Class 12 Sociology Chapter 2 The Demographic Structure of the Indian Society NCERT Solutions

Q. Explain the basic argument of the theory of demographic transition. Why is
the transition period associated with a “population explosion”?

Answer:

The basic argument. The theory of demographic transition holds that
population growth is linked to overall levels of economic development, and that every
society follows a typical pattern of development-related population growth. There are
three basic stages.

Stage 1. Low population growth in a society that is underdeveloped and
technologically backward. Growth rates are low because both the death rate and the
birth rate are very high, so the difference between the two, the net growth rate, is
low.

Stage 2. The transitional stage, the movement from a backward to an advanced
stage. This stage is characterised by very high rates of growth of population.

Stage 3. Low growth again, in a developed society where both the death rate
and the birth rate have been reduced considerably and the difference between them is
once again small.

Why the transition brings a “population explosion”. Because the two rates do
not fall together. Death rates are brought down relatively quickly through advanced
methods of disease control, public health and better nutrition, all of which a state
and its medical services can supply. But it takes far longer for a
society to adjust and alter its reproductive behaviour, which evolved during a period
of poverty and high death rates, to suit a new situation of relative prosperity and
longer life spans. For some time, therefore, comparatively few people die
while many are still being born, and the widening gap between the two rates is the
population explosion.

This kind of transition was effected in Western Europe during the late nineteenth
and early twentieth century, and more or less similar patterns are followed in the less
developed countries that are struggling to reduce the birth rate in keeping with the
falling mortality rate. In India the demographic transition is not yet complete,
because the mortality rate has been reduced but the birth rate has not been brought
down to the same extent.

Q. Why did Malthus believe that catastrophic events like famines and
epidemics that cause mass deaths were inevitable?

Answer:

Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834) argued in his Essay on Population (1798)
that human populations tend to grow at a much faster rate than the rate at which the
means of human subsistence, especially food but also clothing and other
agriculture-based products, can grow. Population rises in geometric progression, like
2, 4, 8, 16, 32, while agricultural production can only grow in arithmetic progression,
like 2, 4, 6, 8, 10.

Because population growth always outstrips the growth in production of subsistence
resources, Malthus held that humanity is condemned to live in poverty forever, and that
the only way to increase prosperity is by controlling the growth of population.

He believed, however, that humanity has only a limited ability to reduce its
population growth voluntarily, through what he called preventive checks such as
postponing marriage, practising sexual abstinence or celibacy. Since those voluntary
measures could not do enough, the imbalance between food supply and an increasing
population had to be corrected some other way.

That is why he thought positive checks, in the form of famines and diseases,
were inevitable. In the chapter’s words, they were nature’s way of
dealing with the imbalance between food supply and increasing population. The quotation
in Box 2.1 puts it in his own words: “The vices of mankind are active and able ministers
of depopulation”, and if they fail, “sickly seasons, epidemics, pestilence, and plague”
follow, and “gigantic inevitable famine stalks in the rear”.

Q. What is meant by “birth rate” and “death rate”? Explain why the birth rate
is relatively slow to fall while the death rate declines much faster.

Answer:

Birth rate. The birth rate is the total number of live births in a particular
area, which may be an entire country, a state, a district or another territorial unit,
during a specified period, usually a year, divided by the total population of that area
in thousands. In short, it is the number of live births per 1000 population.

Death rate. The death rate is a similar statistic, expressed as the number of
deaths in a given area during a given time per 1000 population. Both statistics depend
on the reporting of births and deaths by the families in which they occur.

Why the death rate falls fast. Death rates can be brought down relatively
quickly through advanced methods of disease control, public health and better
nutrition. In India the principal reasons for the decline
after 1921 were increased levels of control over famines and epidemic diseases.
Improvements in medical cures, programmes for mass vaccination and efforts to improve
sanitation controlled the great epidemics of fevers, plague, smallpox and cholera.
Improvements in agricultural productivity, especially through the expansion of
irrigation, better means of communication and more vigorous relief and preventive
measures by the state drastically reduced deaths from famine.

Why the birth rate falls slowly. The birth rate is a sociocultural phenomenon
that is relatively slow to change: it takes longer for a society to adjust and alter its
reproductive behaviour, which evolved during a period of poverty and high death rates.
By and large, increased levels of prosperity exert a
strong downward pull on the birth rate, but only once infant mortality rates decline
and there is an overall increase in the levels of education and awareness does family
size begin to fall.

Q. Which states in India have reached or are very near the “replacement
levels” of population growth? Which ones still have very high rates of population
growth? In your opinion, what could be some of the reasons for these regional
differences?

Answer:

What the replacement level is. The replacement level is the rate of growth
required for new generations to replace the older ones that are dying out, reached when
the difference between the birth rate and the death rate is zero or, in practice, very
small.

States at or below the replacement level. Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh,
Punjab, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal had managed to bring their total fertility rates
down to 1.7 each in 2016, which means that the average woman in these states produces
only 1.7 children, below the replacement level. Kerala’s total fertility rate is also
below the replacement level, which means that its population is going to decline in
future.

States that still have very high rates. Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and
Uttar Pradesh still have very high total fertility rates: in 2016 they were 3.3, 2.8,
2.7 and 3.1 respectively. According to the Sample Registration System, Statistical
Report 2020, Bihar with 25.5 and Uttar Pradesh with 25.1 account for the highest birth
rates in India, and the Economic Survey 2018-19 projects that these two states will
account for almost half, 50%, of the additions to the Indian population up to the year
2041, with Uttar Pradesh alone expected to account for a little less than one-quarter,
22%, of that increase.

Possible reasons for the regional differences. This part asks for your
opinion. The chapter gives these general factors, but no state-by-state history, so
present any state-specific explanation as your own view.

1. Levels of prosperity. Increased levels of prosperity exert a strong
downward pull on the birth rate.

2. Infant mortality. Once infant mortality rates decline, parents can expect
the children they have to survive, and family size begins to fall.

3. Education and awareness. An overall increase in the levels of education
and awareness, and particularly female literacy, is closely associated with smaller
families. Kerala, which is approaching universal literacy, has fertility below the
replacement level, while Bihar, which is lagging far behind in literacy, has the
highest total fertility rate (3.3) of the states the chapter names.

4. The slowness of sociocultural change. Because the birth rate is a
sociocultural phenomenon that is relatively slow to change, fertility may follow these
changes only with a lag.

The same divide shows up in the age structure: Kerala is beginning to acquire an age
structure like that of the developed countries, while Uttar Pradesh presents a very
different picture with high proportions in the younger age groups and relatively low
proportions among the aged. India as a whole is somewhere in the middle, because it
includes states like Uttar Pradesh as well as states that are more like Kerala.

Q. What is meant by the “age structure” of the population? Why is it relevant
for economic development and growth?

Answer:

Meaning. The age structure of the population refers to the proportion of
persons in different age groups relative to the total population. It changes in
response to changes in levels of development and in the average life expectancy.
Initially, poor medical facilities, the prevalence of disease and high infant and
maternal mortality make for a relatively short life span. With development, quality of
life improves and life expectancy improves with it, so relatively smaller proportions
of the population are found in the younger age groups and larger proportions in the
older age groups, a change also referred to as the ageing of the population.

India’s age structure. India has a very young population. The share of the
under-15 age group has come down from its highest level of 42% in 1971 to 29% in 2011,
the share of the 15-59 age group has increased from 53% to 63%, and the share of the
60+ age group, though small, has begun to increase, from 5% in 1971 to 8% in 2011 (Table 2). By 2026 the
projection is 23%, 64% and 12% respectively.

Why it is relevant for economic development and growth.

1. It decides the dependency ratio. The dependency ratio compares the portion
of a population composed of dependants, meaning elderly people who are too old to work
and children who are too young to work, with the portion in the working age group,
generally defined as 15 to 64 years. A rising dependency ratio is a cause for worry in
countries facing an ageing population, because it becomes difficult for a relatively
smaller proportion of working-age people to carry the burden of providing for a
relatively larger proportion of dependants.

2. A falling dependency ratio is an opportunity. A falling dependency ratio
can be a source of economic growth and prosperity, because of the larger proportion of
workers relative to non-workers. This is the demographic dividend, or benefit flowing
from the changing age structure. India’s total dependency ratio fell from 79 in 1970 to
64 in 2005; on the age-based measure it is projected to fall to 48 in 2025 and rise to
50 by 2050.

3. India is placed to receive that dividend. A third of India’s population
was below 15 years of age in 2011, and in 2020 the average Indian was only 29 years
old, compared with 37 in China and the United States, 45 in Western Europe and 48 in
Japan. This implies a large and growing labour force which can deliver unexpected
benefits in terms of growth and prosperity.

4. But there is nothing automatic about it. The potential can be converted
into actual growth only if the rise in the working age group is accompanied by
increasing levels of education and employment. If the new entrants to the labour force
are not educated their productivity remains low; if they remain unemployed they are
unable to earn at all and become dependants rather than earners. The real problem is in
defining the dependency ratio as the ratio of the non-working age to working-age
population, rather than the ratio of non-workers to workers, and the difference between
the two is determined by the extent of unemployment and underemployment. That is why
the rate of growth of employment in the 15-30 age group falling from around 2.4 per
cent a year between 1987 and 1994 to 0.7 for rural men and 0.3 per cent for urban men
during 1994 to 2004 is such a serious warning.

5. The benefit is temporary. The larger pool of working-age people will
eventually turn into non-working old people, so the window has to be used while it is
open.

Q. What is meant by the “sex ratio”? What are some of the implications of a
declining sex ratio? Do you feel that parents still prefer to have sons rather than
daughters? What, in your opinion, could be some of the reasons for this preference?

Answer:

Meaning. The sex ratio refers to the number of females per 1000 males in a
given area at a specified time period. Historically, all over the world, most countries
have been found to have slightly more females than males. This is so despite the fact
that slightly more male babies are born than female ones, since nature seems to produce
roughly 943 to 952 female babies for every 1000 males. Two things account for it: girl
babies appear to have an advantage over boy babies in resistance to disease in infancy,
and women have tended to outlive men in most societies, so there are more older women
than men. The combination gives a sex ratio of roughly 1050 females per 1000 males in
most contexts.

India’s record. India has had a declining sex ratio for more than a century.
From 972 females per 1000 males at the turn of the twentieth century it declined to 933
at the turn of the twenty-first. The trends of the last four decades have been
particularly worrying: from 941 in 1961 the sex ratio fell to an all-time low of 927 in
1991, before a modest increase in 2001, and according to the Census of India 2011 it
has increased to 943. What has really alarmed demographers, policy makers, social
activists and concerned citizens, however, is the drastic fall in the child sex ratio
for the 0-6 age group, from 976 in 1961 to 919 in 2011. In the decade 1991 to 2001 the
overall sex ratio posted its highest increase up to then, 6 points, while the child sex
ratio dropped 18 points, taking it below the overall sex ratio for the first time.

Implications of a declining sex ratio.

1. It points to a serious social problem. Since maternal mortality has been
coming down in India, it is difficult to see how it could explain a worsening sex ratio. Combined with the much
steeper fall in the child sex ratio, social scientists believe the cause has to be
sought in the differential treatment of girl babies: severe neglect of girl babies in
infancy leading to higher death rates, sex-specific abortions that prevent girl babies
from being born, and female infanticide.

2. Fewer girls in the next generation. A falling child sex ratio means fewer
girls in the present generation of children, and so it will shape the adult population
of the future.

3. It reveals the value placed on women. A declining sex ratio has been
linked to prevailing social norms that tend to value males much more than females,
which leads to son preference and the relative neglect of girl babies.

4. It is worst where resources are best. As many as nine States and Union
Territories have a child sex ratio under 900, with Haryana the worst at 793, and the
lowest child sex ratios are found in the most prosperous regions of India.

Do parents still prefer sons, and why? The low child sex ratios in the
chapter suggest that the preference persists. The chapter’s explanation is prevailing
social norms; the second point below is the kind of opinion you may add, and the
chapter itself does not discuss it.

1. Social norms. Prevailing social norms tend to value males much more than
females, which leads to ‘son preference’ and the relative neglect of girl babies.

2. Your own opinion (not from the chapter). Sons are often expected to support
parents in old age and to continue the family line, so a couple that intends to have
only one or two children may feel it cannot afford to have no son.

3. Smaller families plus available technology. Sometimes economically
prosperous families decide to have fewer children, often only one or two now, and they
may also wish to choose the sex of their child. This becomes possible with the
availability of ultra-sound technology. The sonogram, an x-ray-like diagnostic device
originally developed to identify genetic or other disorders in the foetus, is misused to
identify and selectively abort female foetuses.

4. Not poverty or ignorance. According to the Economic Survey for a recent
year, Maharashtra, Punjab, Haryana, Chandigarh and Delhi have high per capita income and
the child sex ratio of these states is still low, so the problem of selective abortions
is not due to poverty or ignorance or lack of resources.

What is being done. The government has passed strict laws banning the practice
and imposing heavy fines and imprisonment as punishment. The Pre-natal Diagnostic
Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act has been in force since 1996 and
was further strengthened in 2003, and the Government of India has more recently
introduced the Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao programme, which can prove an important policy
to increase the child sex ratio in the country. In the long run, however, the solution
to problems like bias against girl children depends more on how social attitudes evolve,
even though laws and rules can also help.

Q. Read the section on the previous page and the quotation from Malthus in Box 2.1. One reason why Malthus was proved wrong is the substantial increases in the productivity of agriculture. Can you find out how these productivity increases occurred, i.e., what were the factors that made agriculture more productive? What could be some of the other reasons why Malthus was wrong? Discuss with your classmates and make a list with the help of your teacher.

Answer: Factors that made agriculture more productive include the expansion of irrigation (the one the chapter itself names for India), better seeds, fertilisers and farm machinery (outside the chapter), and improved means of transport and communication that let food move from surplus to deficit areas. Other reasons Malthus was wrong, from the chapter:

• The historical experience of European countries: from the latter half of the nineteenth century birth rates declined and epidemics were controlled, and food production and standards of living kept rising despite rapid population growth.
• Economic growth could outstrip population growth, as some theorists argued.
• Liberal and Marxist critics showed that poverty and starvation are caused by the unequal distribution of economic resources, not by population growth itself.
• Societies do change their reproductive behaviour: once prosperity rises, infant mortality falls and education spreads, family size begins to fall, as the theory of demographic transition shows.

Q. Try to find out why the birth rate is slow to decline but the death rate can fall relatively fast. What are some of the factors that might influence a family or couple’s decision about the number of children they should have? Ask older people in your family or neighbourhood about the possible reasons why people in the past tended to have more children.

Answer: The death rate can fall fast because it is brought down by things that can be supplied from outside the family: disease control, mass vaccination, sanitation, public health and better nutrition. The birth rate falls slowly because it is a sociocultural phenomenon; family size depends on attitudes and expectations that change only over a generation. Factors that influence a couple’s decision include the family’s income and prosperity, whether children are expected to survive (infant mortality), the level of education and awareness, especially of women, son preference, the need for children’s labour or for support in old age, and access to birth control. Typical reasons older people may give, which you should check against your own interviews, include: many children died young, so families had more to be sure some survived; children helped on the farm and in the house; sons were wanted to support parents in old age; and there was little knowledge of or access to family planning.

Q. In 2020-21, the whole world met with COVID-19 pandemic. Collect details from media sources and compare with what is given in the box.

Answer: Collect your own details from newspapers and official sources, then compare on these points. Both were global pandemics, that is, epidemics affecting a very wide geographical area, and both were caused by viruses attacking the respiratory system. World War I did not cause the 1918-19 influenza, but the box says the close quarters and mass movement of troops quickened its spread; for COVID-19, check in your sources how it spread. The box records that the influenza killed at least 40 million people worldwide and an estimated 17 million in India, about 5% of India’s population at the time. Compare this with the death figures you collect for COVID-19, and note the differences a century apart: check in your sources how quickly vaccines were developed for COVID-19, while the box says the influenza virus’s genetic changes made it immune to existing vaccines; and lockdowns, testing and mass media shaped the response to COVID-19.

Q. Study this chart carefully. With the help of your teacher, try to trace what happens to the new-born generation of 1961 (the 0-4 age group) as it moves up the pyramid in successive years.

• Where will the 0-4 age group of 1961 be located in the pyramids for the later years? Twenty years later it is the 20-24 age group in the 1981 pyramid, the 40-44 age group in the 2001 pyramid, and the 65-69 age group in the 2026 pyramid. Its bar gets shorter as it moves up, because some members of the generation die at every stage.
• Where, in which age group, is the widest part of the pyramid as you move from 1961 to 2026? In 1961 the widest bar is at the very bottom, the 0-4 group. The book says the bottom of the pyramid does not change much between 1961 and 1981, because the birth rate is slow to fall, so the widest part stays near the base in the early pyramids. In the 2026 projection the widest part has moved up into the middle age groups: this is the bulge the chapter calls the demographic dividend. Read the exact age bands off Chart 3.
• What do you think the shape of the pyramid might be in the year 2051 and 3001? If the birth rate keeps falling and life expectancy keeps rising, by 2051 the bulge will have moved further up into the older working ages and the 60+ groups, the base will be narrow, and the shape will look more like a column or even an inverted pyramid, as in ageing developed countries such as Japan. For 3001 no projection is possible; if the population stabilises at replacement level, the pyramid would be close to a rectangle with roughly equal bars up to old age.

Chart 4 adds one more thing to note: in the 2026 projections the widest part of Uttar Pradesh’s pyramid is still towards the younger age groups, while Kerala’s is higher up, in the middle ages (read the exact bands off Chart 4), because Kerala is beginning to acquire an age structure like that of the developed countries.

Q. What impact do you think the age structure has on inter-generational relationships? For instance, could a high dependency ratio create conditions for increasing tension between older and younger generations? Or would it make for closer relationships and stronger bonds between young and old? Discuss this in class and try to come up with a list of possible outcomes and the reasons why they happen.

Answer: Both outcomes are possible, and the reasons differ.

• Tension: when the dependency ratio is high, a relatively smaller proportion of working-age people must carry the burden of providing for a relatively larger proportion of dependants. If jobs are scarce, as the chapter shows for the 15-30 age group, young earners may resent the cost of supporting elderly parents and younger siblings, and the elderly may feel neglected.
• Closer bonds: you may find that in joint or extended families the elderly look after grandchildren while parents work, and the young look after the elderly; a larger number of dependants can make the family depend on cooperation, which strengthens bonds.
• What decides the outcome: employment and income, whether there is any old-age pension or social security, the type of family and household, and the values of care and respect for elders in the community.

Q. Do a small survey in your school to find out when (i.e., how many generations ago) the families of your fellow students came to live in your area or place where the school is located. Tabulate the results and discuss them in class. What does your survey tell you about rural-urban migrations?

Answer: Make a table with columns such as: student, generation that migrated (self, parents, grandparents, earlier), place of origin (village or town), and reason for moving. Such a survey may show that many families arrived only one or two generations ago, from villages or small towns; check this against your own results. Read the results with the chapter’s reasons for rural-urban migration: the search for work, since the city acts as a magnet for those who cannot find sufficient work in rural areas; the decline of common property resources like ponds, forests and grazing lands; and social reasons such as the relative anonymity of the city. A survey that finds many recent migrants confirms the chapter’s point that the swelling cities bear testimony to this flow of population, and that the metropolises attract migrants from both rural areas and small towns.

Q. Read these policy goals and discuss their implications in the class.

Answer: The goals of the National Health Policy 2017 show that population policy has moved from simply slowing growth to broad socio-demographic objectives. Raising government health expenditure from 1.15% to 2.5% of GDP by 2025 means more public hospitals, doctors and paramedics. Reducing the total fertility rate to 2.1 at national and sub-national level by 2025 means bringing every state to the replacement level, which will need special effort in high-fertility states like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Cutting under-five mortality to 23, neo-natal mortality to 16 and the maternal mortality rate to 100 addresses what the chapter calls an unambiguous indicator of backwardness and poverty, and lower infant mortality also helps bring the birth rate down. Raising life expectancy from 67.5 to 70 will add to the ageing of the population. The chapter’s own closing lesson applies to all of them: the state can create the conditions, but fertility is ultimately a matter of economic, social and cultural change.