The Trend of the Birth Rate in India, 1911-50

7/26/2019 The Trend of the Birth Rate in India, 1911-50

1/17

Population Investigation Committee

The Trend of the Birth Rate in India, 1911-50Author(s): A. GhoshReviewed work(s):Source: Population Studies, Vol. 10, No. 1 (Jul., 1956), pp. 53-68Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.on behalf of the Population Investigation Committee

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2172274.Accessed: 26/11/2012 15:34

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd.and Population Investigation Committeeare collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,

preserve and extend access to Population Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.72.231 on Mon, 26 Nov 2012 15:34:11 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancishttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=pichttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2172274?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2172274?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=pichttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis


2/17

The Trend

of the Birth

Rate n India,

9I

I-50

By

A. GHOSH

I

In an earlierpaper' on the trends

of birthrates n West Bengal, an attempt

was made

to

estimate

he

true evel

of

the

birthrates

n that

region by devising

a

formula

or correcting

he

registered ital statistics or the region

on the basis

of a critical

tudy

of

certain

ystematic

iases displayedby the statistics.

Since

the

completionof

that

paper

the

Government

of

India, in connection

with

the Census

of

195I,

has

published

a

report

entitledEstimation

f

Birth nd

Death

Rates

n ndia

during94I-5

0.2 In

this

report

he actuaries ssociated

with

the census of

195

I

have analyseda mass of material nd have triedto arriveat

firm stimates f the birth nd death

rates for differentegions

of India during

1941-50.

Kingsley

Davis has also

tried

o computebirth stimates

orthe major

provinces of India

during 926-30.3 These

two publications husenable us to

examine two independently

stimated ates

of

omission n

the two decades (i.e.

I926-30 and 1941-50).

In

the

earlierpaper

it was shown

that

we

can

apply our formula n estimating

the rates of omission

for

several decades

provided that we can

use the rate of

omission

for

any specificperiod

as a

given

datum.

Thus

using

the

rates

of

omissionas estimatedby the census actuariesfor

I941-50

as a datumwe can

estimate he ratesof omission or 9II-20, 192I-30 and 1931-40

from the

formula

tself.

In the present aper

t willbe shown that he formula evised

forWest Bengal

is

valid for

a much

larger area, comprising

he

provinces

of Assam, Bengal,

Bihar,

Orissa,

Uttar Pradesh, and Madhya Pradesh.4

The rates

of omission

estimated

y

our formula or

92z-30

will

be compared

with the

corresponding

rates f omissionfor 926-30

as

estimated

y KingsleyDavis, and

it

will be

shown

that n all the cases the two

agree quite

closely.

The

only provinces

in which the

formula

does

not seem to

apply

are the

Punjab, Madras and Bombay. The possiblereasonwhythese provincesdo not

follow

this common

pattern

will

be discussed

and rates

of

omission for

these

three calculated on

the

basis

of other

considerations. With

the estimatesfor

these nine

provinces,

n

all-India rate of birth and

a rate

of omission

will

be

estimated

or

he

period 911-50.

1

A.

Ghosh,

Demographic

Trends in India during

90I-50 , Population tudies, ol. ix, no.

3,

March

I956, pp. 2I7-36.

2

Census f

ndia,Paper No. 6,

I954.

3

K.

Davis, The Populationf ndia nd Pakistan.

Princeton,

95I.

4

In India before

947

the

units under

directBritish dministration ere comprised

of these nine

provinces.

In

free

ndia theseprovinceshave been designated

s States. In thispaper

theseunitswill

be referredo as provinces o avoid confusion. Of the nineprovincesBengal and the Punjab were

partitioned uring he

creation

f

the State

of Pakistan In the paper we refer o

the regions ncluded

in

the Indian

Union

and known

as

West Bengal

and

East

Punjab.

53

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/17

54

A. GHOSH

II

While

the

reliability

f

the

registration

tatistics n

different

arts

of

India

is questioned by

most experts

on

Indian

demography, heygenerally

gree that

the registrationeries s still of some value for ndicating hetrend s it is free

from udden umps

or irregularities.'We also showed in our

earlier tudy hat

the registration

tatistics

re

fairly

onsistentwithin heirframework nd suffer

from systematic ias

rather

than

random

irregularities n a large scale. In

analysing

he

series

of

registered

irths

n

West

Bengal over

a

period of over

fifty ears

we noted

a

number

of

features

which

revealed

the

existence

of a

systematic ias

in

the series.

These features

may

be

summarized s follows:

(i)

The

registered

irth

rate showed

a

steady

decline

over the years, decline

not

confirmed

y

subsequent

census counts.

This

decline

in

the

birth

rate

was

seento be

highest

n the districts itha marked

rise

n

the

population.

The

higher

he rateof increase n the

population

of an

area,

the

steeper

was the fall

in

the

birth

rate.

(ii) The absolute number

of

births egistered

ends to fluctuatebout

a

mean,

in spite of

a

sharp

rise in

population,

and this

cannot be

explained even by

assuming

reasonable

fall n the

fertility

f

the

population.

(iii)

The

short-range

luctuations

n the

birth

rate for

contiguous areas

throughout

he

last

fifty ears

showed

a

high

seasonal

correlation

which may

be

expected

over

neighbouring

reas.

An

analysis

of

the

birth

rate in the nine

provinces

we

are now

considering

shows that n theprovincesofAssam,Bengal, Bihar, Orissa,UttarPradeshand

Madhya

Pradesh

most of these features

re

present

n the

registration

ata.

The

following

able shows

the

registered

irthrate for

the

nine

provinces over

the

last

fftyyears.

Table

i

Crude

BirthRate

per

i,ooo (registered)

uring

Provinces

I90I-I0

I9II-20

I92I-30 I93I-40

194I-50

Assam

... ...

...

35-7 32.3 30? 3

25.

6

i6-8

W.

Bengal*

...

37.6

32-8

28.5

27'5 20-5

Bihar

and

Orissa

41.0

38

-

8

36.3 31.5 22-9

UttarPradesh ...

4I*4 42-

2

35-

I

34- 2 24.

8

Madhya

radesh

...

49

-

6

45 5

43-7

4I*2

37.0

Madras

...

30-

8

30.7

34

6

34 7 30.

8

Bombay

...

...

...

33'4

34.2

35'9 37.2 32.9

E.

Punjab*

..... 4I.2

43

-

8

42-

2

43

. 0

39-

5

*

Figures

for

Bengal

and

Punjab

for

90I-I0

and

I9II-20

refer

to the

provinces

efore

he

partition.

In

the

first ive

provinces including

Bihar and Orissa

as one

unit as

in

earlier

official

eports)

the birth rate shows

a

consistent

all

throughout

he last

fifty

'

Since

the

adequacy

of

registration

as

apparently

hanged

very

ittle

n

India during

several

decadesany pronounced ncrease r decrease n theregistered irth ate hould ndicate similar rend

in

the actual

rate

, Davis,

op. cit.,

p.

68.

It will

be seen that

under-registration

s

fairly niform

nd

does

not take sudden eaps

and bounds

from

year

to

year ,

cf. Vital Statistics

f

West

engal

94I-50,

Census

f

ndia,

95 I,

vol.

vi,

partB, p.

z.



4/17

THE TREND OF

THE

BIRTH

RATE IN INDIA,

I911-50

55

years,

declining

n some

cases to almosthalf

the rate

of

I9OI-IO.

But in the

lastthreeprovinces

of Bombay,

Madras

and the

Punjab an almost

constant ate

is maintained hroughout

he period.

It is significantn

this

connection

that

all Indian demographic studies agree that these three provinces maintaina

reasonably

efficienttandard

of registration.'

It is

also generally

recognised

thatthe provinces

which

show the steepest

decline over

the decades are

also

those

which have

the least reliable

systems

of registration

e.g.

Assam and

Bengal).

This feature

s

clearly

broughtout

in the followingtable,

showing

the

percentage

mission n

birth egistration

s estimated

y the

censusauthorities

for 1941-50

and by Davis

for I926-30, with

the

apparent

percentage

fall

in

the

birth

ate s recorded

ince

90I-IO.

Table

z

EstimatedPercentage f Per centFall

Provinces

Omission n Registered

in BirthRate

Births

1941-50

1926-30 194I-50

per cent

of

90I-I0

Assam

...

... ... ...

...

45

*

6

64-

0

53

W.

Bengal

...

... ... (27-

9)

42-

I 46

Bihar

and Orissa ...

... ...

22 3

39-

6

44

Uttar

Pradesh

... ..

. . ...

25 * 4

35 *

8

40

Madhya

Pradesh

... ... ...

.

7' i8*o

25

Madras

...

...

... ...

I

i6 i

13'7

Bombay.

...

... ...

...

22

i8

8

W.Punjab ... ... ... ...

4I

-

In

the

first iveareas

the rate of omission

has increased

considerably ince

I926-30

and

the birth

ratehas

fallen

sharply

during

the whole

period,

while in

the

last

three areas the

rate of omissionhas remained

stationary

nd the

birth

rate

has

also

continued

at

practically

he same level. We

may

conclude from

this

that

provinces

with an

inefficient

ystem

f

registration

ppear

to

show a

steady

decline

n the birthrate

primarily

ecause

of a

steadily

ncreasing

ate of

omission

n

registration

ver

time.

The

above

conclusion

s reinforced

f we consider

the

second feature

noted

inour earlier tudies n WestBengal,that s,theconstancyn the absolutenumber

of birthsregistered, iven

below

for the

provinces

since

I9

I

-0.2

1

The census

actuaries

f

95

I

classified

he

provinces

s

following:

A.

Registration

may

be

regarded

as reasonably atisfactory

. .

Bombay,

Madras,

the

Punjab

and Madhya

Pradesh.

B.

Registration

annot

be

regarded

s reasonably

atisfactory

. . Uttar

Pradesh,Bihar, Orissa,

West Bengal

and Assam. (op. Cit.,

p.

2).

Further

. . it

appears

that

in states

ike

Assam and

Bihar registration

s

particularly

ad while

n UttarPradesh

nd West

Bengal

it is

comparatively

etter

though

tillbad enough.

In the

major portion

of

Madhya

Pradesh

nd

Punjab

it is

not unsatisfactory.

As regardsbirth

ates

t

seems

clearly stablished

hatwhere

the

registered

ate

s lower

the

percentage

omission

s

high.

This

shows

that the

ower birth

ate which

s

being

shown

n

the recent

years by

the

registration

ata

is due more

to

under-registration

hanto

any

substantial

eduction

f births

n the

country , op. cit., p. 43.

2

The table

has

been

compiled

rom he nnual

figures

f

registration

n

the official

ealth ublications.

The figures

or 94I-50

are for

the

yearsup

to

I947.

The

figure

or

Bengal

is for

the

provincebefore

the partition.



5/17

56

A.

GHOSH

Table 3

Average

Number

of

Births

Registered, n

o,ooo's

Decades Biharand Uttar

Assam

Bengal Orissa Pradesh Madras

Bombay

I9II-20

...

19

I47

I32

I97

I23

67

I92I-30

...

20

I32

I23

I59

I42

69

I93I-40

...

24

I4I

I32

I77

I67

77

I94I-50

...

I8

I33

II0

I54

i62 74

The

first ive

regions

do not show an

increasing

rend

n

the

numbers

f

births

while

a

clearly ncreasing

rend s seen in the

case

of the last

two

regions. If

we consider

the

very

considerable

ncrease in the

population

of

those

areas

since

9I I-20,

a

steady

ise

n the number f births

egistered ould be expected,

even

ifthere

had been a substantial

ecline

n

fertility.

ndeed,unless

there

had

been a sensationaldecline n

fertility

he numbersof births n all

regionsshould

have

shown

a

steady

rise. It is therefore

ignificant

hat

the

provinceswhich

are

known

to have efficient

ystems

of

registration

how the

expected rise.

Again,

as in the case of our

study

of West

Bengal,

we can

see

that

the

rate

of

decline n the

registered

irth

rate s correlated

with the rateof

increase

n

the

population.

This

is

demonstrated

n Table

4,

which

compares

the

percentage

fall

n the

birth ate ince

9I

I-20

withthe

percentage

ncrease n

the

population.

Table

4

Percentage

ncrease Percentage ecline in

Province

of

Female

Population, Registered irth

Rate,

I91I-20

to

I941-50

19II-20

to

I94I-50

Assam ... ... ...

...

...

66

48

W.

Bengal

...

...

... ...

36

47

Bihar

and Orissa.

... ... ...

7 42

Uttar

Pradesh. ...

...

...

7

4I

Madhya

Pradesh

...

...

...

...

22

I9

In

spite

of

rather

wide

divergencies

here s a

definite

ssociation

between

the

rateof fall in the birthrate and the rate of increase of the population. This

supports

the

view

that

n all

these

regions

the

rate

of

omiQsion s a

function

f

the

population

increase.

The

constancy

of

the

absolute

number

of

registered

births

suggests

that in all these

regions

the

registered

irths

refer o a

more

or

less

fixed

ample

of

an

increasing opulation.

We may

conclude

that the first ix

provinces

show

a

tendency

o

a

systematic

underestimation

hich would

occur fa fixed

ample

of an

increasing opulation

were

kept

under

observation

and if the

births of this

fixed

sample

were

sub-

stituted

for

those

of the

entire

population,

other

errors

being fairly onstant

during

the

period.

This

being so,

it is worth

drawing

attention

o

the

factors

whichmighthaveproducedthesystematicias referredo.

It

is

not

difficult

o visualise

how

such

a

situation

may

have

arisen. The

registration

epartments

n

most

regions

are

known

to

be

lagging

behind as



6/17

THE

TREND OF THE BIRTH RATE

IN

INDIA,

I9II-50

57

regards he expansion of their

taff. The traditional nd stillexisting mployee

at the village level is the headman

or chowkiderf the village. As the population

has gradually ncreased, hevillage area has also spreadand

the burden of work

vastly ncreased withoutany augmentation f the staff o

take over the extra

burden. The headmanhasbeenforced oa simple olution. He has not ncreased

his coverage with the ncrease

of work n his jurisdiction. He has been covering

the

original sample and

thus tracing he vital events of the same population as

in the formeryears,this coverage being determined y contiguity

nd accessi-

bility.

In

recording

he births

nd deaths of

a

practically ixedpopulation he

is also subject to some omission. But this rate of omission,

as far as his fixed

sample

is

concerned,

s

practically

onstant. That

is,

he is

working with the

same

level

of

efficiency.

Registering

he

vital history

f

a

fixedpopulation with

a constantrateof omission has produced several features

n his records.

(i) The shortrange

rise

and

fall n the area

is

correctly

eflectedn the sample

and is correlated

with

the rise and

fall

n

the

region

as

a

whole.

(ii) As estimates

of total births

or

deaths his

records become increasingly

deficient

n

proportion

o the

population

increase within

this

egal jurisdiction.

In

regions

with a static

population

he has

maintained he same

level

of

efficiency

while

in

regions

with

a

rapidly ncreasingpopulation

his

record of

births or

deaths

oses

all

semblance

to

reality.

In

all the first

ix

provinces

mentioned before

(i.e., Assam, Bengal, Bihar,

Orissa,

Uttar

Pradesh

and

Madhya Pradesh)

this force

had been at

work

and

therefore

he

correction ormule

which

were

devised

for

West

Bengal may

be

appliedin all theseregions. The three xceptions o this ruleare theprovinces

of

Bombay,

Madras and

the

Punjab.

But

theseare

exceptions

which

demonstrate

the

rule.

The

first ix

provinces

discussedbefore

are all

provinces

which

were

settled

emporarily

r

permanently

ith

private

andlords.

In all

these

regions

the collection

f and

revenue

ndother ssential

evenue

operations

re

entrusted

to private andlords,

who

maintain

heir

wn

staff or

this

purpose.

The

govern-

ment

employedvillage

headman

s a kind of welfare

fficer ith no

important

administrative

esponsibilities.

In the other

provinces (i.e. Bombay,

Madras

and

the

Punjab)

the case

is different.

hese three

provinces

re

known as ryotwari

areas,

in

which

the

government

ollects

the

revenue

directly

from

the

rural

people throughthevillage headman. The village headman s thustheagency

through

which

the

government

arries

on

important

dministrative unctions.

It

is understandable

hat

while

in areas

settled with

private

landlords the

government

as

paid

no heed to the

requests

f the

village

functionary

o

augment

his staff o keep pace

with the increasingwork,

it has taken care to see

that

adequate

staff

s maintained

n the

directly

ettled

ryotwari

reas to collect

the

necessary

revenue

and to

carry

out other

important

functions

n which the

government

s interested.

This has resulted

n a

gradual

deterioration

n

the

coverage

of

the

village

headman

n the andlord-settled

reas,though

the

directly

settled

provinces

have maintained

pproximately

constant evel

of

efficiency.

The problemof correcting heregistrationtatistics or thetwo separategroups

of

provinces may

thus be considered

s

requiring

wo distinct

pproaches.

E



7/17

58

A. GHOSLT

III

In thepresent ection

we shall ttempt

o estimate

he

rate f

omissionn

the

groupof privately

ettled rovinces hich

have

a

steadily eterioratingystem

ofregistration. he correctionormulaor hisgroup fprovinces asdevised

in the

arlier aper s

follows:

Let

PO

be

the nitial emale

opulation

n a

region

nd

Bo

the

number f

births

occurringhere

t

time

o.

Let the

village

fficial

egister

n an

average

o

out

of

Bo

births

n

the

same

period, overing

o

women. His initial

orrection

factor

will

therefore

e

Bo/bo.

At

time

1

let

the

female

opulation

ise

to

p1.

But

the officials

still

overing nly

o

females.

Let his new birth

egister

e

bl,

whichwill be

of the

order

f

bo,

subject

o small

hanges.

To correct is

records

or

both

the

nitial

mission nd

the ncrease ue to a

fixed

overage

in

an

ncreasing

opulation,

e

arrive

t theformula or

orrection

s

follows:

bl P1iBo

As

theratio

P1/Po

canbe

easily

valuated

or

pecific

ecadesfrom he

census,

the

corrected

ecord

f births or

ny specific

eriod

will

enableus to

estimate

the

nitial

rror

o

/BO,I

Taking

the

nitial

decade

as

i9i

i-zo,

we

obtain he

following

atios

of the

average

female

opulations

f

succeeding

ecades

to

that

f

9II-zo.

Table

5

Ratio of

Average

Female

Population

of

SucceedingDecades

to

I9II-20

Decade

Assam B. and

0.

U.P.

M.P.

W.

Bengal

I9

II-20

...

...

...

I,

00 I, 00 I,

00

I*

00

I

I

00

I92I-30 ...

... ...

II

3

I104 I-OI

i-o6

I02

I93I-40

...

...

...

I-40

I1i6

I1I2

I

I

I I

i6

I94I-50 ... ...

..

i66

I*27

I*27 I*22 I36

The

selection

f

I9II-20

as the

nitial ecade

s,

of

course,

rbitrary

nd has

been

aken

ecause

ata n the

resent rovincial

nits

renot

uniformly

vailable

before

his

date. But t can be

easily

hown hat fwe take

ny rbitraryeriod

and itspopulations the nitial tarting ointsuch a selectionwillnot affect

the

result

rovided

he totalomission

f this

period

s

also

taken

s

the

nitial

omission.

This

may

be demonstrated

s

follows:

Let

the

nitial

eriod

be

to

and the

period

under

onsideration

e

t4

,

also

let

ti

be

any

ntermediate

eriod.

Then

the

correction

actor

y

our

formula

for

he

omission

n the th

period

will

be

Bi Pi

Bo

bi

Po

-bo

1

In the

earlier

aper

the

ratio

PI

/Pohas

been taken s

representing

he

married

emale opulationof

age I

-50,

which

s the

relevant

population

forbirth

orrection

n our

formula.

But owing to the

difficultyfobtaining etailsby age overthe entire eriod,and specially orthepartitioned reas this

population

has

been

replaced

by

the

total

female

population.

However,

our

data

will not

be

affected

in any significant

egree.

The ratios

f totalfemale

opulation

n the

two

decades

and the dult female

population

n the two decades are generally uite

close.



8/17

THE

TREND

OF THE

BIRTH RAT'E

IN INDIA,

1911-50 59

This

simplymplies hat fthe otal missionn the th

period s due only o

the

initial

mission ate nd thepopulation rowth uring

his eriod,which

rowth

has been

completelyxcluded rom hecurrent

overage, hen he

correction

factoror hecurrenteriodmaybe obtained yweightinghe nitial orrection

factor

y theratio f the wo populations.

Now

using

he th

period

s

the

original eriod

we obtain he

orrection

actor

for

t4

j

in the

ame

way

as follows:

Pi+

*Bi

Ps *bs

We

cansubstituten the

bove

expression

or

Bi/bi

he

expression iven

earlier

in terms

f the nitial eriod

o,

as follows:

P

B+j?

i

P

+*Pi

BoP

Pi

+-Bo

Pi_b_

Pi

rPo

0

PO

bo

The

assumptions

n this

derivations

the

ame s

in our

main

erivationf

B1

which s

discussed arlier

n

this ection.

This s

that he

headman

s

covering

an

approximately

ixed

opulation

ith

constant

fficiency

nd

that he

popula-

tion

which

s

escaping

is

coverage

as

the

amerate f birth s the

population

which

s

being

covered

by

him.

With

these

ssumptions

he

selection f

any

period

s

the

nitial

eriod

nd its

total

omission s

the nitial

mission o

not

affecthe calculation f a later eriod.

Using

the

ratios

f the female

opulation

n

I94I-50,

to that n

I9II-20 as

given

n

Table

S

we obtain

n

estimatef

therate f

omission

n

9I

-20

(which

in this

ase s

our

arbitrary

nitial

eriod)

rom

he census stimate

f

the

total

omission

n

94I-5o

as

follows:

P1941-50 B1911-20_

B1941-50.

P1911-20

b1911-20.

b1941-50

where stands or he ctual irths ndbstands or herecorded irths. able 6

gives

the

initial ate of omission

n our

arbitraryeriod

I9Ii-zo)

as

given

below:

Table

6

Initial

Rate

of

Omission

Province

(per cent)

as

derived

from

resent

ormula

Assam

..

...

...

3 5

*

W.

Bengal

...

2I.5

Bihar ndOrissa

..22-6

UttarPradesh

...

I

i8.

5

Madhya

Pradesh

...

0o0



9/17

6o

A. GHOSH

Using the population

atios

f

Table

5

with

he

above rates n our

formula

we arrive

t the rateof omission

orthe

successive

ecadesfrom9ii-20

for

thedifferent

rovinces

s

follows:

Table 7

Rate of Omission per

cent)

Decade

Assam B. and

0. W. Bengal U.P. M.P.

I9II-20

... ... ...

35

8 22-6

210

5

i8.5

0?-

1921-30

...

... ...

472

224.

23

7

200

?

6

1931-40

.57

2

32.3

32-1

27.2 10- 3

1941-50

...

...

...

64.o

39 4 42

1

35

8

i8

2

Comparison f these estimated ates of omissionwithratesestimated y

Kingsley

avis

for he

decade

92I-30,

is

possible

or

ll

the

provinces,

avefor

West

Bengal.'

In the

following

able we have

compared

he rates

stimated

by

Davis for

926-30

with

our ratefor

92I-30

except

orWestBengal. For

West

Bengal

we have substituted

lternative

ates stimated

y

us

from

ertility

enquiries

s given n

theearlier

aper.2

Table

8

Census Omission OmissionRate

Omission

Rate by estimated y

Province Rate for present ormula Davis for

926-30

I94I-50

foa

92I-30

Assam

... ...

... ...

64-

0

47

2

45

6

W.

Bengal

... ... ...

42-I 23 7

(27-

9)

Bihar

and Orissa ...

... ...

39-4 24-

8

25 . 4

Uttar

radesh ... ...

...

3 5

*

8

20-0

22. 3

Madhya

Pradesh

...

...

i8*o

5

6

7*I

Considering

ur own estimates

nd those

rrived t

by

Davis

by

the

reverse

survival

method,

hetwosets re

quite

close n mostof

the

cases.

It

appears,

therefore,

hat urmethod

ives

valid stimatesor

hewhole

region omprising

these ixprovinces. t is interestingo note s in Table7 thatnWestBengal,

Bihar

nd

Orissa,

nd

UttarPradesh ates

f omission

n

I9II-zo

were

fairly

close.

Assam

had a

poor system

f

registration

s

early

s in

I9II-20.

This is

quite ikely

or ommunications

n Assam re

very

oor.

It is

most

ikely hat

the

rates

fomission

n Assam nd

East

Bengal now

East

Pakistan)

re

quite

high

nd

of the same

order

or he samereason.

Madhya

Pradesh

ad

almost

complete egistration

n the earlier

years,

but with

population

ncrease

the

situation

s

fast

deterioratingverywhere

n this

region.

The

highly arying

rate

f

omission

oday

s theresult

othof

differing

ates

f

population ncrease

and

also of

thedifferent

nitial

ateswithwhich

he

regions

tarted.

1

Davis

has calculatedtheomissionrate n

I926-30

for

Bengal

as a whole. We

have shown in a

note

in

the

appendix

that

his rate

s

quite consistent,

ut

is not

applicable

to

West

Bengal.

2

Loc. cit.



10/17

THE TREND OF

THE

BIRTH RATE

IN

INDIA,

I9II-510

6i

IV

It

has been

seenthat

out of nine provinces,

he registration

ystemn

six

is increasingly

nderestimating

he actualnumber

f births. But we have

also

seenthatBombay,Madras nd thePunjabhavea moreor less constantate f

registration

ith no

evidence f any

increasingnaccuracy.

The following

figures

orthe

rates f omission

stimated or

differenteriods

how that

he

rates of omission

have not increased

nd mayeven have

decreased lightly

in

these

provinces.

Table

9

Rate

of Omission per cent)

Census Davis

Census

Province

I90I-I

Iz926-30

1941-50

Madras

..

.

...

26.5

i6*

I

13.7

Bombay ...

... ... ...

22z8

i9. 8

i8

6

Punjab ...

... ... ...

7-0

-

4.I

It is notsafe

o

suggest

hat here as been

a

consistentecline

n therate

f

omission

s thedifferences

n

I926-30

and

I94I-5o

are

small,

while he stimate

forMadras n I90I-I0 seems

omewhat igh.

But we shallnot be

greatly

n

error

fwe assume

constantate

f

omission

or

hese

rovinces

uring9I

I-50.

We

can thereforestimate

he births or

Bombay,

Madras and thePunjab

by working

n

the

verage

ate f omission

uring

g26-5o

as

derived y

com-

bining he wo rates or

926-30

and

949-5o.

The average ate s taken nthe

assumption

hat

he

differences

uring

his

period

re

not

significant.

n any

case the

order

f

difference,specially

uring

926-30 and

I949-50,

is not

arge

enough

o cause any

ignificant

dditional

rror

n

theestimates.

Calculating

he

births

orthe

firstix

provinces

n the

basis

of the

formula

discussed

n

Section

II,

and

for he ast three n the

basis

of a

constant

rror

of

omission

s discussed bove,

we

give below

the corrected irth

ate

for he

nine

provincesor

hedecades

9II-20,

I92I-30, I93I-40

and

94I-50.

Table

io

Birth

Rate

per ,000 Population

Reconstructed

y

Province

Present ormulx

for

I9II-20

1921-30

I93I-40

1941-50

Assam

...

... ...

50'3

5I.3

59

8

46.7

Bihar

and Orissa

...

...

50-I

46.3

46 6

37

0

W.

Bengal

...

...

4I*8

37

6

40

6

35 4

Uttar

Pradesh ...

...

...

5I*2

42.5

47

0

38

o

Madhya

Pradesh ...

...

45 5 43.4 40?9

45-2

Madras ...

...

...

...

36

I

37 5

40'8

36

2Z

Bombay

...

...

...

43 3 45

0

46.7 4I.3

Punjab.

...

...

456 42-3

44

8

4I.I

In

terms

f

these

orrected

igures,

ihar nd

Orissa,

Bengal

nd the

United

Provinces

how

a

slight

endency

o

decline,

hough

hisdecline

s

rather

ffset



11/17

6z

A.

GHOSH

during

93I-40.

The

provinces

f

Assam,

Bombay,

MadhyaPradesh,

Madras

and

the Punjab

have practically

emained tationary

ithonlyrandom

luctua-

tions. The

birth ates

or

he ombined

rovinces

n an all-India cale,gnoring

the regionswhichwerepreviouslyotpartofBritish ndia,are givenbelow

with heregistered

irth

ates hown

for

comparison.

Table

i i

Registered

Reconstructed

Estimated

Rate

Decade

BirthRate BirthRate of Omission

per i,ooo

per i,ooo from

(per cent)

n

Formule

Registration

All Provinces

I9II-20

...

...

...

37 5

45

5

i8-6

1921-30

...

... ... 34-2 42'4 19.4

I93I-40

.

-

34

2

45

2 24.4

I941-50

...

..

27.5

38-

8 29 2

For

the

group

as

a

whole

trend

s

perhaps lightly

ownwards,

ith an

offsetting

iseduring

93I-40.

But

t is

interesting

o notethat

heeffect

f

the

increasing

rror

f omission

with ime

has offset

his ise

n the

registered

eries,

thus

appearing

o show

a definiteownward

rend

during

he

whole

period.

The estimated

ates

fomission

ndicatehat

here as been

consistenteteriora-

tion

n

registration

hroughout

he

period

but because

t has

been

gradual

nd

hasnot disturbedheapparentrend,t is noteasilydetected.Unlesstheres

a

change

n the

registrationystem,

his

pparent

ownward

rend

will

continue

to

appear

n the

registered

tatistics

n the

future.

V

An

estimate

fthe xtent

f

under-registration

f nfant

eaths

may

e

obtained

by

methods

nalogous

to those

used for the correction

f birth

egistration.

In

the case

of

infant

mortality

e can

use a correction

ormula

xpressed

s

follows:

D

2d,

Bi

-Do

D

o -do

where 1

isthe ctualnumber

f

nfant

eaths

n the

period

nder

onsideration;

di

are

the

recorded

eaths

n the

period;

B1

and

Bo

are thebirths

ctually aking

place

during

he

period

underconsideration

nd the initial

period;

and

Do

and

do

are the

ctual

nd

the

recorded

nfant

eaths

uch

hat

o Do

s the

nitial

rate f

registration.

he

only

lteration

n this

ase s the

use

of

he atio

f

births

instead

f that

fthefemale

opulation

or

orrecting

he ncrease

n

omission

due

to

the

ncrease

n the

population.

While

the ratio

of

population

ncrease

wouldhavegivenus similar esultshebirth atiomaybe morerelevantnthe

case

of

infant

eaths

han

simple

ndex

of

population

ncrease. In

any

case

the difference

n the

result

y

either alculation

as found

not

to be

very

arge.



12/17

THE

TREND OF

THE BIRTH

RATE

IN

INDIA, 1911-50

63

From

our

earlier stimates

f

the error

f

omission

n birth

egistration,

e

canevaluate

hevalue

of

B1IBo

for

he

firstix

provinces.

As

in

thecase

of

the

birth orrection,

stimates

f total

omission

uring

nyperiod

will

now

enable

us to evaluatedo/Do, r the nitial ateof deathregistration. dopting he

actuarial

ate

f nfantmortality

n

the ensus f

93

I

as

the orrect ate f

nfant

mortality

or

92I-30

and

taking

our estimates

f

the

corrected umber

f

births,

e

arrive

t the

following

ercentage

f nitial

mission

n

the

registration

of nfant

mortality.

Table

iz

Estimated

Rate

of

Province

Omission

n

Infant

Mortality

egistration

(per

cent)

W. Bengal

...

...

54-9

Assam

56.

2

Bihar

and Orissa

...

54

9

UttarPradesh

.

... 46.o

Madhya

Pradesh

...

00

Madras

... .

29.7

Bombay ...

...

38. 5

The

first

et of figures

hows

the

nitial

ate

of

omission

n

provinces

with

an increasingmissionn time,whilethe secondset showsthe ratefor the

provinces

f

Bombay

nd Madras,

with constant

ate of omission.

In the

Punjab

he

rate

f

omission

s almost

egligible.

The

following

able

shows

therate

of

omission uring

he

fourdecades

for

the

different

rovinces,

ith

he

exception

f the

Punjab.

Table I3

Rate

of Omission

per

cent)

n

Registered

nfant

Mortality

Decades West Bihar Uttar Madhya

Assam Bengal

Orissa Pradesh Pradesh Bombay Madras

I9II-20

... 56'2

47

8

54

9

46o

-

38.5

29.7

I921-30

...

6i*2

48v8

56

6

46 5

5

7

38.5

29.7

I93I-40

...

68.7

55

? 6i-i

53 4

I0s0

38.5

29.7

I94I-50

..

736 6I.7

64

5

57 5

i8 i 3855

29'7

An

interesting

eature

f theomission

ate s that

while

he

number

f

nfant

deaths

has been

progressively

nderestimated,

his has

not affected

he

nfant

mortality

ate

to the

sameextent

ecause

of the simultaneous

ncrease

n

the

under-registrationf births. The net effectmay be seen in Table

14,

which

shows

the

ratio

of the recorded

nfant

mortality

ate

o the

corrected

rate.



13/17

64 A. GHOSH

Table I4

Registered

nfantMortality ate

as percentage

f Corrected

InfantMortality ate

Bihar

West Uttar

Decades

Assam

Orissa

Bengal Pradesh

Madras Bombay

1911-20

... ...

68.4 58.4

72

4

66-2

83.1

77.8

1921-30

...

...

73 5

6o-8

70'7

66-9

79-1

75I

1931-40

.

*

72c9 56-8

67-4 63c7

8o-8

79c2

1941-50

...

73 3

56-6

65*7

63*3

84.I

77

4

This

result

ollows rom

ur

correction

ormula

or nfantmortality. hus

if D1

be the

number f infantsctually ying,

nd

B1

the

number f

infants

actuallyorn, hen your formula ehave

D1

_

d1BDDo

.

bjPjBo

B1

Bodo

Pobo

Thus

as

Bl/Bo

s

verynearly qual

to

P1/Po

n most

ases,

he ratioduring

he

decades

ends o

be

proportionate

o the

two nitial ates f omission

f

births

and

deaths.

The estimates

rrived t by

our

formulx

may

be comparedwith

imilar

ates

computed

y

other uthorities

sing

different ethods.

Table

I

5

gives

the

estimated

ates

s

calculated

y

the census

ctuaries or 90I-II, I92I-30

and

I94I-5O.1

Table

I

5

Rates of

nfantMortality er

i,ooo Live Births.

Regis-

Actu- Rate

Regis-

Actu-

Regis-

Rate

Regis-

Actu-

Rate

Province

tered

arial

from

tered

arial

tered from tered

arial from

Rate

Rate

Form- Rate

Rate Rate Form- Rate Rate Form-

ulk

ulx

ulx

1911-20

1901-I1 1911-20

1921-30

1931-40

1941-50

Bengal W.)

205

298 283

i8i

242

159

230

115

i6o

147

Assam

...

208

298 330

143

235

134

236

125 237

202

Bihar

f

193

298 304

178

242

I56

214

148

237

221

U.P. ...

233 298

352 178

266

153

240

120 212 210

Madras

...

197

274 237

178

225

177

219 152

237

202

Bombay

..

211

296

271

178 237 I64

207

154

237

208

As

our

own

estimates

re

based

on therates

f nfant

mortality

n the

census

of

93I,

the

comparison

ith

he other wo estimates

f

90I-II and

I94I-50

is

of

nterest.

The

agreement

s

quitegood

in the

ase of the

figures

f

94I-50

where

he

upper

range

f

the

actuarial

ate s

given,

hough

n the caseof

the

decade of Iqoi-ii

it

is

naturally

ot so close.

It shouldbe remembered

hat

1

Census

f

ndia

931,

vol.

,

Report,

.

i6i.

Census

f

India

195I.

Paper

no.

2,

Life

Tables,

95I

Census, able 9,

page

0

(only he

upper

limit

of the

estimated ange

has

been

given

here.)



14/17

THE TREND

OF THE BIRTH RATE IN

INDIA, I9II-50

65

the ensus alculationsre

for

ather

ider reas ndnotfor

ndividual rovinces.

Considering

he

very pproximate ature f these

estimates,he agreements

by no means

oor.

VI

The calculations

f

under-registration

n

births

nd infant eaths

maynow

be used-to

stimate

he

pproximate

umber

f

births nd

the

numbers

urviving

for

specific ensusyears. In this ectionwe shall

give

such

estimates or

the

years

920, I930, I940

and

950.

It

must e noted hat he orrectionystem iscussed

n

this

aper

s a

correction

for n

average ver decade atherhan

or

specifc ear.

Random

luctuations

in

therate f omissionn

specific earswillnotbe allowed

or n our

correction.

But

t has been pointed ut

earlier

hat he

rate f

omission oes not

showany

violent

hange

rom

year

o

year

nd

thereforeheorder fsuch

error

hould

not be large. For comparison, able

i6,

which ummarizesheresults, lso

gives

the

number

ecorded

t

age

o-i

in the

corresponding

ensus

and

the

number

f

births stimatedy

the

census ctuaries

f

I95

I

on the

basis

of the

census numerationsf nfants

f

age

o-i in

respective

ensus

years.

At the

outset t maybe useful o

point

ut that heestimates f

births

made

by

the

95

census ctuaries n thebasis

of the numerated

nfants

re,

on

their

own

admission, oo low for

the

following

easons:

First,

no

correction

or

underenumerationas been made, nd

secondly, egistered

nfant

eaths,which

are

themselvesnderestimates,avebeenused.

The actuaries'

pinion

s

quoted

briefly

elow.'

In general,tmay e seen hat heresevidence fsignificantnderenumera-

tion

n

the census ounts f infants

ged

o-i

in

all

the three

ensuses f

92I,

1931 and

1941

in

varying

egrees.

In

195

I

there

s

much

ess

evidence f

under-

enumerationn mostof theprovinces,nd

this

grees

with

he

general

pinion

of the

ctuaries f the

951

censuswho

comments follows:

Leaving

out

Assam,

practically

ll

the

past

censuses

n the

various

tates

give

evidence

f

underenumeration

f

infants.

Only I95

I

census

data

except

for

Madrasdo not

give evidence

f

underenumeration

ccording

o the

method

adopted

ere. 2

VII

Usingour estimatesf actualbirths,we mayexamine hefertilityatesof

married

women

of

reproductive

ge,

Table

I7

shows

the

number

f

births

per

i,ooo marriedwomen

aged

i1-503

in

the

different

rovinces

uring

he

four

decades.

1

In all probability here s underenumerationin

the

census)

and

not

overenumeration.

.

. If

anything t may well be understated ue to omission

of

infants

rom

being

recorded

n

the

census.

The latter s more trueof the ndian census.

It

thereforeppears

that

he

extent

f

omission

n

regis-

tration rought ut . . . may well be taken s an estimate f

the

ower side

of

under-registration.

If anything, he registered alue of

I

which

s

adopted

in the calculations

s an

underestimate

of

infantmortality].The combined ffects

that he

expression I-r. I)

is overstated

with the

consequent

result hatthe number f births . . is understated.

Census

f ndia,Paper

no.

6,

I954,

Estimation

of Birth nd Death Rates in India during

94I-50,

p.

50.

2

Cenrus

f ndia, aperno. 6, 954,

p.

53.

3

Where

figures

f

age composition

for

married

women

were

not

available

for

some

regions

for

certain eriods, stimates ave been used.



15/17

66

A. GHOSH

Table

6

Census

Our

Registered

Births

Estimate f

Un-

Counts

of

Estimate

Number

Estimated

Our

derenumeration

Province

Years

Infants

of Infants

of Births by

Estimates

of

Infants

per

(o-i) at aged (o-i) for Actuaries of Births cent of

Enumera-

from

Years of from

Census from he

Regis-

Census

tion

Formula*

Census

Counts

Formula

tered

Counts

I__

______ ______

*

___________

___________ ___________-

B

r

h

Assam

I920

I34,858 I60,393

I22,404

I54,796

I90,660

36

I9

I930

I86,844

203,936

I40,649

2I2,I40

266,380

47

20

I940

I93,500

287,I9I

I56,I55

2I3,200

364,848

59

32

I950

269,840 230,990

IIO,I38

290,370

305,938

64

5

Bengal

(West)

I920 5Io,o6I

505,9I9

544,372

603,408

693,467

2I

13

I930

58I,962

5II,280

5I7,339

675,600

678,032 24

I940

565,250 925,506

657,603 632,059

957,209

3I

34

I950

59I,474

684,7I6

440,880 65o,686

76I,450 42

I5

Bihar

Orissa

I940

86o,6oo I,658,845 I,I7I,966 946,270

I,73I,I07

32

45

I950

2,ooi,2i8

I,I57,I24

837,69I

2,I25,49I

I,382,328

39

Uttar

Pradesh

I920

I,388,700

I,568,855

I,662,I92

I,642,848 2,039,499

I9

I9

I930

I,497,I78

I,794,000

I,693,I73

I,700,758

2,1II6,466

20

20

I940

I,37I,700

2,I59,906

I,680,595

I,5I4,853

2,308,509

27

34

I950

2,o56,o50

I1,806,004

I1,295,505

2,2I9,I58

2,0I7,920

36

Madhya

Pradesh

I920

388,252

462,I23

544,08I

470,2I0 544,08I I4

I930

542,593

633,926

664,2I7

653,254

703,6I9

6

7

I940

408,529

55I,I74

627,946

485,304

700,05I

I0 3I

I950

62I,586

707,758

604,609 720,429

739,I79 i8

2

Madras

I920

969,269

I,025,492

I,023,656

I,094,972

I1,204,30I

I5

9

I930

I,I39,207

I,48I,I64

I,463,962

I,308,68I

I1,722,237 I5

24

I940 I,I40,700 i,647,5I2 I,584,I98 I,292,724 i,863,762 I5 3I

I950

1,280,i90

i,622,745

I,538,540

I,408,349

I,8I0,047

I5

22

Bombay

I920

570,I45

603,945

593,I75

750,854

2I

4

I930

647,732

766,578

7I6,952

_

907,534

2I

I6

I940

6I2,500

809,035

755,8I7

956,730

2I

24

Punjab

I920

38I,492

356,307

402,369 444,3I9

I930

394,957

395,494

437,486

455,I77

I940

362,200

485,892

522,404

420,478

25

I950

442,870

443,548

479,429

498,727

*

These

estimates

ave

been arrived

t

by

correcting

he registered

irth nd

infant

eaths

or

pecific

census

years,

nd

by

applying

further

orrection

or

deaths

occurring hroughout

he calendar

year.

Table

I

7

Birthsper

I,ooo

Married

Women

aged

I5-50

Province

by

Decades

I9II-20

I92I-30

I93I-40 I94I-50

Assam

...

...

...

...

...

284

290

334

267

W.

Bengal

...

...

..

...

237

207

2II

I9I

Bihar

nd

Orissa

..

... ...

254

237 230

I82

Utter

radesh

..

.260

2I7

234

I85

Madhya

radesh

..

...

...

225 2I7

I95

2I4

Madras.

...

...

...

...

Io

I96

209

i8i

Bombay

...

...

...

..

230 239

239

208

E.

Punjab.

... ... ... ...

259

245

253

224

India

.. .

...

...

237

2I7

228

200



16/17

THE TREND

OF

THE BIRTH

RATE IN INDIA,

1911-50

67

The fertility

ates how

practically

hesame

type

f movement

s were seen

in the

crudebirth

ates or he different

rovinces.

There s

a slight endency

towards decline

n

WestBengal,

Bihar,

Orissa and

Uttar

Pradesh.

Assam,

Madras,Bombay ndthePunjab East) do not showanydefiniterend. For

thecountry

s

a whole

he rend eems o be one of

very light

ecline, nd this

conclusion

s in broad

greement

ith

hat

rrived

t

by Davis.'

The

relative

ositions

f

the

provinces

ave remained

pproximately

he

same throughout

heperiod.

Thusthefertility

ates n Assam

nd the Punjab

are generally

igher

while

the rateforMadras

s

generally

ower

than hatof

the

otherprovinces.

Those

other

provinces

iffer

rom

ach

other nlyto

a

minordegree.

Indeed,considering

he

approximate

ature f the

estimates

suchdifferences

hould

notbe

regarded

s

very ignificant.

Summarising

he

results,

t

may

herefore

e concluded

hat

uring

he

period

1911-50

there asbeen very lighthangenthe ertilityevelsn ndia. Further

the

relative

ositions

f different

egions

ave

remained lmost

onstant,

uch

changes

s did

take

place

affected

he ntire

rea

equally.

APPENDIX

Note

on

Bengal

We

have seen

earlierhat

Kingsley

avis's estimate

f a rate

of

omission

f

4I

*2

per

centfor

Bengal

n

I926-30

is

differentrom

ur

estimate

f 27.9

per

cent

for

West

Bengal

n

92I-30.

It is

interesting

o notethat

Davis's estimate

ofthe error f omission t

4I

2

percentforBengal s also borneoutbythe

estimate

f

the ensus

ctuaries

f

93I,

who

put

the

figure

t

37 per

cent

during

I92I-30. Accepting

hecensus stimate f

an omission ate

of

37 per

cent,

he

corrected

irth

ate

ives

us

a

figure

f

I 9 per

thousand.

Using

his

orrected

rate

we

can work

back

to

therate fomissionn

9II-20

by

using

ur

formula.

The

ratio

of

population

ncrease

uring

92I-30

to

I9II-20

for

Bengal

as a

whole

was

I

05.

According

o our formula

he nitial mission

ate n 9II-20

comes

ut

as

29

per

cent,

hecensus

stimate

f

92I

being

6

4

per

cent,

which

agrees

fairly

ell

with

our

estimate. t is

thus

evident

hat

working ack

to

I9II-20

our

formula

or

Bengal

s a

whole

gives

figures

onsistent

ithother

estimates,ccepting figure oughly qual to Davis's estimate or

926-30.

We

may,

herefore,afely ay

hat

herate

or

Bengal

s

a

whole

for ater

eriods

is

higher

than

that

of West

Bengal.

The omission

rate

for

I949-50

for

West

Bengal

s calculated

y

the ensus ctuaries

s lower

hanwhatwouldbe

obtained

for

Bengal

as

a

whole

during

his

period.

This is

quite

understandable

f

we

compare

rates

of

omission

of Assam with

those

of

West

Bengal

in

I94I-50.

In

I949-50

the

rate f

omission

or

Assamwas

64 per

cent

gainst

2

I

per

cent

for

West

Bengal.

East

Bengal,being

very

ackward

rea as

regards ransport

and

communications

nd

being

very

densely opulated,

t

is more

ikely

hat

its

rate

of

omission

will

be

nearer

o

thatof

Assam

which

s

similarly laced

1

There

is some

evidence

here

that

after

92I the

birthrate

started

o decline

slightly

....

It

would

not do

to

extrapolate

he

past

trendpartly

ecause

of

possible

errors

n

the

figures

nd

partly

because

there

s

hardly

ny

trend,

bservable

, Davis,

op. cit.,p. 69.



17/17

68

A. GHOSH

than o that f highly

rbanisedWestBengal. The following able

howsthe

relevant

igures:

Registered irth Corrected

Decade

Rate for BirthRate

Omission Rate

Bengal Bengal

per cent

19II-20 ...

... 3

8

44*7

26 (census) 9 (formula)

I92I-30

..

.

28

5

4I-9

3 (census)

41

(Davis)

As partition

f

the

province

ook

place

in I946 the censusof

I

9I

is limited

to theWestBengal

rea.

Our

scrutiny

f

both

East and WestBengal hus hows

that

t

would be

wrong

o

compare

Davis's

estimate

or

the whole of

Bengal

with he rea ncludednWestBengalwhich s what hecensus uthoritiesave

done.

Documents

The Trend of the Birth Rate in India, 1911-50