPP 2000 is to address
the unmet needs for contraception, health care infrastructure, and health
personnel and to provide integrated service delivery for basic reproductive and
child health care. The medium term objective is to bring the TFR to replacement
levels by 2010, through vigorous implementation of inter- sectoral operational
strategies. The long-term objective is to achieve a stable population by 2045,
at a level consistent with the requirements of sustainable economic growth,
social development and environmental protection.
To be concluded…
[1] Connelly, M. 2006. “Population
Control in India: Prologue to the Emergency Period.” Population and Development
Review 32 (4) 629-667. Also see: Claire
B. Cole, 2009. Responding to the Two-Child Norm: Barriers and Opportunities in
the Campaign to Combat Target-Oriented Population Policies in the Post-ICPD
India. A collaborative Study by the
Centre for Health and Social Justice and the Community- oriented Public Health
Practice Program at the University Of Washington School Of Public Health.
[2] GoI. 2000. National
Populati0n Policy 2000, MoHFW, Government of India.
[3] It was largely
dictated by global pressures and the field realities in India.
[4] The National Health Policy was endorsed by the Parliament of India in
1983 and updated in 2002. None of the health impact goals set in NHP 1983 were
achieved by 2000..
[5] Visaria Leela, Akash
Acharya, Francis Raj. Two-Child Norm Victimising
the Vulnerable?. Economic and Political
Weekly January 7, 2006.
[6] For detail, see: Gwatkin,
D. 1975. Political Will and Family Planning: The Implications of India's Emergency
Experience. Population and Development Review. Vol. 5,
(10. PP 29-59; Buch, Nirmala. 2005. Law
of Two-child Norm in Panchayats: Implications, Consequences and Experiences,
Economic and Political Weekly, Vol 40, (24), June 11, pp 2421-29; Pandey, S, (ed).
2006. Coercion Versus Empowerment. New Delhi: Human Rights Law Network.
[7] For example, see publications of the Centre for Health and Social Justice (CHSJ), a health
research and advocacy group based in New Delhi which currently serves as the
Secretariat to the National Coalition Against the Two-Child Norm.
[8] Chaturvedi, Adesh, Anoop Khanna, Devendra Kothari. 2002:
‘Provision of Two-child Norm in Panchayat Raj Act of Rajasthan: A Critical
Review of Impact and Perception’, Indian Journal of Social Development, Vol 2 (1), June, pp 111-23.
No comments:
Post a Comment