…MODIFIED TOPICS…<br />Introduction<br />Demographic Transition Model<br />World Population Growth<br />Population Growth in India<br />
INTRODUCTION<br />What does Population actually means ???<br />In general , a term for the number of people living in an area at a particular time .<br />How can Population Growth be defined ???<br />The change in population over time and can be quantified as the change in number of individuals in a population us “per unit time”. The term Population Growth can technically refer to any species , but almost refers to humans and it is often informally , far the more specific demographic term Population Growth Rate.<br />
Defining Population Growth Rate (PGR) ???<br />The fractional rate at which the number of individuals in a population increases , specially , ordinarily refers to the change in population over a unit time period .<br />Population Growth Rate is often expressed as a % of the no. of individuals in the population at the beginning of that period . This can be framed as the formula :–<br />GROWTH RATE = Population at End of Period - Population at Beginning of Period / Population at Beginning of Period .<br />It can be further expanded as , <br />GROWTH RATE = Crude Birth Rate (CBR) - Crude Death Rate (CDR) + Net Immigrant Rate (NIR).<br /> or<br /> Population / Population = (Birth / Population) - (Death / Population) + (Immigrant / Population) - (Emigrant / Population).<br />
Population Growth Rate can be positiveor negative . A Positive Growth Rate indicates the population increasing; while a Negative Growth Rate indicates population decline . A Growth Rate of Zero indicates that there were same number of people at the two times , that is , net difference between Births , Deaths and Migration is Zero . Growth Rate can be Zero when there are significant changes ; the Birth Rates , Death Rates , Immigrant Rates and Age Distribution between the two times .<br />The World Population is the total number of living humans on earth on a given time . As 9th Feb. 2010 , the earth’s population is estimated by UNITED NATIONS CENSUS BUREAU to 6,801,600,000 . The fastest rates of the world population growth is above 1.8 % , were seen briefly during the 1950’s , then for a longer period during 1960’s and 1970’s.<br />
In this fig.1, it is showing the population of the world and its regions (in millions), in which Solid Line indicates Medium Variant ; SHADED REGION indicates Low to High Variant ; DASHED LINEindicates Constant Fertility Variant .<br /> Population (in million)<br /> Source : UNPD , 2004<br />Years<br />Fig. 1 : Past and Projected human population on different continents.<br />According to CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY (CIA) World Fact Book (2008) , Maldives has the highest rate of population growth (5.57 %) , United Arab Emirates has rank 2nd with 3.83% population growth , Liberia stands in rank 3 with 3.66 % population growth. On the other hand, according to UNITED NATION (2005 - 2010), Liberia stands 1st in population growth rate with 4.50 % , Burundi stands in 2nd position with 3.90 % and Afghanistan stands 3rd with 3.85 % .<br />India stands in rank 90 with 1.46 % in UNITED NATION REPORT and it holds the rank 77 in CIA World Fact Book with 1.58 % population growth.<br />
DEMOGRAPHIC TRANSITION MODEL<br />HIGHLIGHTS <br /> DEMOGRAPHY<br />TRANSITION<br /> Process of changing from one state or condition to another<br />Statistical study of Human <br />Population<br /> Shows the trend of population growth over a certain period of time on <br /> the basis of two vital <br /> statistics….<br />Birth rate <br />& <br />death rate<br />
In 1929, Frank W. Notestein coined the term <br />“..DEMOGRAPHIC TRANSITION..”<br />Later on, in 1945, Warren S. Thompson propounded the term.. <br /> Based only on Western Experiences<br />The model basically suggests five phases but only the first three will be dealt…!!<br />
Demographic Transition:Stage of <br />societal development in unindustrialized<br />countries marked by growing life expectancy and high birth rates; <br />concept used to explain why populations in less-developed countries grow faster than those in more developed countries.<br /> Fig. 2 : Demographic Transition Model<br /> Stages :-<br /> High Stationery<br /> Early Expanding<br /> Late Expanding<br /> Low Stationary<br /> Fig. 3 : The four main stages with specific explanations <br />
The three stages :-<br />• Stage 1 (pre-industrial): Slow growth because of very high birth and death rates,<br />• Stage 2 (early industrial): Rapid growth because death rate drops, but birth rate remains<br /> high,<br />• Stage 3 (later industrial): Slow growth because birth rate drops to approach death rate.<br />Stage One<br />In pre-industrial society, death rates and birth rates were both high and fluctuated rapidly according to natural events, such as drought and disease, to produce a relatively constant and young population. Children contributed to the economy of the household from an early age by carrying water, firewood, and messages, caring for younger siblings, sweeping, washing dishes, preparing food, and doing some work in the fields.<br />Raising a child cost little more than feeding him; there were no education or entertainment expenses and, in equatorial Africa, there were no clothing expenses either. Thus, the totalcost of raising childrenbarely exceeded their contribution to the household. In addition, as they became adults they become a major input to the family business, mainly farming, and were the primary form of insurance for adults in old age. In India, an adult son was all that prevented a widow from falling into destitution. While death rates remained high there was no question as to the need for children, even if the means to prevent them had existed.<br />Stage Two<br />This stage leads to a fall in death rates and an increase in population. The changes leading to this stage in Europe were initiated in the Agricultural Revolution of the 18th century and were initially quite slow. In the 20th century, the falls in death rates in developing countries tended to be substantially faster. Countries in this stage include Yemen, Afghanistan, the Palestinian territories, Bhutan and Laos and much of Sub-Saharan Africa (but do not include South Africa, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Swaziland, Lesotho, Namibia, Kenya and Ghana, which have begun to move into stage 3).<br />
The decline in the death rate is due initially to two factors:<br /><ul><li>First, improvements in the food supply brought about by higher yields in agricultural practices and better transportation prevent death due to starvation and lack of water. Agricultural improvements included crop rotation, selective breeding, and seed drill technology.
Second, significant improvements in public health reduce mortality, particularly in childhood. These are not so much medical breakthroughs (Europe passed through stage two before the advances of the mid-20th century, although there was significant medical progress in the 19th century, such as the development of vaccination) as there are improvements in water supply, sewerage, food handling, and general personal hygiene following from growing scientific knowledge of the causes of disease and the improved education and social status of mothers. </li></ul>A consequence of the decline in mortality in Stage Two is an increasingly rapid rise in population growth (a "population explosion") as the gap between deaths and births grows wider. Note that this growth is not due to an increase in fertility (or birth rates) but to a decline in deaths. This change in population occurred in northwestern Europe during the 19th century due to the Industrial Revolution. During the second half of the 20th century less-developed countries entered Stage Two, creating the worldwide population explosion that has demographers concerned today.<br />Another characteristic of Stage Two of the demographic transition is a change in the age structure of the population. In Stage One, the majority of deaths are concentrated in the first 5–10 years of life. Therefore, more than anything else, the decline in death rates in Stage Two entails the increasing survival of children and a growing population. Hence, the age structure of the population becomes increasingly youthful and more of these children enter the reproductive cycle of their lives while maintaining the high fertility rates of their parents. The bottom of the "age pyramid" widens first, accelerating population growth. The age structure of such a population is illustrated by using an example from the Third World today.<br />Stage Three<br />Stage Three moves the population towards stability through a decline in the birth rate.There are several factors contributing to this eventual decline, although some of them remain speculative:<br /><ul><li> In rural areas continued decline in childhood death means that at some point parents realize, they need not require so many children to be born to ensure a comfortable old age. As childhood death continues to fall and income</li></li></ul><li>increase, parents can become increasingly confident that fewer children will suffice to help in family business and care for them in old age. <br /><ul><li>Increasing urbanization changes the traditional values placed upon fertility and the value of children in rural society. Urban living also raises the cost of dependent children to a family. A recent theory suggests that urbanization also contributes to reducing the birth rate because it disrupts optimal mating patterns. A 2008 study in Iceland found that the most fecund marriages are between distant cousins. Genetic incompatibilities inherent in more distant out breeding makes reproduction harder.
In both rural and urban areas, the cost of children to parents is exacerbated by the introduction of compulsory education acts and the increased need to educate children so they can take up a respected position in society. Children are increasingly prohibited under law from working outside the household and make an increasingly limited contribution to the household, as school children are increasingly exempted from the expectation of making a significant contribution to domestic work. Even in equatorial Africa, children now need to be clothed, and may even require school uniforms. Parents begin to consider it a duty to buy children books and toys. Partly due to education and access to family planning, people begin to reassess their need for children and their ability to raise them.</li></ul>A major factor in reducing birth rates in stage 3 countries such as Malaysia is the availability of family planning facilities, like this one in Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu, Malaysia.<br /><ul><li> Increasing female literacy and employment lower the uncritical acceptance of childbearing and motherhood as measures of the status of women. Working women have less time to raise children; this is particularly an issue where fathers traditionally make little or no contribution to child-raising, such as southern Europe or Japan. Valuation of women beyond childbearing and motherhood becomes important.
Improvements in contraceptive technology are now a major factor. Fertility decline is caused as much by changes in values about children and sex as by the availability of contraceptives and knowledge of how to use them. </li></ul>The resulting changes in the age structure of the population include a reduction in the youth dependency ratio and eventually population ageing. The population structure becomes less triangular and more like an elongated balloon. During the period between the decline in youth dependency and rise in old age dependency there is a demographic window of opportunity that can potentially produce economic growth through an increase in the ratio of working age<br />
to dependent population; the demographic dividend.<br />However, unless factors such as those listed above are allowed to work, a society's birth rates may not drop to a low level in due time, which means that the society cannot proceed to Stage Four and is locked in what is called a demographic trap.<br />Countries that have experienced a fertility decline of over 40% from their pre-transition levels include: Costa Rica, El Salvador, Panama, Jamaica, Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Surinam, Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Lebanon, South Africa, India, Saudi Arabia, and many Pacific islands.<br />Countries that have experienced a fertility decline of 25-40% include: Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Bolivia, Vietnam, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Tajikistan, Jordan, Qatar, Albania, United Arab Emirates, Zimbabwe, and Botswana.<br />Countries that have experienced a fertility decline of 10-25% include: Haiti, Papua New Guinea, Nepal, Pakistan, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Kenya, Ghana and Senegal.<br />Effects on Age Structure<br />The decline in death rate and birth rate that occurs during the demographic transition leads to a radical transformation of the age structure. When the death rate declines during the second stage of the transition, the result is primarily an increase in the child population. The reason is that when the death rate is high (stage one), the infant mortality rate is very high, often above 200 deaths per 1000 children born. When the death rate falls or improves, this, in general, results in a significantly lower infant mortality rate and, hence, increased child survival. Over time, as cohorts increased by higher survival rates get older, there will also be an increase in the number of older children, teenagers, and young adults. This implies that there is an increase in the fertile population which, with constant fertility rates, will lead to an increase in the number of children born. This will further increase the growth of the child population. The second stage of the demographic transition, therefore, implies a rise in child dependency.<br />
Consequences:-<br />Most worldwide population growth happened in past 200 years;<br />• First billion reached in 1804, sixth billion in Oct. 1999.<br />World population growth is stabilizing;<br />• Highest growth rate (2.04%) in late 1960s; now at 1.31% .<br />• U.N. projects world pop. stabilizing at 10 billion after 2200 .<br />Growth rates vary among nations;<br />• Most growth is in developing (stage 2) nations. <br />• Some stage 3 nations approach zero population growth (ZPG).<br />Age structures and sex ratios vary among nations.<br />Critical Evaluation :-<br />It has to be remembered that the DTM is only a model and cannot necessarily predict the future. It does however give an indication of what the future birth and death rates may be for a country, together with the total population size. There are therefore limitations to it as with any model. Most particularly, of course, the DTM makes no comment on change in population due to migration.<br />Conclusion :-<br />The demographic transitions that swept the world in the course of the last century has been identified as one of the prime forces in the transition from stagnation to growth. It brought about significant reduction in fertility rates and population growth in various regions of the world, enabling economies to convert a larger share of the fruits of factor accumulation and technological progress into growth of income per capita. Various mechanisms have been proposed as possible triggers for the demographic transition, and thus as a catalyst in the transition from stagnation to growth. Empirical evidence, however, suggests that the increasing role of human capital in the production process in the second phase of the Industrial Revolution was the central force behind the demographic transition. Unlike episodes of technological progress in the pre-Industrial Revolution era that failed to generate sustained economic growth, the onset of the demographic transition liberated the gains in productivity from the counterbalancing effects of population growth paving the way for human capital formation and the emergence of the modern state of sustained economic growth.<br />
Fig.1 shows, the world population grew very slowly until 1750. Around 1750, at the drawn of Industrial Revolution. The world population was approx. 800 million. Until this time, the world population was kept in check by high mortality. After 1750, the world population grew substantially; by 1950, it had tripled around 2.5 billion. After this, duration of doubling time has decreased & also duration of billion addition decreased (as shown in fig. 2 & 3).<br />Source : UNPD<br />
THE WORLD AT BILLION : HIGHLIGHTS<br /><ul><li>World population is estimated cross the six billion threshold on Oct. 12th 1999.
World population is projected to cross the 7 billion mark in 2013; the 8 billion mark in 2028; the 9 billion mark in 2054.
World population nearly stabilizes at just above 10 billion after 2200.
It has taken just 22 yrs. for the world to add this most recent billion people. This is the shortest period of time in the world history for a billion people to be added.
World population did not reach one billion until 1804. It took 123 yrs. to reach 2 billion in 1927, 33 yrs. to 3 billion in 1960, 14 yrs. to reach 4 billion in 1974 and 13 yrs. to reach 5 billion in 1987.
The highest rate of world population growth (2.04 %) occurred in the late 1960s. The current rate (1995 – 2000) is 1.31 % .
The largest annual increase to world population (86 million) took place in the late 1980s; the current annual increase is 78 million. </li></li></ul><li><ul><li>Of the 78 million people currently added to the world each year, 95% live in the less developed regions.
80% of the world currently resides in the less developed regions. At the beginning o the century, 70% did so. By 2050, the share of the world population living in the currently less developed regions will have risen to 90%.
The number of people in the world aged 60 or older will also rise from the current one – of – ten persons to be two – of – nine by 2050.
Currently around one – of – five persons in the developed countries are aged 60 or older; in 2050 nearly one – of every – three persons will be aged 60 or older.
World life expectancy at birth is now at 65 yrs , having increased by a remarkable 20 yrs since 1950; by 2050 life expectancy is expected to exceed 76 yrs. However, in spite of these impressive gains, recent years have shown devastating toll from AIDS in a number of countries.
In addition, in some Eastern European Countries, health has been deteriorating and mortality, particularly among adult males, has been rising.
Couples in developed countries today have on an average 3 children each, 30 yrs ago they had six. More than half of all couples in the developing countries now use contraception.
The number of persons who have moved to another country has rise to above 120 million migrants today from 75 million in 1965.
The world has become increasingly urban. Currently, around 46 % of the world population lives in urban areas; the majority of the world’s population will be urban by 2006.</li></ul>Source : Population Division, UN.<br />
Countries with population 100 million or more,1950 <br />( SOURCE :- Population Division, UN) <br />
Countries with a population of 100 millions or more<br />( SOURCE-POPULATION DIVISION, UN , 1999)<br />
Distribution of the world urban population by major area, 1950, 2007, 2050<br />( Source – Population Division, UN )<br />
DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION OF GLOBAL POPULATION <br />
Urban Population <br />( SOURCE :- Population Division, UN) <br />
POPULATION GROWTH IN INDIA<br />Size, Growth Rate and Distribution of Population<br />INTRODUCTION :-<br />The first census was taken in India in 1871, and thereafter once every 10 yrs. It is, therefore , possible to study change in population size, structure, characteristics and other aspects during the last 139 yrs. The estimates of population size in India during the ancient, medieval and the early modern periods have been derived by Kingsley Davis from a careful examination of archeological evidence, relevant literature that and historical records left behind by scholars of history. The ensuing discussion on the growth of population in India from the ancient times upto 1900 draws heavily on the scholarly work of Kingsley Davis.<br />POPULATION GROWTH UPTO 1600 AD. : Since the ancient times, India has had the legacy of a thickly settled population. The excavations at Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro reveal that. It appears that even 3000 – 7000 yrs. ago, India possessed adequate technological knowledge to support a dense population. The available record for the first truly Indian empire, under the rule of Chandragupta Maurya almost three centuries BC., reveal that this empire could maintain a standing army of about 700,000 men. It may well be presumed from this that a substantial <br />
Population must have been required to maintain such a large army . Putting together all the available evidence, Davis asserts, “Before the Christian Era, India had a substantial population, first because of its advanced technology and second because of the fertile environment for the application of this technology”.<br />POPULATION GROWTH FROM 1600 – 1870 : It is our misfortune that very little documentary evidence is available on the basis of which estimates of population size for the period of 1600 – 1870 may be made. This is probably because of census which was done reason wise not country as a whole that’s way we do not get accurate statistics and different aspects about the population. Heavy reliance has, therefore, to be placed on the impressions of the Europeans who, during this period, visited India or stayed in India for different periods of time for either trade or military purposes. Davis, while attempting to reconstruct the growth of population in India during the period of 1660 – 1870 on the basis of all available evidence, has finally arrived at the conclusion that “there is little use trying to puzzle out India’s growth rate prior to the census period. The best policy is to revise Moreland’s figure for 1600 upward to 125 million, ant to assume that the population remained at this point for one and half centuries more, after which a gradual enhancement of growth began, accelerating as 1870 approached”.<br />POPULATION GROWTH FROM 1871 – 1901 : From 1871 onwards, the base for the study of the population of India is more firm, for actual accounts rather than only estimates, are available. These actual counts, however, cannot be accepted as reliable because, with each census, additional territories were covered and improvements effected in the methodology <br />
of conducting a census. The necessary adjustments in the total population figures have, therefore, been made.<br />The population count for 1867 – 1871 was 203.4 million, while the adjusted figure was 255.2 million. The growth rate of India’s population, computed on the basis of adjusted figures, indicates that between 1867 – 71 and 1881, <br />Source : Census of <br /> India<br /> Table a1. : Growth Rates<br />population increased at the rate of 0.9 % , while<br />during 1881 – 91, it increased by 9.4 %. In the next decade (1891 – 1901), however the growth rate went down to 1 %. The fluctuations in the rates of growth may be evaluated from the (table a1.).<br />POPULATION GROWTH IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY – Table a2., presents the growth of India’s population from 1901 to 2001. It may be noted that the figures have been adjusted for the territorial changes which occurred because of the partition of the Indian sub-continent into two countries, India and Pakistan. The census figures for 2001 refer to the population of India as recorded at 00.00 Hours of March 1, 2001. It may, however, be noted that the enumeration was not carried out in Jammu And Kashmir. The provisional figure of the total population as recorded in the 1991 census, however, includes the projected population of Jammu And Kashmir.<br />
Table a2. – POPULATION GROWTH IN INDIA 1901-2001<br />Source : Census Of India, 2001<br />
OBSERVATIONS FROM TABLE a2 :<br />The course of population growth upto 1921 was undulating. The decades of marked increases regularly alternated with decades of small increases, while during 1911-21 a negative growth was experienced.<br />The absolute number of people added to the population during each decade has been on the increase since 1921.<br />The decennial rate of growth has also increased from 1921 upto 2001. From 1951 onwards, India’s population has been growing at a phenomenal rate. While during 1941 to 1951, the average decennial growth rate was 13.31 % , during 1951-61 it increased to 21.6% during 1961-71 it was 24.8%. From 1901-2001 there has been an increase of 330.8% in the population. India’s population has more than doubled in a period of 50 years, i.e., from 1921-71. <br />It can be noticed from table a2 that the decennial population growth rate during 1961-71 was 21.80%, during 1971-81 it was 24.66%, during 1981-91 it was 23.85% and during 1991-2001 it was 21.34%. Thus, it can be observed that the rate of population growth has decreased during 1981-91 and 1991-2001.<br />
CURRENT POPULATION SITUATION IN INDIA :<br />India’s population growth during the twentieth century can be classified into the following four distinct phases :<br />1901-1921 : Stagnant population<br />1921-1951 : Steady growth<br />1951-1981 : Rapid high growth<br />1981-2001 : High growth with definite<br />signs of slowing down<br />
THE CURRENT POPULATION SITUATION IN THE STATES AND UNION TERRITORIES :<br />MAP : 1<br />
PROSPECTS FOR POPULATION GROWTH IN INDIA : It must be emphasized of population growth in India, which is already over – populated, will depend mainly on the reproductive behavior of the people. Though the death rate has considerably declined over the yrs., there is a scope for even further decline, in which case there is all the more reason why the birth rate should correspondingly decrease. A further reduction in birth rate will certainly depend on the effectiveness with which family planning programme, recently renamed the family welfare programme is implemented.<br />