Occasional Paper 3

POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR RAJASTHAN AND DISTRICTS: 2002-2011

Devendra Kothari, Ph.D.

Indian Institute of Health Management Research

And FPI

Forum of Population Action, Jaipur

July 2002

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
An earlier version of this paper was prepared for the Social Policy Research Institute, Jaipur. The author gratefully acknowledges the support received from the Institute. The author thanks Shri Shiv Charan Mathur, Chairman, and Professor C.S. Barla, Director Social Policy Research Institute and Shri M.L. Mehta, President, Forum for Population Action for helpful comments on the earlier draft. The author is thankful to Dr. S.D. Gupta, Director, Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipur for supporting its publication.

CONTENTS Page No. Introduction Demographic Profile Fertility, Mortality and Migration Regional Variations State of the Family Welfare Programme Recent Initiatives to Stabilize the Population Growth Emerging Positive Environment for Small Family Norm Population Projections Discussion and Conclusion References Annexure 1 Rajasthan: Annexure 2 Rajasthan: Projected population by age and sex as on 1st March, 2002-11 Projected population by sex for districts and divisions as on 1st March, 2002-11 01 02 09 12 15 18 20 23 33 35 39 44

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Devendra Kothari, Ph.D. is Director & Professor, Population Programme Management, Forum for Population Action. He studied at the Australian National University, Australia (Ph.D. in Demography) and Harvard University, USA (Master of Science in Population Sciences). His initial training in population sciences was at the International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai, India. From 1987 to 2000, Dr. Kothari worked as Professor, Population Programme Management at the Institute of Health Management Research (IIHMR), Jaipur, India. Prior to joining IIHMR, he had worked at the Sardar Patel Institute of Economic and Social Research, Ahmedabad; Fellow at the Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Australian National University, Canberra and also worked at the University of Udaipur, Udaipur, India. During his tenure at IIHMR, he was instrumental in conceptualizing and field testing an alternative framework known as Vikalp for strengthening the management of the family planning programme in the broader context of reproductive and child health. Vikalp, a hindi word which means "alternative", is based on the premise that there exists an obvious unmet need for family planning and reproductive services, which can be captured through well-managed operations. It was adopted by various State Governments in India including Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh for field testing under his supervision. The framework has attracted international attention and has been recognized as a successful innovation by the UNFPA, New York in its publication: State of World Population: 1997 (box 22) and others. He co-ordinated a workshop titled Experience Sharing Workshop on Innovations for Population Stabilization in Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, sponsored by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Government of India and UNFPA (1999). He also co-ordinated the first Indo-China Dialogue on Managing the Transition to Quality of Care, which was sponsored by the Ford Foundation (1998). Dr. Kothari headed the team which drafted state-specific population policies for Rajasthan (1998) and Madhya Pradesh (2000). He was appointed as a Chairperson of the Committee on Community Needs Assessment Approach (CNAA), constituted by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. The main purpose of the committee was to review the functioning of the approach and suggest necessary changes for effective implementation of the family welfare programme to achieve total fertility rate of 2.1 by 2010, as noted in the National Population Policy 2000. He is member of various national and state level committees including Task Force on Monitoring of the National Commission on Population under the Chairmanship of the Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission, Government of India; the State Population and Development Council under the Chairmanship of the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh; and Rajiv Gandhi Mission on Population (2001) under the Chairmanship of the Chief Minister of Rajasthan. Dr. Kothari has a wide national and international experience in policy analysis, population programme management, operational research and advocacy in the field of family planning and reproductive health. He played a major role in advocacy on population issues with state legislatures, senior programme managers and bureaucrats.

FOREWORD
Rajasthan has been in a stage of demographic transition over the past few decades. The decade 1991-2001 has witnessed an increase of 28.33 per cent in the State's population, which is not different from the preceding decadal growth. High growth of population creates a stress on the resources. Interestingly enough, over the past two decades, the contribution of natural increase in population has been alarmingly high ranging from 93-95 per cent. The State faces an extremely high level of Total Fertility Rate (TFR) of around 4 children per women, which, in turn, contributes to high growth of population. It appears, the impact of our family planning policies has not been significant in Rajasthan. If this trend continues, perhaps a substantial part of our additional income will be used up only by increased mouths to be fed in the State. In this context, the present document "Population Projections for Rajasthan and Districts: 20022011" has great value for academicians and policy makers in Rajasthan. The author, Dr. Devendra Kothari, is a population scientist of high repute, and has shown his anxiety about the sort of population explosion being experienced in Rajasthan. Population stabilization warrants a significant reduction in TFR as also increase in use of contraceptives. Dr. Kothari feels that by 2011, perhaps we shall not be able to reduce TFR beyond 3.1, whereas the Crude Birth Rate (CBR) may not be reduce below 25 per thousand. In that case, the State's population will rise from 56.47 million in 2001 to 69.44 million showing an addition of about 13 million persons. I am quite sure, this paper will motivate the policy makers to give a serious thought for initiating effective and all pervasive policies for stabilizing population of our State. I also feel that the document will provide a food for thought for the academic world.

Shiv Charan Mathur Chairman, Social Policy Research Institute and Chairman Administrative Reforms Commission, Government of Rajasthan

PREFACE
Rapidly growing population in Rajasthan is causing worries to the Government and the people alike. During the last five decades, population in Rajasthan has increased from 1.59 million in 1951 to 5.65 million with the share of the State in India's population increasing from 4.6 per cent in 1951 to 5.6 per cent in 2001. Due to two-third area of the State falling in arid and semi-arid region with chronic vulnerability to droughts, growing population is leading the State towards a man-made ecological disaster. It would impact adversely on incomes and employment, food security, water availability and biotic resources. Though the Government has undertaken many innovative measures to deal with population growth, their impact is yet to be felt. Even the announcement of State Population Policy two years ago did not result in any purposive action on the population front. Setting up of Rajiv Gandhi Population Mission under the chairmanship of the Chief Minister has likewise failed to infuse new life into the programme. There is a vast gap between rhetoric and reality. This needs to be bridged. In the present paper, Dr. Devendra Kothari, a renowned population scientist as also Director of the Forum for Population Action has developed demographic scenario for Rajasthan for the period 2002-2011. He has estimated that notwithstanding various measures undertaken by the Government of Rajasthan to reduce the growth rate of population, the State's population would become 6.94 million in 2011, resulting in a decadal increase of 23 percent. The impact of population potential already built up due to large young population is likely to peter out only in decade to follow. A sharp increase in the population in the age group 65 years and above would add to the economic burden. Dr. Kothari has worked out likely population in different age groups. This would be very useful to planners for designing package of services, particularly medical, educational and social security support in the old age, needed by different population segments. We are happy to place Dr. Kothari's paper before the general public. I am sure the present paper would generate a debate and focus attention on problems of his population growth in Rajasthan and steps needed to arrest it. M. L. MEHTA Trustee Secretary, IIHMR & President, Forum for Population Action

ABSTRACT
It was really difficult to project the population of Rajasthan since no change had been noticed in the growth rate of population between 1981-91 and 1991-01. In addition, no significant decline was observed in infant and child mortality during the 1980s. In fact, some stability was observed in infant mortality rate. However, looking to the concerted efforts, interest and initiative taken by the Government of Rajasthan in the last few years, especially after launching the State Population Policy in January 2000, in the field of population programme management as well as investment in the social sector with special reference to education, it is assumed that Rajasthan can expect a sizeable decline in its growth rate during the current decade. The main aim of this paper is to project the likely trends in the growth rate of population in Rajasthan and peep into the future beyond 2001. it is projected that the population of Rajasthan will increase by 23 percent during the decade 2002-2011. Information provided here can be useful in the assessment of future public and private demand for goods and services including energy, water housing, education, transportation and various aspects of labour.

INTRODUCTION
The Census of India 2001 reveals that since independence Rajasthan has continued to maintain its record of registering one of the highest population growth rates in the country. Its reported annual growth rate of 2.5 percent is around 30 percent higher than that recorded for the country as a whole. It has doubled in a period of less than 29 years since 1951. What impact this will have on the State's fragile eco-system as well as the quality of its people can easily be imagined. It appears that during the remaining years of this critical decade (2001-11), Rajasthan will choose its demographic future by action or inaction. The main aim of this paper is to project the likely trend in the growth of the population of Rajasthan and peep into the future beyond 2001. In general, long range projections are more likely to prove wrong than those made for short periods. Also, detailed projections are more likely to prove wrong than those in which only broad aggregates are predicted. That is, projections for 2021 will probably be less reliable than those for 2011. As such, an attempt has been made here to project the population of the State for the years 2002-2011. Projections of the type presented here can be useful in the assessment of future public and private demand for goods and services including energy, water, housing, education, transportation and various types of labour. Such a population projection is an attempt to guess the future using the data available at present about the demographic situation relating to the past. As such, the current demographic scenario is also discussed in the paper. Apart from the census data on total population, estimates of vital rates derived from the Sample Registration System (SRS) of the Office of the Registrar General, India have also been made use of. The SRS is an annual survey conducted in 350 rural-urban sample units spread allover Rajasthan. The paper has also used the data provided by the National Family Health Surveys conducted in 199293 and 1998-99 (NFHS 11995; NFHS II 2001). Situated in the north-west of India, Rajasthan has become the largest state in the country in terms of area (342,239 sq km) after the bifurcation of the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh on November 1, 2000 into Madhya Pradesh and Chhatisgarh. The Present State of Rajasthan was formed in 1956 by integrating the erstwhile princely states of Rajputana and the centrally administrated territory of Ajmer-Marwara. The most conspicuous physiographic feature of Rajasthan is the Aravali ranges, which run south-west to north-west through the heart of the State. The ranges divide the State into two distinct regions. To the west of the ranges there is an inhospitable arid and semi-arid stretch, whereas towards the east the land is relatively more hospitable and the rainfall is also adequate. Rajasthan thus lies mostly in the arid and semi-arid regions that form the major part of the Thar Desert. The State is divided into six administrative divisions and 32 districts. The districts are further divided into 241 tehsils. More than almost half of all the inhabited villages in the State, numbering 41,353, have fewer than 500 inhabitants each. Around 23 percent of 56.47 million population of the State resided in 222 towns in 2001.

The economy of the State reflects not only its geographical diversity but also its historical legacy of feudal social norms. Water is indeed a critical resource because the State, which occupies 10.4 percent of the total area of the country and has about 5.5 percent of its population, is endowed with only 1 percent of the total surface water resources of the country. The ground water table, owing to scanty and erratic rainfall, is getting deeper and deeper. Agriculture is, thus, still dependent on the vagaries of the monsoon. Though the proportion of its population below the poverty line declined from 33.6 percent in 1977-78 to 24.4 percent in 1987-88, the actual number of the poor in absolute terms remains constant at around 10 million persons. The average annual per capita income at the constant prices (1980-81) has increased from Rs.1818 in 1983-84 to Rs.2233 in 1996-97. In terms of Human Development Index (HDI), the State lags behind the country as a whole, with an index value of 37 out of 100 compared to 45 for the country (UNFPA: 1997a). Within the State, Ajmer and Jaipur divisions are relatively more developed than Kota, Udaipur, Bikaner and Jodhpur. In short, Rajasthan, marked by a complex social structure, a predominantly agrarian economy, difficult and inaccessible terrain, and scattered settlements over a vast area, poses several formidable problems to the family planning and reproductive health service delivery systems.

DEMOGRAPHIC SCENARIO
From a demographic perspective, Rajasthan is one of Indias most critical states. The State recorded the highest growth rate amongst the major states of India in the 1971-81 and 1981-91 decades. With a decadal growth rate of 28.3 percent during the nineties (1991-01), the State ranked second after Bihar which recorded the highest growth rate of 28.4 percent in the country. Table 1 provides some basic demographic information about India and Rajasthan. Table 1. Socio-demographic profile, India and Rajasthan, 2001 Item Population (in 000) Population growth rate 1991-01 (percent) Sex ratio (females per thousand males) Population density (persons per sq.km) Percent urban Literacy rate total (percent) Literacy rate male (percent) Literacy rate female (percent) Total fertility rate (children per woman), 1997 Crude birth rate (births/1000 population) 1999 Crude death rate (deaths/1000 population) 1999 Infant mortality rate (infant deaths/1000 births), 1999
Source: Registrar General, India, Government of India, New Delhi.

India 10,27,015 21.3 933 324 27.8 65.4 75.8 54.2 3.3 26.1 8.7 70

Rajasthan 56,473 28.3 922 165 23.4 61.0 76.5 44.3 4.2 31.1 8.4 81

With an estimated population of 56.5 million on March 1, 2001, the State has added more than 1.4 million people in the year 2000-01 compared to less than 0.4 million in the year 1956-57 when the present State of Rajasthan is a relatively recent phenomenon. After decades of very slow or minimal population growth, the States population began to increase rapidly in the 1950s as a result of improvements in public health, which contributed to a steep decline in death rates without a corresponding decline in birth rates. The population grew from 10 million in 1901 to 16 million in 1951, but from 1951 to 2001 it grew about three and a half times to 56.5 million in 50 years. The table also shows that the States population has been doubling in less than 30 years since independence. The most important reasons for the accelerating growth rate of population in Rajasthan is the nearly constant fertility and rapidly declining mortality, as will be discussed shortly. Year Table 2. Rajasthan: Trends in population growth, 1901-2001 Population Absolute Persons Annual growth per sq.km rate (in million) Increase (in percent) (in million) 1901 10.3 30 1911 11.0 0.7 32 0.7 1921 10.3 -0.7 30 -0.7 1931 11.8 1.5 34 1.3 1941 13.9 2.1 41 1.6 1951 16.0 5.7 47 1.4 1961 20.1 4.1 59 2.3 1971 25.8 5.7 75 2.5 1981 34.3 8.5 100 2.8 1991 44.0 9.7 129 2.5 2001 56.5 12.5 165 2.5

Source: Census of India, 2001, Rajasthan, Series-9 Provisional Population Totals: Paper 1 of 2001.

The population of an area or state grows as a result of both natural increase (births-deaths) and the inflow of migrants exceeding the outflow. The role of in-migration has not been appreciable in Rajasthan in the past since it was a net out-migration region. However, since 1981, migration from outside has contributed to some extent to the growth of the population of the State. During the 1990s the State's population increased by 12.5 million; out of this, 93 percent was contributed by natural increase and the remaining 7 percent were due to net in-migration. During the 1980s, net in-migration contributed only 5 per cent of the total increase of 9.7 million persons (see Table 3). Of the total population in 2001, 29.38 million were males and 27.09 million were females, giving a sex ratio of 922 females per 1000 males, which is lower than the sex ratio observed at the

national level (933). The sex ratio has been adverse to females, and it has declined from 921 in 1951 to 910 in 1991. Thus, an increase in the sex ratio was one of the positive findings of the Census of India, 2001. However, a sudden rise of 12 women for every 1000 men in the overall female population in the latest census could be a "calculation mistake". It can only be explained in terms of extraneous reasons such as migration of males from Rajasthan due to three consecutive droughts. Table 3. Components of population growth in Rajasthan, 1981-91 and 1991-2001 Item Number (in 000) Percent A. Population -1991 44,006 B. Population -1981 34,262 Net increase in Population (1981-1991) 9744 100.0 Increase due to: * Natural increase 9,266 95.1 * Net in-migration 478 4.9 C. Population - 2001 56,473 D. Population - 1991 44,006 Net increase in Population (1991-2001) 12,467 100.0 Increase due to: * Natural increase 11,598 93.0 * Net in-migration 869 7.0 Note: Calculation is based on data obtained from Census of India, 2001 and Sample Registration System Source: Kothari, Rajasthan: Emerging Population Scenario and Agenda for Population Stabilization, FPA, Occasional Paper No.1, Forum for Population Action, Jaipur; 2002.

The sex ratio of the child population in the age group of 0-6 years has declined significantly from 916 female children for every 1000 male children in 1991 to 909 in 2001. The decline was relatively more in the developed districts (Kothari 2001). Thus, out of a little over 10 million children in the age group 0-6 years, the number of young girls is less by almost half a million. Though it may be a welcome sign that the number of females for every 1000 men has gone up in the total population, it is baffling to note that the number of young girls has gone down. The fall in the number of girl children may be due to the spread of the small family concept, which has reached even the rural areas. But, minds are still obsessed with preference for the male child. If couples go in for a small family, they want a male child and ensure it by having a sex determination test after pregnancy and abortion of the foetus if it happens to be female. However, this appears to be a temporary phase, as has also been observed in Kerala and Tamil Nadu during the fertility transition. It is interesting to note that the proportion of girl children has

gone down more among developed districts of the State than in relatively less developed districts. The State registered the highest growth in literacy among the major states of the country with its literacy rate going up from 38 percent in 1991 to over 61 percent in 2001. An impressive hike of 24 percentage points in female literacy from 20 percent in 1991 to 44 percent in 2001 was also reported. The increase in the overall literacy rate is due to persistent efforts made by the State Government to enrol and retain children in schools and to effectively implement adult education programmes. It appears that Rajasthan has made significant progress in literacy in recent years, as has also been reported by the 53rd round of NSSO in 1997 and National Family Health Survey conducted in the year 1998-99. Urbanization is a process of great demographic significance. It transfers population to a very different physical, social and economic environment. The urban population of Rajasthan in 2001 was 13.2 million. The proportion of urban population to total population in Rajasthan now is relatively low, as it is only 23.4 percent. It is also increasing at a slow pace (Table 4). In 2001, more than 57 percent of the urban population of Rajasthan lived in 20 Class I cities with 100,000 and above population. The proportion of the urban population living in towns with a population of 20,000 or below has been declining. Around 18 percent of the State's urban population was enumerated in Jaipur - the capital city of the State.

Year

Table 4. Rajasthan: Trends in urban population Urban population Percent of total Annual growth (in (in million) population percent) Total Urban 2.59 3.28 4.54 7.21 10.06 13.20 Paper 1 of 2001 16.22 16.28 17.62 21.04 22.95 23.37 2.32 2.28 2.50 2.85 2.49 2.36 3.25 4.62 3.33 2.72

1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 Source:

Census of India, 2001, Rajasthan, Series-9 Provisional Population Totals:

Another important aspect of the demography of Rajasthan is the low age at marriage. It is known that marriage is virtually universal in Rajasthan and these marriages, especially in rural areas, take place at relatively young ages. About half of the married women aged 25-29 in 1991 had married before they were 15 and about four-fifths of these women had married before reaching 18 years, the legal minimum age at marriage. The median age at first marriage is 15.1 years, and the median age at cohabitation with the husband is 16.4 years (NFHS-II 2001). This not only contributes to the high fertility rate but also to the risk associated with early child bearing as well as child survival. One consequence of the low age marriage is the large proportion of married females in the reproductive age group (15-49). Over 90 percent of females in these age groups are currently married as against only 70 percent in Tamil Nadu. An increase in the age at marriage is possible only when there are major changes in social values and attitudes towards the girl child. The age structure of Rajasthan's population is young. Around three-fifths of the total population is under 25 years of age and over 10 million are between 15-24 years. The proportion of the population in this age group is increasing fast, as shown in Table 5. They have special need for health care and education, including the very important area of sexual and reproductive health. Every year, slightly less than one million young people reach the age of 21 and they need employment. Better medical care is preserving life at both ends of the age spectrum: infant mortality has fallen and more people are living longer. Combined with lower fertility, the effect is to increase the proportion of older people. This is what "aging population" means. Increasing numbers of elderly people and the erosion of family support systems will call for new arrangements for the care of the elderly. A majority of the elderly will be females, underscoring the need to address women's health needs throughout the life cycle.

Table 5. Rajasthan: Age structure of population and growing number of young adults, 1991-2001 Age Group (Years) 0-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-59 60 + Total * 1991 Females 6.1 (29.1) 2.5 (11.9) 1.9 (9.0) 1.8 (8.6) 7.4 (35.2) 1.3 (6.2) 21.0 (100.0) (Figures in million) 2001* Females Total 7.2 15.1 (26.6) (26.7) 3.6 7.5 (13.3) (13.3) 2.9 6.1 (10.7) (10.8) 2.2 4.7 (8.1) (8.3) 9.4 19.5 (34.7) (34.5) 1.8 3.6 (6.6) (6.4) 27.1 56.5 (100.0) (100.0)

Males 6.7 (29.1) 2.9 (12.6) 2.3 (10.0) 1.9 (8.3) 7.8 (33.9) 1.4 (6.0) 23.0 (100.0)

Total 12.8 (29.1) 5.4 (12.3) 4.2 (9.5) 3.7 (8.4) 15.2 (34.6) 2.7 (6.1) 44.0 (100.0)

Males 7.9 (26.9) 3.9 (13.3) 3.2 (10.9) 2.5 (8.5) 10.1 (34.3) 1.8 (6.1) 29.4 (100.0)

Figures in parentheses show percentage distribution and age distribution for the year 1991 are as per the Report of Expert Committee on Population Projections, Planning Commission, Government of India, 1996 and the estimates for 2001 are also based on the expert committee report and NFHS-II.

FERTILITY, MORTALITY AND MIGRATION Mortality has fallen to a great extent but Rajasthan has not yet entered the state of rapid fertility transition, though the pace of decline has accelerated in recent years (Table 6). The Crude Birth Rate (CBR) is strictly not a measure of fertility, since it is affected by structural changes in the age-sex-marital status distribution of the population. However, it is the most important component of population growth, since the difference between the CBR and the Crude Death Rate (CDR) determines the natural increase in a population. The CBR was 37.1 live births per thousand population in 1981 and it steadily declined to 30 in 2000. In rural areas, it declined from 38.3 to 32.5 and in urban areas from 31.2 to 24.9 during the same period (SRS 2000). The Total Fertility Rate (TFR) is considered to be a refined and reliable measure of fertility in a population. It is independent of the age-sex structure of a population and measures the average number of children a woman will give birth to in her lifetime, if she is subjected to the age-

specific fertility schedules observed in the population. Table 6 indicates that TFR has declined from 5.2 children per woman in 1981 to nearly 4 in recent years. Thus, the pace of decline is slow. The age specific pattern of fertility reveals a peak in the age group of 20-24 years for both urban and rural areas. The majority of births (53 percent) are of third or higher orders. A large proportion of these births are unwanted, or unplanned, as revealed by mothers themselves, and could have been avoided (NFHS II 2001). The Crude Death Rate (CDR) declined sharply over the same period. The estimated CDR for the State was 14.3 deaths per thousand population in 1981 and it declined to 8.4 in 1999. In rural areas the death rate declined from 15.8 to 8.9, and in urban areas from 7.6 to 6.4. Much of this decline was due to sharp reduction in the Infant Mortality Rate (lMR), especially during the eighties. The IMR for the State was 108 per thousand live births in 1981 and declined to 84 in 1990 and further to 80 in 2000. Table 6 also shows that the IMR declined sharply during the late eighties in Rajasthan. Thus, during the nineties, there was little reason not to expect continuation of the downward trend in IMR. However, unfortunately, this trend was not observed. On the contrary, an increase was noticed in the IMR leading to stagnancy at a relatively high level. This trend was unexpected in the light of the socio-economic development as well as expansion in the health infrastructure (Kothari et al. 1997b). According to NFHS-II, nearly three-fifths of infant deaths were during the neonatal period (within the first seven days of birth). It is disturbing to learn that the level of neonatal deaths has significantly increased between NFHS-I and NFHS-II A similar increase was observed in child mortality also and it increased from 32 in 1992-93 to 37 in 1998-99 (NFHS-I 1995 and NFHS-II 2001). It appears that no significant decline in infant and child mortality was observed in the last decade. Year 1981 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000* 2001* * Estimated Source: Sample Registration Scheme, Government of India Table 6: Rajasthan: Trends in fertility and mortality, 1981-2001 CBR CDR TFR 37.1 14.3 5.2 35.0 10.1 4.6 34.9 10.5 4.5 34.0 9.1 4.5 33.7 9.0 4.5 33.2 9.1 4.4 32.3 9.1 4.3 32.1 8.9 4.2 31.6 8.8 4.1 31.1 8.4 4.1 30.6 8.0 4.0 29.7 7.8 4.0 IMR 108 79 90 82 84 85 85 85 83 81 80 79

Migration is a significant component of population growth. The only source of information on migration is the decennial Census, which provides some data on the place of last residence and the place of birth of an individual. The lifetime migration data (based on the place of birth concept) available from the 1951, 1961, 1971, 1981 and 1991 censuses show that the extent of

inter-state migration was very much limited and did not affect the growth of population in the State in any significant manner. Rajasthan has been characterized as a net out-migration state, as about 5 per cent of Rajasthan-born population was enumerated in other states of India (Table 7), while only 3.7 per cent of the State's population was born in other states (Kothari 1990). However, if we concentrate only on those migrants who moved in and moved out during the 1980s and 1990s, the data indicate that the inflow of migrants into Rajasthan exceeds the outflow, as noted earlier. Most of these migrants are from the contiguous states - Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana and Gujarat. Females dominate the inter-state migration stream; movement of females across the State boundary is twice that of males. The data relating to the migration indicate that about 70 per cent moved into the State and 63 per cent moved out of the State for the same reason as a consequence of marriage. Among the male inter-state migrants, employment was the main motivational factor for moving into the State as well as moving out of the State. International migration, from Pakistan mostly, accounted for less then 1 per cent of the total population in 1991, as compared to 1.5 per cent in 1961. Most of these international migrants are 'forced' migrants, that is, those compelled to migrate at the time of the partition of the Indian subcontinent in 1947 Table 7. Rajasthan: Number of inter-state migrants, 1971 and 1981 Migration Stream 1971 Census In-migration Out-migration Net-migration 1981 Census In-migration Out-migration Net-migration Source: Persons (in '000) 856 1366 -510 1227 1683 -456 Males (in '000) 298 648 350 419 721 -302 Females (in '000) 558 718 -160 808 962 -154

Deuendra Kothari, Growing population in Rajasthan: Some emerging Issues, IIHMR Occasional Paper No.1, Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipu1; 1990

REGIONAL VARIATIONS
Rajasthan presents a peculiar case in terms of the immense regional disparities in demographic characteristics. According to the 2001 Census, Jaisalmer district, located on the western border of the State, had a population of about half a million, accounting for less than 1 percent (0.9 percent) of the total population of the State, and more than 11 percent of its area (Jaisalmer district has an area of 38,401 sq km, which is larger than the area of the State of Kerala). On the other hand, Jaipur district accounted for around 9 percent of the State's population, but less than 1.5 per cent of its area. The population of the State increased by 28.3 percent during the intercensus period of 1991-01. However, the growth rate varied at the district level from slightly less than 20 per cent in Rajsamand district to 47 per cent in Jaisalmer district. Similarly, the density of population which was 165 persons per sq km for the State as a whole, varied from 13 persons per sq. km in Jaisalmer district to 471 persons per sq km in Jaipur district, in which the State capital is located. The regional variation was also observed in the literacy rate. For example, the lowest literacy level was found in Banswara district (44 per cent), whereas the highest literacy level of 74 per cent was recorded in Kota district. Similar disparities can be seen in the literacy level by sex, as shown in Table 8.

Table 8. Rajasthan: Demographic variations by district, 2001

Item Population (in million) Decadal population growth (percent) Density (per sq. km.) Sex ratio (females per 1000 males) Rajasthan 56.4 28.3 165 922 Range* Lowest Highest 0.5 5.2 (Jaisalmer) (Jaipur) 19.9 47.5 (Rajsamand) (Jaisalmer) 13 (Jaisalmer) 821 (Jaisalmer) 471 (Jaipur) 1027 (Dungarpur)

Literacy rate (percent) (7 years and above)

- Persons - Males - Females

Population doubling time in years

61.0 76.5 44.3 28.0

44.2 (Banswara) 60.2 (Barmer) 27.5 (Jalore) 39 (Rajsamand)

74.4 (Kota) 86.6 (Jhunjhunu) 61.2 (Kota) 18 (Jaisalmer)

Note: * Figures relate to a district and the name of the district is given in parenthesis. Source: Kothari, Rajasthan: Emerging Population Scenario and Agenda for Population Stabilization, FPA, Occasional Paper No. 1, Forum for Population Action, Jaipur; 2002.

The decadal growth rate showed a marginal decline from 28.4 percent in 1981-91 to 28.3 percent in 1991-01 at the state level. There are, however, district and regional variations in the growth rates. Only two of the 32 districts have decadal growth rate less than the national average of 21.3 per cent. These districts are Rajsmand (19.9) and Jhunjhunu (20.9). It is interesting to note that the decadal growth rate has increased in 17 districts as compared to the previous decade. Most of these districts are located in the eastern and western parts of the State. The distribution of population by districts along with some other information is given in Table 9:

Table 9. Rajasthan: Population distribution, decadal growth, sex ratio and density by district as on 1st March 2001 S.No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. District Male Female Total Percent of total population Decadal variation 19912001 38.2 24.6 27.5 24.3 30.2 27.0 32.4 31.1 35.1 20.9 24.1 36.8 47.4 26.8 33.8 22.4 30.1 26.1 26.1 29.3 24.2 29.8 21.5 26.6 19.9 27.4 26.2 24.8 23.3 30.0 28.5 27.4 28.3 Sex Ratio 889 948 873 895 887 857 899 828 897 946 951 896 821 968 908 983 944 932 964 951 936 978 966 127 1002 972 909 908 928 858 895 889 922 Density per sq. km 61 114 224 120 357 414 384 324 471 323 296 69 13 136 126 147 166 257 192 157 168 298 166 294 256 196 146 173 190 218 288 248 165

Bikaner 885722 787840 1673562 3.0 Churu 986867 936041 1922908 3.4 Ganganagar 955027 833460 1788487 3.2 Hanumangarh 800796 716594 1517390 2.7 Alwar 1585046 1405816 2990862 5.3 Bharatpur 1130010 968313 2098323 3.7 Dausa 693438 623352 1316790 2.3 Dhaulpur 537733 445082 982815 1.7 Jaipur 2769096 2483292 5252388 9.3 Jhunjhunu 983158 929941 1913099 3.4 Sikar 1172129 1115100 2287229 4.0 Barmer 1035813 927945 1963758 3.5 Jaisalmer 278973 229026 507999 0.9 Jalore 736029 712457 1448486 2.6 Jodhpur 1509563 1371214 2880777 5.1 Pali 917320 901881 1819201 3.2 Sirohi 437534 413222 850756 1.5 Ajmer 1128763 1051763 2180526 3.9 Bhilwara 1023086 986430 2009516 3.6 Nagaur 1421455 1352439 2773894 4.9 Tonk 625719 585624 1211343 2.1 Banswara 758379 742041 1500420 2.7 Chitturgarh 917023 885633 1802656 3.2 Dungarpur 546096 560941 1107037 2.0 Rajasamand 492736 493533 986269 1.7 Udaipur 1335017 1297193 2632210 4.7 Baran 535745 486823 1022568 1.8 Bundi 503827 457442 961269 1.7 Jhalawar 612357 567985 1180342 2.1 Karauli 648837 556794 1205631 2.1 Kota 827647 740933 1568580 2.8 Sawai Madhopur 590716 525315 1116031 2.0 Rajasthan 29381657 27091465 56473122 100.0 Source: Census of India, 2001, Rajasthan, Series-9 Provisional Population Totals: Paper 1 of 2001.

Jodhpur Division, located in the south-western part of the State, has recorded the highest decadal variation of 31.1 per cent during 1991-2001, followed by Jaipur Division in the north-eastern part of the State (Table 10). However, the remaining four divisions have attained lower decadal growth rates as compared to the state average. Udaipur Division recorded the lowest growth rate of 25.5 per cent, closely followed by Kota (26.3) and Ajmer (27.0) Divisions.
Table 10. Rajasthan: Total population and decadal variation by division, 2001 ~
'

Decadal growth Percentage of total (in percent) population 1991-2001 1991 2001 Ajmer 27.02 14.64 14.49 12.23 12.22 Bikaner 28.25 Jaipur 13.0 16.84 29.54 29.54 29.82 Jodhpur 7.20 9.47 31.15 16.36 16.77 Kota 5.58 7.05 26.34 12.68 12.48 Udaipur 6.40 8.03 25.47 14.55 14.22 Rajasthan State 44.00 56.47 28.33 100.00 100.00 Note: The six divisions alongwith their districts are: (1) Ajmer- Ajmer; Bhilwara, Nagour, Tonk (2) Bikaner - Bikaner, Churu, Ganganagar, Hanumangarh (3) Jaipur - Alwar, Bharatpur, Dausa, Dholpur, Jaipur, Jhunjhunu and Sikar (4) Jodhpur - Barmer, Jaisalmer, Jalore, Jodhpur, Pali and Sirohi (5) Kota - Baran, Bundi, Jhalawhar, Karauli, Kota, and Sawai Madhopur and (6) Udaipur - Banswara, Chittorgarh, Dungarpur, Rajsamand and Uraipur Source: Based on the data obtained: Census of India 2001, Rajasthan, Series-9, Provisional Population Totals, Directorate of Census Operations, Rajasthan, Jaipur Division

Total population (in million) 1991 2001 6.44 8.18 5.38 6.90

STATE OF THE FAMILY WELFARE PROGRAMME

The Family Welfare Programme, which encompasses family planning and reproductive and child health activities, is vital from the standpoint of the need to control and stabilize population. It has, therefore, been adopted and funded as a national programme by the Government of India.

In 1971, less than 10 per cent of currently married women in the reproductive age were using modern family planning methods to either delay child birth or prevent further child bearing, and over the decades, the CPR steadily increased to reach a level of 38 percent by 1999 as per the National Family Health Survey (NFHS-II 2001). However, this increase in the contraceptive prevalence rate is not commensurate with the level of the total fertility rate. Most of the protection (85 per cent) by contraceptive use among couples in the State is due to sterilization after the women have attained a fairly high parity (four or more children) with 32 to 33 years of age. Thus, in Rajasthan, it is necessary to motivate couples to adopt limitation practices, if at all they want to, at a younger age and low parity. Then only will sterilization have a significant impact on fertility. Further, significant decline in fertility can also be achieved in the State in the coming years by an increased proportion of younger couples, with the wives in the peak years of reproduction in the age groups 20-24 and 25-29 adopting effective family planning methods. According to the National Family Health Survey conducted in 1992-93, less than 2 per cent of eligible couples in the age group 15-19 and less than 10 per cent in the 20-24 age group were using modern contraceptives. Unfortunately, even after six years of efforts, there is no significant increase in the use of contraceptive as well as in spacing methods among young couples, as revealed by the National Family Health Survey conducted in 1998-99 (Table 11). Couples in these age groups are likely to adopt more of spacing methods than sterilization. Hence, there is a need to extend the contraceptive choice available to couples with a special drive to promote spacing methods among younger couples. Table 11. Rajasthan: Pattern of contraceptive use among younger couples, 1992-93 to 1998-99 Percent of total eligible couples using any modern method of contraception Age Group NFHS-I NFHS-II (1992-93) (1998-99) 15-19 1.3 2.9 20-24 8.1 16.1 25-29 27.4 33.5 All Ages 29.6 36.6 Percent of couples using any modern 3.4 6.3 spacing method Source: NFHS-I and NFHS-II, International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai, 1995 & 2001 There are several regional disparities related to contraceptive use. In 17 districts of the State, namely Banswara, Barmer, Bharatpur, Bhilwara, Chittorgarh, Dausa, Dholpur, Jaisalmer, Jalore, Jodhpur, Karoli, Nagaur, Pali, Rajsamand, Sawai Madhopur, Sirohi and Udaipur, which constitute more than half of the State's population, and where two major urban centres (Jodhpur and Udaipur) are located, have been performing below the state average for the last five years. This could be one of the many reasons why, in spite of high investment in infrastructure and manpower, the programme has reached stagnation. Hence an area-specific approach is needed to manage the programme in the State. In short, recent trends in the use of contraception show that it has increased considerably, especially during the last one decade. But, at the same time, the use of family planning has not been able to bring about a proportional decline in fertility. Caldwell (1983), a known population scientist who has spent much time in the villages in south India, argues that in India family welfare programme has not created a demand for birth control but it has accelerated change that was taking place in any case. Many reasons have been cited for this situation. There are, however, two primary reasons: (1) The Family Welfare Programme has not been effectively

managed. It continues to be a diffused programme not providing area-specific, need-based and quality services as well as timely follow-up on a large scale. Further, no systematic efforts have been made to involve NGOs and the private sector in the delivery of services. (2) The manyfaceted population programme, which is impacted by women's literacy, status, empowerment, age at marriage, etc., has not been properly implemented and monitored, and thus lacks interdepartmental cooperation. No serious efforts have been made to tackle these issues although they have been widely discussed during the last forty years or so (GoR 1997).

RECENT INITIATIVES TO STABILIZE POPULATION GROWTH

Recognizing the ever increasing population size and its adverse impact on various components of development efforts in the State, the Government of Rajasthan has initiated many innovative measures and has made a number of changes in its approach to population programme management. It has taken several initiatives during the last one decade to cater to the needs of the clients on the one hand and to create an environment conducive to the small family norm on the other (Ram Lubhaya 1998; Kothari 2002). To improve the programmatic factors, the Government of Rajasthan has initiated schemes such as Jan Mangal (Bhatnagar et al. 2001), Swastya Karmi, VIKALP - a system-based service delivery model, (Kothari et al. 1997c; Pahariya 2001), etc. These initiatives have been taken to convert unmet need for family planning services into demand by ensuring availability, accessibility and quality of services, as well as to become sensitive to the needs of clients. For creating an environment conducive to the small family norm and generating further demand for family planning and RCH services, a number of innovative schemes have been introduced. To reduce gender inequities and enhance the status of the girl child by reducing the perspective for the male child, the Government of Rajasthan launched Rajalaxmi Yojana on October 1, 1992. It was visualized that this scheme would not only help in removing the deep-rooted notion of a girl child being a liability but also help in reducing female infanticide, increasing age at marriage and improving female literacy (Sharma et al. 2001). Another major innovation in Rajasthan to create an environment conducive to planned families among elected representatives was the prescription of the small family norm for elected representatives. A special law was enacted in November 1995 prescribing a two-child norm for all those seeking public office in Panchayats, Municipalities and Cooperatives. This act, passed in 1994, debars and disqualifies people from holding office if they have more than two children after the cut-off date. This provision has already created awareness of the two-child family norm among the elected representatives, and there is a demand to extend the provision to the State Legislative Assembly and Indian Parliament elections. The initiative was praised in many forums, as it was expected to percolate the message of the small family norm on a wider scale. However, it was also criticized since it affected the political career of a few leaders who were declared disqualified to be members of the local bodies. There have been instances of at least 1,579 candidates that have been disqualified from holding office under this provision (Chaturwadi et al. 2001). Although these interventions were appreciable, it was felt that for effective population stabilization effort a comprehensive population policy was needed to address the state- specific issues and concerns. Such a document would have to spell out the mission, objectives and broad strategies, which would be time-bound and realistic. The responsibility of developing this policy document was assigned to the Institute of Health Management Research (IIHMR) at the beginning of 19971 (GoR 1997). The draft report on population policy was submitted to the Government of Rajasthan in 1998 (GoR 1998). The policy document was reviewed and necessary changes were made. It was launched at a public function held on January 20,2000. The main objective of the State Population Policy is to attain replacement level fertility of 2.1 by 2016 in order to obtain a stable number by the middle of this century. For this purpose, the contraceptive prevalence rate by modern methods must increase to 68 percent by the year 2016.

Fertility and contraceptive behaviour are inextricably interlinked to infant and child mortality. To achieve replacement fertility, there is an urgent need to reduce infant and child mortality and also maternal mortality. The specific goals of the policy are given below: Indicator Total fertility rate Crude birth rate Crude death rate Infant mortality rate Contraceptive prevalence rate 1997 4.1 32.1 8.9 85.0 38.5 2001 3.7 29.2 8.7 77.4 42.2 2007 3.1 25.6 7.9 68.1 52.7 2011 2.6 22. 6 7.5 62.2 58.8 2016 2.1 18.4 7.0 56.8 68.0

Source: Population Policy for Rajasthan, Government of Rajasthan, 2000.

With the objective of implementing the population policy effectively and to enhance the pace of implementation of various interventions as suggested in the policy, the Government of Rajasthan has recently decided to create a Mission on population stabilization. In compliance with the cabinet decision No.68/2001, dated June 20-21,2001, the Rajiv Gandhi Population Mission has been created under the chairmanship of the Chief Minister. The Ministers of Social Welfare, Education, Panchayati Raj, Women and Child Development, Medical and Health, Finance and Planning are members of the Mission. The Chief Secretary, GoR and the Secretaries of the above mentioned departments are also members of the Mission. Three subject experts of repute have also been included as its members2. The Mission will develop strategies and programmes for the achievement of the objectives set out in the State Population Policy and will ensure effective inter-sectional coordination. The Mission will convene its meeting quarterly and submit a progress report to the Cabinet twice a year. To facilitate the working of the Mission, a high powered committee has been formed under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary.

EMERGING POSITIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR SMALL FAMILY NORM

It is not as if the people of the State were against population stabilization efforts or there is an organized opposition to the Family Welfare Programme. On the contrary, findings of several surveys show that, in spite of the high level of illiteracy and incidence of poverty, people, especially women, want to control their fertility but are not using any method of family planning (Kothari 2002). There is a large unmet need for family planning services and a significant number unwanted pregnancies occurring in the State3. Moreover, the level of unmet need has increased during the last few years. For instance, the percentage of couples who do not want an additional child was 24 per cent (around 1.9 million eligible couples) in 1992-93 (NFHS I 1995), which has increased to 28 percent (around 2.5 million eligible couples) in 1998-99(NFHS II 2001), as shown in Table 12. Further, the level of unwanted fertility has increased from 22 percent in 1992-93 to 32 percent in 1998-99. It is believed that if the existing and future unmet need is converted into acceptance and the unwanted pregnancies are avoided, it is possible to achieve the replacement level fertility of 2.1 by 2011 without having to wait for the year 2016, as has been targeted in the State Population Policy. It will have a significant impact on the future trend of population growth.

Table 12. Rajasthan: Changes in percentage of currently married women who do not want more

children by number of children, 1992-93 and 1998-99 (Percent of total in the category) No. of children None One Two Three Four + Total
Source: 1995 & 2001 NFHS-I NFHS-II

1992-93 2.4 5.5 25.9 28.7 36.9 24.2

1998-99 2.2 14.8 32.4 33.9 38.6 27.6

NFHS-I and NFHS-II, International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai,

To attain the replacement level fertility of 2.1 by 2011 or earlier, the first step is to reach a level where 60-65 percent eligible couples adopt contraception by 2006 with an appropriate methodmix. Though it appears a difficult task looking to the recent trend: in contraceptive use (Table 13) it could be achieved by focusing on unmet need for family planning services. Recent data shows that around 36 percent eligible couples in the State were protected by modern contraceptive methods and around 32 percent (2.9 million) of the currently married women in the reproductive age have had unmet need for family planning services (Table 14), as revealed by the District RCH survey conducted in all the districts of Rajasthan in 1998-99 (UNFPA 2000). That means they are not using any contraception even though they do not want any more children, or want to wait at least one year before having their next child. If all such women (couples) were to use family planning, the contraceptive prevalence rate would increase from about 36 percent now to around 68 percent, and that level is much more than required to achieve the replacement fertility of 2.1 by 2011 to initiate the process of population stabilization in the State.

Table 13. Couple protection rate due to all methods - Rajasthan and India, 1992-99

Year 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999*

Rajasthan 29.5 29.3 30.3 30.2 30.7 32.6 34.6 36.4

(Per cent) India 43.6 43.5 45.4 48.4 46.5 45.4 44.8 44.0

* 38 percent as per NFHS II Source:Department of Family Welfare, Government of India.

The strategic approach must be focused on meeting the unmet need for family planning services and avoiding unwanted pregnancies by improving the management of family welfare programme to ensure that contraceptive services are available to the people, especially to those who are interested in terms of distance, convenience and quality. Table 14. Rajasthan: Unmet need for family planning services, 1999 Particulars Number (in Per cent million) Population size 53.74 Eligible couples 9.14 100.0 Eligible couples currently using any 3.32 36.4* modern method of contraception Eligible couples with unmet need for contraception** Total 2.94 32.2 To space (1.87) (20.5) To limit (1.07) (11.7)
Note * Assumed level of CPR, as per service statistics ** Assumed level of unmet need for contraception as per RCH surveys 1999. Also see Table 6 Source: Kothari Rajasthan: Emerging population scenario and agenda for population stabilization, FPA, Occasional Paper No.1, Forum for Population Action, 2002.

POPULATION PROJECTIONS
Projection is an attempt to guess the future by using the data presently available. The projected future levels of the population depend on the accuracy of the input data and the assumptions made in respect of the future trends of various components. This section presents the population

projections for the State of Rajasthan for the years 2002-2011. It begins with a brief discussion of the methodology in relation to how the projections were prepared. After a summary of the assumptions and a description of the use of data in projecting the population, there follows a review of the projections by the state, divisions and districts. Detailed information on the projected population is given in Annexures A and B. These projections are based on an extension of past relationships believed to have relevance for the future, with certain assumptions, as noted below: The exact levels of fertility, mortality and migration based on the 2001 Census data are not yet available. Pending the release of such data needed in projecting the population, an attempt has been made to estimate them by using the 1991 Census and other available data. The percentage distribution of population by age and sex for Rajasthan for the year 1991 (Table 15), as given by the Technical Group on Population Projections (GoI 1996), has been used to estimate the initial base population for the year 2001. In addition, information obtained from SRS and NFHS II has been applied to the census population of 2001 to obtain the age and sex distribution of the population for the year 2001. This has been taken as the base population for the projection exercise (Table 16). Table 15. Rajasthan: Percentage distribution of 1991 Census smoothed population by age and sex as on 1st March 1991 Population (in million) Percentage distribution Total Male Female Total Male Female 6.39 3.30 3.09 14.53 14.32 14.75 6.39 3.36 3.03 14.53 14.61 14.00 5.46 2.93 2.53 12.42 12.72 12.09 4.22 2.27 1.95 9.60 9.86 9.31 3.64 1.87 1.77 8.26 8.12 8.42 3.38 1.71 1.67 7.67 7.43 7.97 2.95 1.53 1.42 6.70 6.63 6.78 2.47 1.31 1.16 5.51 5.70 5.50 2.04 1.08 0.96 4.64 4.72 4.55 1.74 0.92 0.82 3.96 3.99 3.92 1.44 0.77 0.67 3.27 3.35 3.19 1.16 0.61 0.55 2.67 2.63 2.67 1.00 0.51 0.49 2.28 2.22 2.34 0.72 0.37 0.35 1.64 1.60 1.70 0.53 0.27 0.26 1.22 1.19 1.25 0.17 0.08 0.09 0.40 0.37 0.43 0.26 0.12 0.14 0.60 0.53 0.67 44.00 23.04 20.96 100.00 100.00 100.00

Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+ Total

Source:Government of India, 1991, Population Projections for India and States, 1996-2016, Registrar General, India- 1996

Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+ Total

Table 16. Rajasthan: Estimated percentage distribution of 2001 Census population by age and sex as on 1st March, 2001 Population (in million) Percentage distribution Total Male Female Total Male Female 7.35 3.86 3.49 13.02 13.14 12.8 7.77 4.06 3.71 13.76 13.82 13.70 7.50 3.90 3.60 13.28 13.27 13.29 6.11 3.25 2.85 10.82 11.06 10.52 4.72 2.47 2.25 8.36 8.41 8.31 4.20 2.14 2.06 7.44 7.32 7.60 3.81 1.91 1.90 6.75 6.50 7.01 3.22 1.65 1.57 5.70 5.62 5.80 2.68 1.41 1.27 4.75 4.80 4.69 2.20 1.18 1.02 3.90 4.02 3.80 1.89 1.00 0.89 3.35 3.40 3.29 1.52 0.79 0.73 2.69 2.69 2.69 1.27 0.65 0.62 2.25 2.21 2.29 0.93 0.47 0.46 1.65 1.60 1.70 0.65 0.32 0.33 1.15 1.09 1.22 0.31 0.15 0.16 0.55 0.51 0.59 0.34 0.18 0.16 0.60 0.61 0.59 56.47 29.30 27.17 100.00 100.00 100.00

Note: Based on data obtained from the Report of the Technical Group of Population Projections, SRS and National Family Health Survey II.

The assumptions regarding fertility have been based on the current efforts by the Government of Rajasthan, as noted earlier, to capture the unmet need for family planning services as well as the trend analysis of the Total Fertility Rate (TFR) for 1991-2001 (see Table 6). Table 17 shows the projected value of TFR for the years 2002- 2011. The increase in the expectation of life at birth has been taken as the indicator of mortality decline and it is based on the data obtained from the Report on Population Projections for India and the States- 1996-2016 (GoR 1996). The component of international migration in population growth is considered to be insignificant. As regards inter-state migration, data from earlier censuses reveal that the decadal inter-state net migration rate is negligible. As such, it has been assumed that the impact of the migration component on the projected future levels of population will not be very significant, and also that it will have very little impact on the age structure as well. It is, therefore, assumed that there will be no significant in-crease in migration in the period under consideration4. Another assumption was that the trend towards the improvement in the management of the Family Welfare Programme to capture the unmet need for contraception will continue. Rajasthan has progressed significantly in the field of literacy during the 1990s, and it is assumed that the State will be able to maintain this pace in the coming years. A two-stage methodology has been developed for the population projection. First, the entire state population is projected for the year 2011, and then district-wise projections are computed by using a ratio method. Male and female population projections are computed separately. The State population data for the years 1991 and 2001 have been analyzed and the projections have been generated by using the computer programme, Spectrum, developed by the Policy Project, the Futures Group International in collaboration with the Research Triangle Institute. It is observed that the population has reached very high levels in many states of India, including Rajasthan, and is beginning to show a decrease in the rate of increase. In the "not too distant future, therefore, the growth rate could diminish to 'zero'; as targeted by the National Population Policy 2000, the country would achieve a stable population by 2045 (GoI 2000). The State of Rajasthan has also targeted to achieve a stable population by the middle of the century, as noted in the State

Population Policy (GoR 2000). An analysis of the data of Rajasthan for the past 30 years confirms a similar trend, though the pace of decline has been slow, especially during the 1990s. Table 17 provides data on the estimated vital rates, namely total fertility, crude birth rate, crude death rate, infant mortality rate and expectancy of life at birth. It is assumed that the level of the total fertility rate will decline from the current level of 4 children per woman in 2001 to 3.1 children per woman in 2011. With regard to mortality, the projection has assumed that the expectation of life at birth, which was estimated to be 62.2 years for males and 63.3 years for females in 2001, would increase to 65.8 and 67.3 years respectively by the year 2011. Table 17. Rajasthan: Estimated vital rates for the years 2001-2011
Year Total Fertility Rate Crude Birth Rate Crude Death Rate Infant Mortality Rate Life Expectancy at Birth Male Female

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Note:

4.04 3.93 3.83 3.73 3.64 3.54 3.45 3.36 3.28 3.19 3.11

29.7 29.2 28.7 28.2 27. 7 27.3 26.8 26.4 25.9 25.5 25.1

7.8 7.8 7.7 7.6 7.5 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.1

79.5 78.4 77.4 76.3 75.2 74.2 73.1 72.1 71.0 70.0 68.9

62.2 62.4 62.7 62.9 63.1 63.3 63.6 63.8 64.0 64.3 64.5

63.3 63.6 63.8 64.1 64.4 64.7 64.9 65.2 65.5 65.7 66.0

Based on information obtained from Sample Registration System, Report of the Technical Group of Population Projections, 1996, National Family Health Survey II, 1998-99 and State Population Policy for Rajasthan 2002.

The projected population for the State as a whole for the years 2002 to 2011 is provided in Table 18. The distribution of the projected population for the years 2006 and 2011 by age and sex is given in Table 19. Table 18 shows that the population of Rajasthan is likely to go up to 69.44 million by the year 2011 and that the population of the State is likely to cross the 60 million or 6 crore mark before the end of 2003. Average annual growth rate of population is likely to decline to 2.1 per cent during the period 2001- 2011 from the present level of 2.5 per cent. As such, the goal of replacement level fertility (i.e. TFR 2.1) would still be far away. It may take about 15 years more from the year 2011 to achieve that goal. Despite efforts on the family planning front, the number of births per annum is not likely to be less than 1.9 million by 2011. This is because of the likelihood of the number of females in the reproductive age group 15-49 increasing from around 12.9 million in 2001 to 17.7 million in 2011, an increase of 37 per cent. One welcome effect of the decline in the level of fertility is the decline in the population under 15 years. It appears that, in the coming years, the proportion of the population under the 0-14 years category will decline significantly from 40 per cent in 2001 to 34 per cent in 2011, as shown below: Age group 0-4 5-14 15-64 65+ Total Year 2001 (percent) 13.02 27.04 56.00 3.94 100.00 Year 2011 (percent) 12.45 21.54 61.69 4.32 100.00

A sharp increase is likely in the population in the working age group 15-59 years. Another consequence of the increase in life expectancy will be an increase in the population aged 65 years and above. This is likely to increase steadily from 2.0 million in 2001 to 3.0 million in 2011. It, therefore, appears that increasing employment will be the priority area during 2001-2011 and provision for the care of the aged will assume greater importance during the decade under consideration. Table 18. Rajasthan: Projected population by sex as on 1st March, 2002-2011 Year Year 2001 2002 2003 Total 56.47 57.66 Population (in million) Male 29.38 30.00 Female 27.09

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2011 Percentage increase (20012011)

58.88 60.12 61.39 62.88 63.99 65.33 66.68 68.05

69.44 22.97

30.63 31.27 31.93 32.60 33.28 33.97 34.67 35.38

36.09 22.84

27.66 28.25 28.85 29.46 30.08 30.72

31.36

32.01 32.68 33.34 23.07

Table 19. Rajasthan: Projected population by age and sex as on 1st March, 2006-2011 Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+ Total Total 7.95 7.20 7.73 7.47 6.07 4.68 4.17 3.76 3.16 2.61 2.11 1.77 1.37 1.08 0.73 0.46 0.35 62.68 2006 (in million) Male Female 4.15 3.80 3.78 3.42
4.03 3.69

Total 8.65 7.79

7.16

2011(in million) Male Female 4.52 4.13 4.07 3.72

3.76 3.40

3.89 3.24 2.45 2.13 1.89 1.62 1.37 1.12 0.93 0.71 0.54 0.37 0.23 0.17 32.6

3.58 2.84 2.23 2.04 1.88 1.55 1.25 0.99 0.84 0.67 0.54 0.37 0.23 0.18 30.08

7.69 7.43 6.04 4.65 4.13 3.70 3.09 2.52 1.99 1.60 1.18 0.86 0.52 0.44 69.44

4.02 3.87 3.22 2.43 2.10 1.85 1.57 1.31 1.04 0.83 0.60 0.43 0.26 0.22 36.09

3.68 3.57 2.82 2.22 2.02 1.85 1.52 1.21 0.94 0.77 0.58 0.43 0.26 0.22 33.34

Note: Based on data obtained from the Report of the Technical Group of Population Projections, SRS and National Family Health Survey II.

Table 20 gives the projected population of Rajasthan by age and sex for the population below 21 years of age. The table shows that the elementary school-going population (aged 7-14) in Rajasthan will decline from 12.2 million in 2001 to 11.7 million in 2011, as shown below: Year 2001 2006 2011 Male (000) 6341 6304 6158 Female (000) 5831 5752 5587 Total (000) 12172 12056 11745

Table 21 gives the distribution of projected population by division and district. The average decadal growth rate will come down to 22.94 percent in 2011 from 28.33 percent in 2001. As per the projected population in 19 districts in the State, - Churu, Ganganagar, Hanumangarh, Bharatpur, Jhunjhunu, Sikar, Jalore, Pali, Ajmer, Bhilwara, Tonk, Chittorgarh, Dungarpur, Rajsamand, Udaipur, Baran, Bundi, Jhalawar and Sawai Madhopur - the population growth will be less than the State's average during 2001-2011, with Rajsamand having the lowest decadal growth rate of 14.82 per cent, closely followed by Jhunjhunu. The remaining 13 districts Bikaner, Alwar, Dausa, Dhaulpur, Jaipur, Barmer, Jaisalmer, Jodhpur, Sirohi, Nagaur, Banswara, Karauli and Kota - are likely to record higher decadal growth rates compared to that of the State as a whole, with Jaisalmer having the highest growth rate of 41.31 percent. Among divisions, the population will increase from as little as 20 percent in Udaipur division to as much as 26 percent in Jodhpur division. It is interesting to note that the rate of growth of population in Jaipur division will decline significantly during the decade under consideration.

Table 20. Rajasthan: Projected population of Rajasthan by Single Age (0-20) and Sex (in' 000)
Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Sex Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 0 730 644 736 652 752 671 782 704 828 756 898 834 927 862 950 882 966 894 974 897 970 889 1 758 681 757 682 765 690 782 707 812 739 859 790 880 809 898 826 912 839 922 846 926 847 2 778 707 774 703 775 703 782 709 798 724 824 752 839 765 853 779 868 793 881 806 894 817 3 792 724 786 717 782 712 782 710 786 713 796 722 804 730 816 741 831 756 849 774 871 797 4 802 733 794 725 788 717 783 711 778 705 773 699 778 703 787 712 802 727 824 750 854 783 5 808 738 800 730 793 722 784 713 773 701 757 683 759 684 766 692 781 707 806 732 842 772 6 811 740 805 733 797 726 786 716 771 700 749 675 748 674 753 680 767 694 792 719 830 761 7 812 742 808 737 801 731 790 721 774 704 748 676 745 673 749 676 760 687 782 710 817 748 8 813 744 811 742 806 737 796 728 780 711 756 684 751 679 752 680 759 687 775 703 800 731 9 811 747 813 748 810 745 803 736 790 721 770 698 764 692 762 690 763 692 769 699 781 711 Age 10 808 748 813 753 813 752 809 744 800 732 787 716 781 709 776 704 771 700 767 696 761 690 11 800 744 810 753 813 754 813 750 809 742 804 733 798 726 790 720 781 711 767 697 746 674 12 787 730 800 744 808 750 812 749 814 747 815 745 810 740 802 733 790 721 770 701 741 668 13 767 705 784 724 797 736 805 742 812 746 817 750 815 747 808 741 797 729 778 709 749 676 14 741 672 763 695 780 714 793 728 804 739 812 748 813 749 810 745 802 735 787 719 765 693 15 713 636 739 664 761 690 779 713 794 731 805 745 810 750 810 749 806 742 798 730 784 714 16 684 600 714 633 741 665 764 696 783 722 797 740 806 750 810 751 810 747 806 739 800 730 17 653 567 685 601 716 638 743 673 765 704 783 727 797 741 805 746 809 746 810 744 811 742 18 619 538 652 571 684 607 714 643 741 676 763 702 781 721 793 732 802 738 808 742 813 747 19 584 512 616 541 649 574 681 608 711 641 737 669 759 692 776 710 790 725 800 736 808 744 20 548 487 578 511 611 540 646 571 679 602 709 632 735 660 758 687 776 709 790 728 801 742

Table 21. Rajasthan: Projected population by sex for districts and divisions as on 1st March 2011
District/Division Bikaner Churu Ganganagar Hanumangarh Bikaner Division Alwar Bharatpur Dausa Dhaulpur Jaipur Jhunjhunu Sikar Jaipur Division Barmer Jaisalmer Jalore Jodhpur Pali Sirohi Jodhpur Division Ajmer Bhilwara Nagaur Tonk Ajmer Division Banswara Chittorgarh Dungarpur Rajasamand Udaipur Udaipur Division Baran Bundi Jhalawar Karauli Kota Sawai Madhopur Kota Division Rajasthan Male 885722 986867 955027 800796 3628412 1585046 1130010 693438 537733 2769096 983158 1172129 8870610 1035813 278973 736029 1509563 917320 437534 4915232 1128763 1023086 1421455 625719 4199023 758379 917023 546096 492736 1335017 4049251 535745 503827 612357 648837 827647 590716 3719129 29381657 2001 (actual) Female 787840 936041 833460 716594 3273935 1405816 968313 623352 445082 2483292 929941 1115100 7970896 927945 229026 712457 1371214 901881 41~222 4555745 1051763 986430 1352439 585624 3976256 742041 885633 560941 493533 1297193 3979341 486823 457442 567985 556794 740933 525315 3335292 27091465 Total 1673562 1922908 1788487 1517390 6902347 2990862 2098323 1316790 982815 5252388 1913099 2287229 16841506 1963758 507999 1448486 2880777 1819201 850756 9470977 2180526 2009516 2773894 1211343 8175279 1500420 1802656 1107037 986269 2632210 8028592 1022568 961269 1180342 1205631 1568580 1116031 7054421 56473122 2011 (projected) Male 1176135 1177530 1173418 952783 4471281 1981287 1364402 877725 667252 3594005 1136304 1397216 11001259 1361589 393163 886838 1928078 1066848 549640 6169857 1361683 1230907 1762138 744015 5097504 944085 1064100 655408 565967 1624638 4850300 647054 599594 723995 812213 1016952 710262 4508347 36098548 Female Total 1039526 2215661 1117720 2295250 1011966 2185384 854933 1807717 4017386 8488667 1750606 3731893 1190449 2554851 792870 1670596 568163 1235415 3204334 6798339 1079344 2215648 1322002 2719219 9893980 20895239 1212727 2574316 324703 717866 872334 1759172 1764111 3692189 1065987 2132835 510504 1060144 5738449 11908306 1272461 2634144 1197202 2428109 1674414 3436551 697715 1441730 4840932 9938436 921927 1866012 1033201 2097301 686882 1342290 566450 1132417 1586843 3211481 4791412 9641712 589231 1236285 549814 1149408 670705 1394700 689111 1501324 914532 1931484 652906 1363168 4064920 8573267 33347079 69445627 Decadal increase 2001-11 32.39 19.36 22.19 19.13 22.98 24.78 21.76 26.87 25.70 29.43 15.81 18.89 24.07 31.09 41.31 21.45 28.17 17.24 24.61 25.73 20.80 20.83 23.89 19.02 21.57 24.37 16.35 21.25 14.82 22.01 20.09 20.90 19.57 18.16 24.53 23.14 22.14 21.53 22.94

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

It appears from the foregoing discussion that the outstanding feature of Rajasthan's demographic scenario is not so much the size of the population as the high rate of population growth. It has been recording a phenomenally high population growth rate since 1951. If the current growth rate of 2.5 per cent per annum continues unabated, Rajasthan's population will be double its current size, reaching a staggering figure of 113 million or more than 11 crore, before the year 2030. This rapid pace of population growth will exert a tremendous pressure on the labour market and other social institutions that are age-graded. This may also become a major drag on the economic growth and the delicate eco-system of the State. Thus, curbing the rate of growth of the population of the State and stabilizing its population size is a dire necessity in order to accelerate the growth of its economy. The Government of Rajasthan, as noted earlier, has recognized this fact and has taken steps in the last few years to achieve a breakthrough. These 'development' efforts have been taken into account while projecting the population of the State till the year 2011. The population is projected to rise from 56.47 million in 2001 to 69.44 million by 2011, an increase of 23 per cent or 2.1 per cent per annum. Among the divisions, the population will increase by as little as 20 per cent in the Udaipur division while it will be as much as 26 per cent in the Jodhpur division. Although a backdrop has been created with a favourable political and bureaucratic climate supported by technical efforts the Government of Rajasthan has to run its population stabilization programme imaginatively. Thus, the strategic approach must be focussed on meeting the unmet need for family planning services. In other words, programme management based on the needs of clients could produce the results desired. A study conducted by the author some 14 years ago in Rajasthan, on behalf of the Department of Family Welfare, Government of India argued that "we have to think beyond the existing approach in order to develop the right type of organization and organizational processes for managing the family welfare programme, looking to the needs of clients" (Kothari 1989), and it is still relevant. The programme has positioned itself mainly as "nasbandi", which is not desirable. A re-positioning of the Family Welfare Programme rather than rechristening it, for example, re-naming the Family Welfare Programme as Reproductive and Child Health (RCH) Programme, is therefore essential. We have numerous examples of organizations, which after failing in the market with their products, readjust and redesign their strategies and succeed. Why can't the same be done to the Family Welfare Programme? In addition, an effort should be made to strengthen and expand social investment in young people to offset the population momentum. The proposed measures and their successful implementation will help Rajasthan achieve sustainable development with hope and confidence.

Endnotes 1 The author headed the team, which drafted the first draft of population policy for Rajasthan and it was submitted to the Government of Rajasthan. For details, see Population Policy for Rajasthan: Identification of Issues - Proceedings of Workshop-I, 1997; and draft Population Policy for Rajasthan, Government of Rajasthan, 1998, Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipur. The author is also a member of Rajiv Gandhi Population Mission, Rajasthan A study carried out in Rajasthan in the year 1988 on behalf of the Department of Family Welfare, Government of India indicated that around 15 percent of eligible couples in the State wanted to space or limit the number of children but were not using any contraception mainly due to non-availability of quality services. For details, see Kothari, Family Welfare Programme in Rajasthan: Beyond the Existing Approach, Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipur, 1989. The Technical Group on Population Projections, constituted by the Planning Commission, did not consider migration while projecting the population of the states for the period 1996-2016. For details, see GoI 1996.

2 3

REFERENCES Caldwell, J. "In search of theory of fertility decline for India and Sri Lanka", in Dynamics of Population and Family Welfare, K.Srinivisan and S. Mukherjie, eds. Bombay: Himalaya, 1983. Chaturwedi A, Khanna A and Kothari D. Provision of two-child norm in Panchayati Raj Act of Rajasthan: A critical review of impact and perception, FPA Working Paper No 9, Forum for Population Action, Jaipur, 2001. GoI. Population Projections for India and States, 1996-2016, Report of the Technical Group on Population Projections. Office of Registrar General, India, New Delhi, 1996. GoI. National Population Policy 2000, Department of Family Welfare, Government of India, New Delhi, 2000. GoR. Population Policy for Rajasthan: Identification of Issues - Proceedings of Workshop. Jointly organised by the Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipur and Government of Rajasthan, 1997. GoR Draft Population Policy for Rajasthan. Government of Rajasthan, developed by Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipur, 1998. GoR. Population Policy for Rajasthan. Government of Rajasthan, 2000. NFHS-I. Rajasthan: National Family Health Survey, 1992-93. International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai, 1995. NFHS-II. Rajasthan: National Family Health Survey, 1998-99. International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai, 2001. Kothari Devendra. Family Welfare Programme in Rajasthan: Beyond the Existing Approach. (Sponsored by the Department of Family Welfare, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, New Delhi). Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipur, 1989. Kothari Devendra. Growing population in Rajasthan: Some emerging Issues, IIHMR Occasional Paper No.1, Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipur, 1990. Kothari Devendra. Husbands and wives, and unmet need for family planning services: Some research findings. The paper presented at the workshop on "Reaching out to men as supportive partner in reproductive and sexual health" held at Bombay on February 24-25 2000 and organized by the Population Council, New Delhi, 2000a. Kothari Devendra, Khanna Anoop and Abbassay Shameem. Operationalising the concept of unmet need for family planning services: A case study. IIHMR Policy Brief No.1, Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipur, 1997a. Kothari Devendra, Krishnaswamy S, Maru R M, et al. A note on recent stagnation of infant mortality in Rajasthan. Working paper, Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipur, 1997b.

Kothari Devendra, Maru R M, Khanna Anoop, et al. Vikalp: Managing family planning programme in the Post-ICPD era: An experiment in Rajasthan, India. IIHMR Occasional Paper No.2, Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipur, 1997c. Kothari Devendra. Rajasthan: Reproductive health needs of women as emerged from the recent findings, FPA working paper No. 14, Forum for Population Action, Jaipur,2001. Lubhaya Ram. Target-free approach for family welfare: A review of experiences in Rajasthan.. In: The Policy Project. Targets for Family Planning in India: An analysis of Policy Change, Consequences, and Alternative Choices. The Futures Group International, New Delhi, 1998. Pahariya S, Vikalp: An innovative strategy for management of family welfare programme. FPA Working Paper No.10, Forum for Population Action, Jaipur, 2001. SRS. SRS Bulletin, Registrar General, India, 2000. Sharma R, Goyal R and Gupta H. Rajlakshmi: An initiative for improving the status of girl child in Rajasthan. FPA Working Paper No13, Forum for Population Action, Jaipur, 2000. UNFPA. India: Towards Population and Development Goals. Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1997 UNFPA. The Reproductive and Child Health Survey-I: Selected reproductive health indicators for States in India. POP Times, 2000; 2 (3): 6-7

Annexures 1 & 2

Annexure 1 Table A. Rajasthan: Projected population by age and sex as on 1st March, 2002-11 Year 2002 Population (in million) Percentage distribution Age Total Male Female Total Male Female
0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+ Total 7.33 7.73 7. 64 6.42 4.93 4.27 3.89 3.33 2.77 2.27 1.94 1.57 1.29 0.96 0.67 0.33 0.34 57.66 3.85 4.04 3.97 3.41 2.59 2.19 1.95 1.69 1.45 1.21 1.02 0.82 0.66 0.48 0.34 0.16 0.17 30 3.48 3.69 3.67 3.01 2.33 2.08 1.94 1.63 1.32 1.06 0.91 0.75 0.63 0.47 0.34 0.17 0.17 27.66 12.71 13.41 13.25 11.13 8.55 7.41 6.75 5.78 4.80 3.94 3.36 2.72 2.24 1.66 1.16 0.57 0.59 100.00 12.83 13.47 13.23 11.37 8.63 7.30 6.50 5.63 4.83 4.03 3.40 2.73 2.20 1.60 1.13 0.53 0.57 100.00 12.58 13.34 13.27 10.88 8.42 7.52 7.01 5.89 4.77 3.83 3.29 2.71 2.28 1.70 1.23 0.61 0.61 100.00

Age
0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+ Total

Year 2003 Population (in million) Total Male Female

7.35 7.67 7.72 6.72 5.18 4.33 3.97 3.44 2.87 2.35 1.98 1.62 1.31 0.99 0.69 0.36 0.34 58.88 3.86 4.01 4.01 3.55 2.74 2.23 2 1.74 1.49 1.25 1.05 0.84 0.67 0.5 0.34 0.18 0.17 30.63 3.49 3.66 3.7 3.17 2.44 2.1 1.97 1.7 1.38 1.1 0.93 0.77 0.64 0.49 0.34 0.19 0.17 28.25

Percentage distribution Total Male Female

12.48 13.03 13.11 11.41 8.80 7.35 6.74 5.84 4.87 3.99 3.36 2.75 2.22 1.68 1.17 0.61 0.58 100.00 12. 60 13.09 13.09 11.59 8.95 7.28 6.53 5.68 4.86 4.08 3.43 2.74 2.19 1.63 1.11 0.59 0.56 100.00 12.35 12.96 13.10 11.22 8.64 7.43 6.97 6.02 4.88 3.89 3.29 2.73 2.27 1.73 1.20 0.67 0.60 100.00

Age 0-4
5-9

10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+
Total

Year 2004 Population (in million) Percentage distribution Total Male Female Total Male Female 7.45 3.91 3.54 12.39 12.50 12.27 7.57 3.96 3.61 12.59 12.66 12.51 7.75 4.03 3.71 12.89 12.89 12.86 7.02 3.68 3.33 11.68 11.77 11.54 5.46 2.91 2.56 9.08 9.31 8.87 4.41 2.28 2.13 7.34 7.29 7.38 4.04 2.04 2.00 6.72 6.52 6.93 3.56 1.79 1.77 5.92 5.72 6.14 2.96 1.53 1.43 4.92 4.89 .96 2.44 1.29 1.15 4.06 4.13 3.99 2.01 1.07 0.95 3.34 3.42 3.29 1.67 0.87 0.8 2.78 2.78 2.77 2.20 2.17 2.22 1.32 0.68 0.64 1.02 0.52 0.51 1.70 1.66 1.77 0.7 0.35 0.35 1.16 1.12 1.21 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.67 0.64 0.69 0.34 0.17 0.17 0.57 0.54 0.59 60.12 31.27 28.85 100.00 100.00 100.00 Year 2005

Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+
Total

Population (in million) Total Male Female 7.64 4 3.64 7.42 3.89 3.54 7.74 4.04 3.71 7.27 3.79 3.4 7 5.77 3.07 2.69 4.52 2.35 2.17 4.1 2.08 2.02 3.67 1.84 1.83 3.06 1.57 1.49 2.52 1.33 1.2 2.06 1.09 0.97 1.72 0.9 0.82 1.34 0.69 0.65 1.06 0.53 0.53 0.72 0.36 0.36 0.22 0.43 0.21 0.34 0.17 0.17 61.39 31.93 29.46

Percentage distribution Total Male Female 12.45 12.53 12.36 12.09 12.18 12.02 12.61 12.65 12.59 11.84 11.87 11.78 9.40 9.61 9.13 7.36 7.36 7.37 6.68 6.51 6.86 5.98 5.76 6.21 4.98 4.92 5.06 4.10 4.17 4.07 3.36 3.41 3.29 2.80 2.82 2.78 2.18 2.16 2.21 1.73 1.66 1.80 1.17 1.13 1.22 0.70 0.66 0.75 0.55 0.53 0.58 100.00 100.00 100.00

Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75- 79 80+
Total

Year 2006 Population (in million) Percentage distribution Total Male Female Total Male Female 7.95 4.15 3.8 12.68 12.73 12.63 7.2 3.78 3.42 11.49 11.60 11.37 7.73 4.03 3.69 12.33 12.36 12.27 7.47 3.89 3.58 11.92 11.93 11.90 6.07 3.24 2.84 9.68 9.94 9.44 4.68 2.45 2.23 7.47 7.52 7.41 4.17 2.13 2.04 6.65 6.53 6.78 3.76 1.89 1.88 6.00 5.80 6.25 3.16 1.62 1.55 5.04 4.97 5.15 2.61 1.37 1.25 4.16 4.20 4.16 2.11 1.12 0.99 3.37 3.44 3.29 1.77 0.93 0.84 2.82 2.85 2.79 1.37 0.71 0.67 2.19 2.18 2.23 1.08 0.54 0.54 1.72 1.66 1.80 0.73 0.37 0.37 1.16 1.13 1.23 0.76 0.46 0.23 0.23 0.73 0.71 0.35 0.17 0.18 0.56 0.52 0.60 62.68 32.6 30.08 100.00 100.00 100.00 Year 2007 Population (in million) Percentage distribution Total Male Female Total Male Female 8.1 4.23 3.87 12.66 12.71 12.60 7.17 3.77 3.4 11.20 11.33 11.07 7.69 4.02 3.67 12.02 12.08 11.95 7.61 3.95 3.65 11.89 11.87 11.88 6.38 3.39 2.99 9.97 10.19 9.73 4.89 2.58 2.32 7.64 7.75 7.55 4.23 2.17 2.06 6.61 6.52 6.71 3.85 1.93 1.92 6.02 5.80 6.25 3.27 1.66 1.61 5.11 4.99 5.24 2.71 1.41 1.3 4.24 4.24 4.23 2.18 1.15 1.03 3.41 3.46 3.35 1.81 0.95 0.86 2.83 2.85 2.80 1.41 0.73 0.68 2.20 2.19 2.21 1.1 0.55 0.55 1.72 1.65 1.79 0.76 0.38 0.38 1.19 1.14 1.24 0.47 0.24 0.24 0.73 0.72 0.78 0.36 0.18 0.18 0.56 0.54 0.59 63.99 33.28 30.72 100.00 100.00 100.00

Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+
Total

Year 2008
Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+
Total

Population (in million) Total Male Female 8.24 4.3 3.94 7.2 3.78 3.42 7.63 3.99 3.64 7.68 3.99 3.69 6.69 3.53 3.16 5.15 2.72 2.42 4.3 2.21 2.08 3.92 1.97 1.95 3.39 1.71 1.68 2.8 1.45 1.35 2.26 1.19 1.07 1.85 0.97 0.88 1.46 0.75 0.7 1.11 0.56 0.55 0.78 0.39 0.39 0.49 0.24 0.24 0.38 0.19 0.19 65.33 33.97 31.36

Percentage distribution Total Male Female 12.61 12.66 12.56 11.02 11.13 10.91 11.68 11.75 11.61 11.76 11.75 11.77 10.24 10.39 10.08 7.88 8.01 7.72 6.58 6.51 6.63 6.00 5.80 6.22 5.19 5.03 5.36 4.29 4.27 4.30 3.46 3.50 3.41 2.83 2.86 2.81 2.23 2.21 2.23 1.70 1.65 1.75 1.19 1.15 1.24 0.75 0.71 0.77 0.58 0.56 0.61 100.00 100.00 100.00

Year 2009
Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+
Total

Population (in million) Total Male Female 8.39 4.38 4.01 7.3 3.83 3.47 7.54 3.94 3.6 7.71 4.02 3.7 6.98 3.66 3.32 5.43 2.89 2.54 4.38 2.26 2.11 3.99 2.02 1.98 3.5 1.76 1.74 2.89 1.49 1.4 2.34 1.23 1.11 1.89 0.99 0.89 1.51 0.78 0.73 1.13 0.57 0.56 0.81 0.4 0.41 0.5 0.25 0.25 0.41 0.2 0.2 66.68 34.67 32.01

Percentage distribution Total Male Female 12.58 12.63 12.53 10.95 11.05 10.84 11.31 11.36 11.25 11.56 11.60 11.56 10.47 10.56 10.37 8.14 8.34 7.94 6.57 6.52 6.59 5.98 5.83 6.19 5.25 5.08 5.44 4.33 4.30 4.37 3.51 3.55 3.47 2.83 2.86 2.78 2.26 2.25 2.28 1.69 1.64 1.75 1.21 1.15 1.28 0.75 0.72 0.78 0.61 0.58 0.62 100.00 100.00 100.00

Year 2010 Age

0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+ Total

Population (in million) Total Male Female

8.52 7.49 7.39 7.71 7.23 5.73 4.49 4.06 3.61 2.99 2.43 1.93 1.56 1.15 0.84 0.51 0.43 68.05 4.45 3.92 3.87 4.02 3.77 3.06 2.34 2.06 1.81 1.53 1.27 1.02 0.81 0.58 0.42 0.25 0.21 35.38 4.07 3.56 3.52 3.69 3.46 2.68 2.15 2 1.8 1.46 1.16 0.92 0.75 0.57 0.42 0.26 0.21 32.68

Percentage distribution Total Male Female

12.52 11.01 10.86 11.33 10.62 8.42 6.60 5.97 5.30 4.39 3.57 2.84 2.29 1.69 1.23 0.75 0.63 100.00 12.58 11.08 10.94 11.36 10.66 8.65 6.61 5.82 5.12 4.32 3.59 2.88 2.29 1.64 1.19 0.71 0.59 100.00 12.45 10.89 10.77 11.29 10.59 8.20 6.58 6.12 5.51 4.47 3.55 2.82 2.29 1.74 1.29 0.80 9.64 100.00

Year 2011
Age 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+ Total Population (in million) Total Male Female 8.65 4.52 4.13 7.79 4.07 3.72 7.16 3.76 3.4 7.69 4.02 3.68 7.43 3.87 3.57 6.04 3.22 2.82 4.65 2.43 2.22 4.13 2.1 2.02 3.7 1.85 1.85 3.09 1.57 1.52 2.52 1.31 1.21 1.99 1.04 0.94 1.6 0.83 0.77 1.18 0.6 0.58 0.86 0.43 0.43 0.52 0.26 0.26 0.44 0.22 0.22 69.44 36.09 33.34 Percentage distribution Total Male Female 12.46 12.52 12.39 11.22 11.28 11.16 10.31 10.42 10.20 11.07 11.14 11.04 10.70 10.72 10.71 8.70 8.92 8.46 6.70 6.73 6.66 5.95 5.82 6.06 5.33 5.13 5.55 4.45 4.35 4.56 3.63 3.63 3.63 2.87 2.88 2.82 2.30 2.30 2.31 1.70 1.66 1.74 1.24 1.19 1.29 0.75 0.72 0.78 0.63 0.61 0.66 100.00 100.00 100.00

Annexure- 2

Table B. Rajasthan: Projected population by sex for districts and divisions as on 1st March, 2002-2011
District
Bikaner Churu Ganganagar Hanumangarh Bikaner Division Alwar Bharatpur Dausa Dhaulpur Jaipur Jhunjhunu Sikar Jaipur Division Barmer Jaisalmer Jalore Jodhpur Pali Sirohi Jodhpur Division Ajmer Bhilwara Nagaur Tonk Ajmer Division Banswara Chittorgarh Dungarpur Rajasamand Udaipur Udaipur Division Baran Bundi Jhalawar Karauli Kota Sawai Madhopur Kota Division Rajasthan

Male
911438 1004717 975154 815048 3705971 1621236 1151814 710161 549608 2842994 997756 1193213 9066012 1064809 288787 750073 1547364 931522 447747 5029572 1150440 1042455 1452706 636815 4282359 775377 931010 556298 499742 1361845 4124089 546098 512806 622862 663748 845093 601862 3792388 30000391

2002 Female
809998 952807 849805 729366 3341672 1437013 988534 638538 456089 2547447 943914 1134258 8145165 953131 237165 727039 1406221 917098 422057 4662183 1072005 1005733 1381652 595979 4055330 758335 899401 572427 500388 1323622 4053991 496214 465940 577514 568801 756706 536870 3401982 26660323

Total

Male

2003 Female
833061 970201 866763 742616 3411961 1469399 1009518 654314 467526 2614142 958420 1154136 8326055 979332 245677 742169 1442609 932887 431227 4772718 1093006 1025760 1411972 606722 4137372 775249 913691 584345 507510 1351045 4131435 505957 474757 587402 581263 773076 548865 3471178 28250719

Total
1770921 1993046 1862424 1572132 7196982 3127579 2183504 1381569 1029246 5532877 1970945 2368759 17591363 2073900 544609 1506521 3028651 1878788 889404 9919062 2265488 2087904 2896550 1254802 8504528 1567969 1858859 1151010 1014335 2740196 8331559 1062582 996678 1220920 1260234 1635945 1162055 7338096 58881591

1721437 937860 1957525 1022845 1824959 995661 1544414 829516 7047643 3785021 3058250 1658180 2140348 1173986 1348699 727255 1005697 561720 5390441 2918735 1941670 1012526 2327472 1214623 17211177 9265308 2017940 1094568 525952 298932 1477112 764352 2953585 1586041 1848620 945901 869804 458177 9691755 5146344 2222445 1172481 2048188 1062144 2834358 1484578 1232795 648080 8337689 4367156 1533712 792720 1830411 945169 1128725 566665 1000130 506825 2685467 1389151 8178080 4200124 1042312 556626 978746 521921 1200376 633519 1232549 678971 1601799 862869 1138732 613190 7194370 3866919 57660714 30630872

Table B. Rajasthan: Projected population by sex for districts and divisions as on 1st March, 2002-2011 2004 2005 District Male Female Total Male Female Total
Bikaner Churu Ganganagar Hanumangarh Bikaner Division Alwar Bharatpur Dausa Dhaulpur Jaipur Jhunjhunu Sikar Jaipur Division Barmer Jaisalmer Jalore Jodhpur Pali Sirohi Jodhpur Division Ajmer Bhilwara Nagaur Tonk Ajmer Division Banswara Chittorgarh Dungarpur Rajasamand Udaipur Udaipur Division Baran Bundi Jhalawar Karauli Kota Sawai Madhopur Kota Division Rajasthan 964948 856704 1821651 1041193 987824 2029017 1016495 883980 1900475 844155 756039 1600194 3865357 3483417 7348774 1695789 1502380 3198170 1196462 1030855 2227317 744683 670421 1415104 574040 479207 1053247 2996185 2682342 5678527 1027408 973061 2000470 1236290 1174256 2410546 9468007 8510199 17978206 1125043 1006162 2131205 309402 254471 563874 778822 757547 1536368 1625517 1479806 3105324 960404 948863 1909266 468803 440557 909359 5265283 4885436 10150720 1194822 1114318 2309140 1082093 1046092 2128185 1516993 1442828 2959821 659475 617604 1277079 4453172 4220696 8673868 810368 792468 1602836 959443 928125 1887568 577165 596458 1173624 513956 514687 1028643 1416857 1378913 2795770 4277118 4209982 8487101 567298 515845 1083143 531144 483697 1014841 644291 597405 1241696 694471 593945 1288416 880927 789729 1670657 624668 561077 1185745 3942507 3541463 7483970 31271444 28851193 60122637 993024 880935 1060089 1005674 1037980 901455 859229 769633 3948218 3556039 1734612 1535958 1219621 1052545 762687 686859 586752 0 491134 3076328 2752066 1042726 987835 1258604 1194616 9677149 8697606 1156607 1033631 320306 263556 793731 773171 1666322 1517821 975331 965022 479774 450046 5388090 5000351 1217841 1135941 1102645 1066728 1550437 1474221 671210 628622 4541825 4305298 828580 809995 974136 942699 587983 608766 521295 521917 1445417 1407224 4356429 4289623 578295 525877 540642 492759 655383 607522 710473 606847 899551 806666 636492 573507 4020407 3612835 31932118 29461752 1873959 2065763 1939435 1628863 7504257 3270571 2272166 1449547 1077886 5828394 2030561 2453220 18374755 2190238 583862 1566901 3184143 1940353 929820 10388441 2353781 2169373 3024659 1299832 8847123 1638575 1916835 1196748 1043212 285264 8646052 1104172 1033402 1262905 1317321 1706217 1210000 7633243 61393870

Table B. Rajasthan: Projected population by sex for districts and divisions as on 1st March, 2002-2011 District
Bikaner Churu Ganganagar Hanumangarh Bikaner Division Alwar Bharatpur Dausa Dhaulpur Jaipur Jhunjhunu Sikar Jaipur Division Barmer Jaisalmer Jalore Jodhpur Pali Sirohi Jodhpur Division Ajmer Bhilwara Nagaur Tonk Ajmer Division Banswara Chittorgarh Dungarpur Rajasamand Udaipur Udaipur Division Baran Bundi Jhalawar Karauli Kota Sawai Madhopur Kota Division Rajasthan

Male
1021794 1079198 1059791 874468 4032369 1774110 1243078 781033 599673 3158234 1058144 1281166 9889719 1188912 331553 808827 1707945 990370 490943 5513096 1241153 1123453 1584428 683072 4631684 847100 988934 598931 528675 1474374 4436675 589434 550244 666586 726756 918457 648462 4099353 32602896

2006 Female
905765 1023747 919188 783396 3629824 1570136 1074588 703634 503310 2823329 1002736 1215211 8888283 1061748 272938 789041 1556662 981362 459695 5117475 1157871 1087666 1506153 639775 4391172 827830 957410 621267 529197 1435979 4370349 536052 501943 617750 619970 823887 86157 3685291 30082394

Total
1927559 2102946 1978979 1657864 7662194 3344246 2317666 1484666 1102982 5981564 2060880 2496378 18778002 250660 604492 1597868 3264607 1971733 950638 0630571 2399024 2211119 3090581 1322847 9022856 1674930 1946344 1220198 1057872 2910353 8807025 1125487 1052187 1284336 1346726 1742344 1234619 7784643 62685290

Male
1051269 1098518 1081928 889869 4117812 1814286 1266832 799722 612803 3241926 1073660 1303974 10105725 1221971 343154 824110 1750394 1005520 502311 5640315 1264758 1144513 1618966 695059 4722745 865928 1003835 610008 536094 1503728 4517849 600715 559948 677897 743322 937646 660577 4179339 33283785

2007 Female
931505 1042381 937481 797586 3705980 1605437 1097341 720981 515904 2897094 1018092 1236442 9085197 1090876 282719 805419 1596859 998205 469658 5238529 1180491 1109266 1539124 651273 1 4479773 846249 972571 634169 536701 1465653 4453602 546549 511414 628293 633520 841666 599221 3760050 30723131

Total
1982774 2140899 2019409 1687455 7823792 3419723 2364173 1520702 1128707 6139020 2091752 2540416 19190922 2312847 625873 1629529 3347253 2003724 971969 10878843 2445249 2253779 3158090 1346332 9202518 1712177 1976405 1244177 1072795 2969381 8971451 1147263 1071362 1306191 1376842 1779312 1259798 7939389 64006916

Table B. Rajasthan: Projected population by sex for districts and divisions as on 1st March, 2002-2011 2008 2009 District Male Female Total Male Female Total
Bikaner Churu Ganganagar Hanumangarh Bikaner Division Alwar Bharatpur Dausa Dhaulpur Jaipur Jhunjhunu Sikar Jaipur Division Barmer Jaisalmer Jalore Jodhpur Pali Sirohi Jodhpur Division Ajmer Bhilwara Nagaur Tonk Ajmer Division Banswara Chittorgarh Dungarpur Rajasamand Udaipur Udaipur Division Baran Bundi Jhalawar Karauli Kota Sawai Madhopur Kota Division Rajasthan 1081461 1118046 1104392 905429 4204547 1855144 1290881 818757 626145 3327425 1089268 1327025 10325178 1255794 355117 839579 1793678 1020775 513878 5769758 1288653 1165824 1654054 707168 4815004 885066 1018834 621214 543551 1533478 4599941 612135 569753 689316 760172 957118 672835 4260360 33974788 957561 1060894 955723 811680 3782090 1640819 1120089 738434 528583 2971496 1033235 1257497 9282442 1120318 292723 821781 1637382 1014896 479629 5360118 1203031 110804 1572134 662690 4568177 864702 987543 647058 544074 1495290 4536472 557009 520838 638739 47084 859455 612310 3834661 31363960 2039023 2178940 2060115 1717109 7986637 3495963 2410970 1557192 11544728 6298921 2122503 2584522 19607620 2376112 647840 1661359 3431060 2035670 993507 11129876 2491684 2296629 3226188 1369859 9383181 1749767 2006377 1268271 1087625 3028768 9136413 1169144 1090590 1328055 407256 1816574 1285145 8095021 65338748 1112383 1137780 1127183 921147 4292576 1896686 1315223 838142 639697 3414755 1104967 1350315 10548086 1290394 367451 855231 1837803 1036132 525647 5901439 1312836 187385 1689692 719400 4908455 904514 1033930 632546 551042 1563622 4682943 623696 579657 700839 777307 976874 685235 4342414 34675913 984243 1079623 974219 825937 385963 1676807 1143190 756232 541518 3047491 1048494 1278778 9482983 1150434 303049 838387 1678760 1031759 489760 5483959 1225874 1152640 1605685 674237 4657842 883465 1002641 660140 551492 1525369 4620402 567610 530379 649291 660871 877529 625621 3910345 32014940 2096626 2217403 2101401 1747084 8151938 3573492 2458413 1594374 1181215 6462247 2153461 2629093 20031069 2440827 670500 1693619 3516563 2067891 1015406 11385398 2538710 2340026 3295377 1393637 9566296 1787979 2036570 1292686 1102534 3088990 9303345 1191306 1110036 1350130 1438178 1854403 1310856 8252759 66689353

Table B. Rajasthan: Projected population by sex for districts and divisions as on 1st March, 2002-2011 2010 2011 District Male Female Total Male Female Total
Bikaner Churu Ganganagar Hanumangarh Bikaner Division Alwar Bharatpur Dausa Dhaulpur Jaipur Jhunjhunu Sikar Jaipur Division Barmer Jaisalmer Jalore Jodhpur Pali Sirohi Jodhpur Division Ajmer Bhilwara Nagaur Tonk Ajmer Division Banswara Chittorgarh Dungarpur Rajasamand Udaipur Udaipur Division Baran Bundi Jhalawar Karauli Kota Sawai Madhopur Kota Division Rajasthan 1144045 1157718 1150300 937020 4381900 1938915 1339857 857878 653461 3503939 1120751 1373842 10774460 1325780 380166 871067 1882778 1051590 537618 6035371 1337306 1209194 1725882 731751 5003094 924274 1049118 644006 558567 1594159 4766847 635395 589660 712466 794728 996912 697777 4425494 35387166 1011871 1098902 993271 840613 3939000 1713926 1167000 774614 554880 3126054 1064190 1300679 9689791 1181595 313803 855500 1721526 1049111 500205 5611782 1249401 1175133 1640280 686123 4750215 902817 1018173 673621 559122 1556363 4706825 578528 540204 660149 675086 896162 639348 3988320 32685933 2155916 2256619 2143570 1777633 8320900 3652841 2506857 1632492 1208341 6629994 2184942 2674521 20464251 2507376 693969 1726567 3604305 2100701 1037822 11647153 2586706 2384327 3366162 1417874 9753309 1827090 2067290 1317626 1117689 3150521 9473672 1213923 1129864 1372615 1469815 1893075 1337125 8413814 68069099 1176135 1177530 1173418 952783 4471281 1981287 1364402 877725 667252 3594005 1136304 1397216 11001259 1361589 393163 886838 1928078 1066848 549640 6169857 1361683 1230907 1762138 744015 5097504 944085 1064100 655408 565967 1624638 4850300 647054 599594 723995 812213 1016952 710262 4508347 36098548 1039526 1117720 1011966 854933 4017386 1750606 1190449 792870 568163 3204334 1079344 1322002 9893980 1212727 324703 872334 1764111 1065987 510504 5738449 1272461 1197202 1674414 697715 4840932 921927 1033201 686882 566450 1586843 4791412 589231 549814 670705 689111 914532 652906 4064920 33347079 2215661 2295250 2185384 1807717 8488667 3731893 2554851 1670596 1235415 6798339 2215648 2719219 20895239 2574316 717866 1759172 3692189 2132835 1060144 11908306 2634144 2428109 3436551 1441730 9938436 1866012 2097301 1342290 1132417 3211481 9641712 1236285 1149408 1394700 1501324 1931484 1363168 8573267 69435627