Fertility rate in India drops by 19% in 10 yrs

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by Yusuf, Apr 1, 2012.

  1. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,272
    Likes Received:
    11,275
    Location:
    BANGalore
    NEW DELHI: India's total fertility rate (TFR) - the average number of children expected to be born per woman during her reproductive years - has fallen by19% over the past decade. Among bigger states, the percentage decline in TFR during this period the last decade varied from as high as 28% in Punjab to 5.6%in Kerala.

    Maharashtra saw the second highest dip in TFR between 2000-2010 at 26.9%, followed by Haryana and Andhra Pradesh (25%), Uttar Pradesh (23%), Rajasthan (22%), Himachal Pradesh and West Bengal (21%).

    The latest Sample Registration System 2010 data finalized by the Registrar General of India and sent to the Union health ministry on Saturday says India's TFR, which had remained stagnant in 2008 and 2009 at 2.6, finally has dropped by 0.1 points in 2010. India's TFR now stands at 2.5 as against a TFR of 3.2 in 2000. Education has been found to play a major role in determining TFR.

    On average, an illiterate woman in India is bearing 1.2 children more than a literate woman (3.4 against 2.2). The TFR among women who have studied till at least class X was as low as 1.9. This further dips to 1.6 among women who have studied till class XII.

    The link between female education and fertility is clearly brought out by the SRS data. For instance, even in Bihar, the state with the worst overall TFR of 3.7, women who are educated up to Class X or beyond have a TFR of 2.0 or less. On the other hand, even in Maharashtra, which has an overall TFR of 1.9, women who had no education had a TFR of 6.0.

    According to the SRS 2010, ten states have achieved replacement level fertility of 2.1 and below. However, 10 big states still have a higher TFR than this. These include Bihar (3.7), UP (3.5), MP (3.2), Rajasthan (3.1), Jharkhand (3),Chhattisgarh (2.8), Assam and Gujarat (2.5), Haryana and Odisha (2.3). What's worrying is that these states together account for nearly half of India's population.

    States which have recorded a dip in TFR in 2010 as against 2009 include Andhra Pradesh (1.9 to 1.8), Assam (2.6 to 2.5), Bihar (3.9 to 3.7), Chhattisgarh (3 to 2.8), Haryana (2.5 to 2.3), Himachal (1.9 to 1.8), J&K (2.2 to 2),Jharkhand (3.2 to 3), MP (3.3 to 3.2), Odisha (2.4 to 2.3), Punjab (1.9 to1.8), Rajasthan (3.3 to 3.1), UP (3.7 to 3.5) and West Bengal (1.9 to 1.8). TFR in states like Delhi (1.9), Maharashtra (1.9), Gujarat (2.5), Karnataka (2) and Tamil Nadu (1.7) has however stagnated.

    Kerala is the only state which has recorded an increase in TFR - from 1.7 in 2009 to 1.8 in 2010.

    According to the National Population Policy 2000, India should have reached there placement-level fertility rate of 2.1 by 2010, and ought to attain population stabilization at 145 crore by 2045. Population stabilization is when the size of the population remains unchanged. It is also called the stage of zeropopulation growth. However, India now expects to reach the population stabilization TFR of 2.1 at 165 crore by 2060. Union health minister Ghulam Nabi Azad recently said "We have seen a steady decline in TFR that has come down by 42% from the mid-1960s. We may see a drop of 0.1 point in the TFR, which is currently at 2.6," Azad had said.

    http://m.timesofindia.com/PDATOI/articleshow/12487718.cms
     
  2.  
  3. Mad Indian

    Mad Indian Proud Bigot Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    12,830
    Likes Received:
    7,522
    Location:
    Podigai Hills.
    Why is this Kerala Having low TFR. We need TFR of 2.1 Not more not less for sustaining our development. The population should be stable with Net Replacement Rate as 1.

    Also the TFR of 12+ educated girls is worrying only 1.5:sad:. Then we will become aged like the Europeans:tsk:. We need TFR of 2.1 for all kinds of Population to ensure stable economic growth for all the years to come :D. So that we dont age like Chicoms:bounce:.

    To Forever young India:yey:
     
  4. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    If India had a TFR of 2.1 they would go extinct. That is a replacement level for Europe..
     
  5. Mad Indian

    Mad Indian Proud Bigot Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    12,830
    Likes Received:
    7,522
    Location:
    Podigai Hills.
    NO we would not. We will improve the health structure and standard to above Western levels. Wait for fifteen years:fyeah:
     
    Vishwarupa likes this.
  6. Virendra

    Virendra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    2,923
    Location:
    Delhi, India, India
    On the other hand, why is the TFR increasing in Kerala and why now? Before I spill it, I want to see what others think about it.

    Regards,
    Virendra
     
  7. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    Dont worry i shall have 5 children to even out others...we shall forever number more :pound:
     
  8. SHURIDH

    SHURIDH Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    Messages:
    1,484
    Likes Received:
    293
    Location:
    Murshidabad,Paschim banga,India.
    west bengal tfr 1.8.so we would lose our population.
    kolkata district's population decrase in last 10years.we need exact tfr 2.1.if tfr less 2.1 happen than our population would be old.
     
  9. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    You would really need a 2.1 TFR for a hundred years, then a massive healthcare reogranisation and spending boost to ever get there, much less surpass it. You have too many people to take care of and finite resources to do it with. On a PPP level (which doesn't account for quality) Indians spend $132 per person compared to several thousands for developed countries. Life expectancy of child bearing women are far too low to get a 2.1 replacement rate.
     
  10. Mad Indian

    Mad Indian Proud Bigot Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    12,830
    Likes Received:
    7,522
    Location:
    Podigai Hills.
    Really? how is that?

    Thats the beauty of Population- we have too many people to provide service too for the too many people who needs service;)(for 1000 population you need one doctor, hence for 100000 population, you will need 100 doctors- simple math). The only problem is inefficiency of using our population. Population is never a problem unless it is used inefficiently, like the present India. But it is set to change in the future with the economic growth

    Fifteen years from now, we will have the economy about four times the value now. Hence give us time- we will surpass you OLDIES :taunt:

    the average Child bearing age here is about solid 5-10yrs lower than you Oldie countries:taunt1:. Hence we can achieve the NRR with TFR of 2.1 and low life expectancy(that too not very low) is not a problem. Further, as our economy kicks up, so will our health spending hence the life expectancy will increase to:bounce: So I dont see any problem in attaining the NRR with 2.1 TFR
     
  11. Mad Indian

    Mad Indian Proud Bigot Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    12,830
    Likes Received:
    7,522
    Location:
    Podigai Hills.
    Dont worry .you have your Bangladeshi cousins who are immigrating to screw your population.
     
  12. mattster

    mattster Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    518
    Location:
    California
    I completely agree with Armand........India will never catch up with Western standards.......not in our lifetime at least, or even your kids lifetime. Even if the population drastically drops in the next 50 years.....I dont see it happening.

    Middle-class English speaking Indians who are almost 99% of the Indian DFI posters dont really like to think of how the lower half of Indian population lives.
     
  13. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    You need to lose population to catch up meeting the needs of the numbers India has. 2.1 TFR for a hundred years will balance India out at the current population and give it the time it needs to reach Euro GDP levels. If India goes on to a 2 billion population, it will be a hopeless endeavour. The true poverty rate of India is around 70% and it will stay that way with high birth rates. It is great that fertility has dropped 19% over the last decade and if India can get it to 2.1 it will be well on its way to a healthy and prosperous future. Saying that India will surpass the West in 15 years is an absurdity.

    If you want French levels of health service you need 3.37 per 1000. One per 1000 is on the level of Jamaica or Brunei. India has 0.6. Population is always a hindrance when it is too big to accommodate with finite resources. With over a billion people, India will be lucky to flatten out reaching Eastern European GDP levels and that is half a century away at current growth, and that isn't sustainable either. China only got half way to that before jumping on the credit train.

    You can taunt all you want. It doesn't make the future what you want. India is already experiencing a slow down to 6.1%. It won't quadruple in 15 years at that rate. Even if you quadriple a spend of $600 per person is still only a fraction of Western health spending. As a share of GDP India spends only a third of Western countries.

    If you can achieve and stand at 2.1 you will eventually even out. France has accomplished this and has the best healthcare in the world. As your economy grows and population slows its health situation will get better, but it will be a far cry from surpassing Western levels.
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2012
  14. Mad Indian

    Mad Indian Proud Bigot Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    12,830
    Likes Received:
    7,522
    Location:
    Podigai Hills.
    Thats what i said . 2.1 TFR is good:dude:. And the boldened part was a response to your provocation saying India, will be viped out if TFR is 2.1:dude:


    I gave you an example of how population not related to services, not the exact figures :frusty: . As i said- Population is not a problem but inefficient use of it through corruption and other BS is the problem. The european model is not needed. No thanks. We know where it took them.:wave:

    First of all- the GDP growth for the year is 6.9, not 6.1. And then the growth will pick up hopefully if we kick these bastards in power namely the CON-gr-ASS. And yes it will improve. Hence quadrupling IS possible. even 8 % growth is enough for that. And FYI, we are already increasing the amount spent on the Health. And as i said- the population is not a problem but efficient use of resources is.

    :facepalm: Dint i say the same thing- we need 2.1 for India- not more, not less? And yeah i know it will take some time to over take Europe, but faster than what you all believe it will take(thanks to the oldies there;)) but of course lot longer than 15 years:wave:
     
  15. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,397
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    If TFR is 2.1 at current female mortality rates, India will be wiped out as population will fall.

    You gave an example of 1 doctor per 1000. You want mortality like Jamaica be my guest. It doesn't compare to Western Europe. Population size is the problem as it is impossible to spend the resources to improve conditions. It is the same argument as dealing with poverty. India's answer is to lower the poverty rate rather than actually bringing them out of poverty.

    The year is hardly over and 6.1% was the last quarter growth so it is an accurate statement. You have a crystal ball to see the future? You can't predict next quarter much less 15 years. How much has been increased on health? As a share of GDP, spending has declined over the last decade. Use your resources wisely is fine, but you have to provide the resources in the first place. You can't do it on pennies.

    Aren't you forgetting that an increase in Indian standards will also increase your own age problem? You will be slowing to 2.1 at the same time life expectancy will be increasing to its highest level. You will have the same "oldie" problem. :wave:
     
  16. SHURIDH

    SHURIDH Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    Messages:
    1,484
    Likes Received:
    293
    Location:
    Murshidabad,Paschim banga,India.
    i have bangladeshi distinct cousin.but they are hindu brahmin. west bengal population growth rate is 13.93 when all india 17.85.west bengal population share was 8.06%of all india's population.now it is 7.55% .without know anything you are dancing like a fool.west bengal population grow 4%lower rate than all india.
    i don't care about my bd cousin.but seems like indian tamil loves their sirilankan tamil cousin so much than any other indian.they love their cousin so much that their assembly pass resultion for mercy of indian pm killer.and blackmail indian government to give veto against india's interest.their love for forgien tamil is too much.
     
    ejazr and panduranghari like this.
  17. Mad Indian

    Mad Indian Proud Bigot Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    12,830
    Likes Received:
    7,522
    Location:
    Podigai Hills.
    .

    Relevance of this point to the discussion?:frusty:

    West bengal has the largest bulk of BD immigrants living in India. Its only a matter of time they screw your population. If you cant understand what i posted then you are the idiot.

    Relevance of this point to the post here?:bounce:. And you call me a fool:lol::pound:

    :pound: Where did you learn English? Read my post S-L-O-W-L-Y before posting :bs: :taunt:.
     
    KS likes this.
  18. panduranghari

    panduranghari Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2012
    Messages:
    1,790
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    The question is how long can west afford its overpriced poor quality ( generally not specifically) healthcare?
     
    balai_c and Mad Indian like this.
  19. panduranghari

    panduranghari Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2012
    Messages:
    1,790
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    I will juxtapose your assertion and say how long can you sustain your healthcare system?
     
  20. lemontree

    lemontree Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    640
    What this about fertility rates dropping?

    I dont see it happening. We have far too many people in this country.

    Yesterday, I went to wish a friend's father on his birthday, but I could not find a single spot to part my car. I loitered around for 30 minutes looking for a parking slot, till i gave up and went back home.
     
  21. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,272
    Likes Received:
    11,275
    Location:
    BANGalore
    thats nothing to do with decreasing TFR but already high population and one that is getting richer and affording cars. what decreasing TFR means is that in the future, our kids will require 10 multi-story parking space instead of 15
     

Share This Page