Population — Distribution, Density, Growth and Composition (India) — Practice

Question 1

Why is 1921 called the 'Year of the Great Divide' in India's population history?

Accepted Answer

THE YEAR OF THE GREAT DIVIDE (1921): The census decade 1911–1921 was the ONLY decade in post-1901 Indian history in which the population actually declined slightly (from 303 million in 1911 to 251 million in 1921 — reflecting the devastating 1918 influenza pandemic which killed 10–13 million Indians, combined with recurring famines and very high death rates). WHY 1921 IS THE TURNING POINT: From 1921 onwards, death rates began to CONSISTENTLY and RAPIDLY FALL because of: (1) Improvements in public health infrastructure by the British administration (vaccinations against plague and cholera). (2) Better famine relief using railways to distribute food. (3) Gradual improvements in medicine. Birth rates REMAINED HIGH (cultural preference for large families, early marriage, no family planning). The GAP between high birth rates and falling death rates began to widen from 1921, producing consistent population growth for the first time. ALL SUBSEQUENT DECADES show population growth (never another decline or near-stagnation). This is why 1921 'divides' India's demographic history: before 1921 = stagnant phase; after 1921 = steady then explosive growth. It marks the beginning of India's Stage II demographic transition.

Question 2

Compare the demographic profiles of Kerala and Bihar. What do these differences reveal about development?

Accepted Answer

KERALA vs BIHAR — DEMOGRAPHIC COMPARISON (2011 Census): POPULATION DENSITY: Bihar: 1,106/km² (highest in India). Kerala: 860/km² (also high, but distributed differently). LITERACY: Kerala: ~94% (highest in India; female literacy ~92%). Bihar: 61.8% (lowest in India; female literacy ~53%). SEX RATIO: Kerala: 1,084 females/1,000 males (highest in India). Bihar: 918 (below national average of 940). HUMAN DEVELOPMENT: Kerala would rank ~50th globally on HDI. Bihar would rank ~150th globally. FERTILITY (TFR): Kerala: ~1.7 (BELOW replacement level — population stabilising or slightly declining). Bihar: ~3.0 (above replacement — still growing). WHAT THIS REVEALS: (1) EDUCATION TRANSFORMS DEMOGRAPHICS: Kerala's investment in women's education since the 19th century (princely state of Travancore had strong school networks) has produced: lower fertility (educated women delay marriage, want fewer children), better sex ratio (educated girls are valued), lower infant mortality. (2) INCOME ≠ DEVELOPMENT: Bihar has grown economically in recent years, but its demographic indicators remain poor — showing that GDP growth without targeted social spending doesn't produce human development. (3) GENDER EQUALITY IS FOUNDATIONAL: Kerala's female literacy drives its HDI; Bihar's gender gap in literacy drives its low HDI. (4) REGIONAL VARIATION WITHIN INDIA: India's national HDI averages mask an enormous range — from near-European conditions in Kerala to sub-Saharan conditions in some Bihar districts.

Question 3

Critically assess India's population policy from independence to the present. What has worked and what hasn't?

Accepted Answer

INDIA'S POPULATION POLICY — EVOLUTION AND ASSESSMENT: (1) EARLY PHASE (1952–1970s): India was the FIRST country in the world to adopt an official Family Planning Programme in 1952. Initial approach: voluntary family planning — providing contraceptives, education. Results: slow impact. Birth rate fell from ~45 (1951) to ~37 (1971). Population doubled from 361 million to 548 million. (2) EMERGENCY PHASE (1975–1977): The Indira Gandhi Emergency government launched FORCED STERILISATION campaigns — primarily vasectomies for men. ~8.3 million sterilisations in 1976-77. MASSIVE BACKLASH: coercive methods, targeting of poor and minorities. Emergency defeat (1977) partly due to public fury over forced sterilisation. This remains India's most controversial population policy moment. (3) POST-EMERGENCY SOFTENING (1977–2000): India shifted to VOLUNTARY, INCENTIVE-BASED family planning. Two-child norm encouraged (not legally enforced at national level). Contraceptive supply improved. Small family norm communication campaigns. (4) NATIONAL POPULATION POLICY 2000: Stated goal: achieve TFR of 2.1 (replacement level) by 2010. Approach: (a) address unmet need for contraception; (b) reduce infant mortality so parents don't need 'insurance' children; (c) improve girl child education — Kerala model at national scale; (d) delay age at marriage for women. RESULTS: India's TFR fell from ~6 (1950) to ~2.0 (2021) — slightly below replacement. SUCCESS FACTORS: Female literacy increase (from ~9% in 1951 to 65%+ in 2011). Urbanisation. Economic development. Expanded family planning services. FAILURES: Uneven progress — UP, Bihar, Jharkhand TFR still >3.0. Coercion concerns resurfaced — some states passed two-child laws disqualifying parents of 3+ children from local body elections. CURRENT STATUS: India's TFR is near replacement level nationally, but demographic momentum (large young population already born) means population will continue growing until ~2060 (projected peak: ~1.7 billion). The challenge has shifted from reducing fertility to managing the quality of a large young population — education, skills, health.

Practice — Population — Distribution, Density, Growth and Composition (India)

Sign in to save attempts to your dashboard and track your accuracy over time

Find a verified tutor

Join a live course

Browse coaching centres

About

Categories

Support

Documentation

Get Study Tips & Updates

Download Our App

Download for iOS

Download for Android

Popular Cities