Controlling population is considered to be one of the major challenges in every country. While different countries have adopted various measures to curb population growth, India continues to struggle in developing population control strategies.
Even in the midst of urbanisation, industrialisation and economic development, India continues to witness huge population growth.
According to the United Nations 2016 data, the current population of India stands at 1.3 billion and the country has the fastest growing population after China.
As statistics indicate, the increasing rate of India’s population is quite alarming and requires immediate action. Research suggests that the birth rate is higher among low-income families as they believe that if they produce more children, there will be more earning members.
Scholars have for quite some time identified the family to be the central unit for achieving population control goals.
In fact, India was the first country to adopt family planning as one of its socio-economic development policies in 1952. Post independence, in the first to third Five Year Plans (1951-1966) various methods such as condoms, jellies and foam tablets were advocated for birth control.
Additionally, service clinics were set up in rural areas to educate people about family planning. Advertisements and the media were used to spread awareness and the necessity of using contraceptives for the overall wellbeing of the family.
It was only in the fourth Five Year Plan (1969-1974) that the target was set and a birth rate reduction from 39 per cent to 25 per cent per 1,000 people within the next decade was proposed.
To meet this target, sterilisation clinics were set up and incentives as well as compensations were offered to undergo sterilisation.
Since then sterilisation as a method has been a target-oriented programme and the practice of forceful sterilisation has often been reported in the media.
In fact, it is important to note that among all population-control measures, sterilisation camps have been most enforced by the Government of India.
One cannot deny that such camps have been the reason for a large number of deaths in the country. Reports highlight that from 2009-2012, over 700 women died because of failed sterilisation procedures (United Nations, 2013; Population Foundation of India, 2014).
Though public health experts, demographers and women groups have criticised the functioning of sterilisation camps on several instances, they continue to exist.
Even though concerns of “quality of care” provided in these camps have been questioned by several studies, no particular action has been taken against the doctors and staff involved in sterilisation.
Thirteen women lost their lives at a sterilisation camp in Chhattisgarh in 2014 and strict action was expected from the Centre.
However, it was only on September 16 this year that the Supreme Court ordered the state government to shut down all sterilisation camps in three years.
With this order it is important to understand what alternate approaches can be used to curb population.
Various scholars have said even though sterilisation is the most accepted form of population control measure, it is also one of the major causes of increased mortality rates among women in India.
In this context it is important to reflect on population control policies being followed by other highly populated countries.
Examples outside India
Since population control is a concern for many countries, it is important to understand the different policies adopted by nations experiencing high population growth.
In the United States of America, the Title X Family Program was launched in 1970 to provide contraceptive services, supplies and information regarding birth control.
In particular, families in the low-income group were given priority under this. In 2014, the programme successfully prevented two million unintended pregnancies.
Similarly, Indonesia follows the Banjar system, which involves the community to spread awareness on birth control measures.
Village family planning groups are created by the government to mould fertility behaviour among people. The country has also involved religious leaders to cater to its Muslim population.
The Banjar programme has seen a major shift in the attitude of religious leaders, who have actively supported it.
Bangladesh has achieved the lowest total fertility rate in South Asia through family welfare assistants. Under this, volunteers pay door-to-door visits and advise mothers about the use of contraceptives and provide free ones after every two weeks.
If we look at the different policies used by other countries, it can be suggested that through trained health workers and by involving religious leaders, the use of various contraception measures can be made popular.
Alternative approaches
In India, women are paying a high price in terms of their health due to sterilisation. In this context, it is important to identify alternate approaches that can be used to curb population growth.
Drawing from examples set by other countries, one can say that use of condoms and intrauterine devices can be used to maintain a balance between usage of contraception methods by men and women.
By training members of the village community, the government can also create village self-help groups. These groups can educate villagers on available birth control measures.
In particular, men in rural areas should be motivated and urged to use contraception to reduce the burden on women.
In cities, areas should be identified with low-income families and trained health workers should be sent to spread awareness on other contraception methods. The main goal of population control programmes should be that both men and women should make informed choices. With the Supreme Court’s order to shut down all sterilisation camps and urge for a national health policy, it is important for the Indian government to revaluate population control goals.
Recent Posts
Petrol in India is cheaper than in countries like Hong Kong, Germany and the UK but costlier than in China, Brazil, Japan, the US, Russia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, a Bank of Baroda Economics Research report showed.
Rising fuel prices in India have led to considerable debate on which government, state or central, should be lowering their taxes to keep prices under control.
The rise in fuel prices is mainly due to the global price of crude oil (raw material for making petrol and diesel) going up. Further, a stronger dollar has added to the cost of crude oil.
Amongst comparable countries (per capita wise), prices in India are higher than those in Vietnam, Kenya, Ukraine, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Venezuela. Countries that are major oil producers have much lower prices.
In the report, the Philippines has a comparable petrol price but has a per capita income higher than India by over 50 per cent.
Countries which have a lower per capita income like Kenya, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Venezuela have much lower prices of petrol and hence are impacted less than India.
“Therefore there is still a strong case for the government to consider lowering the taxes on fuel to protect the interest of the people,” the report argued.
India is the world’s third-biggest oil consuming and importing nation. It imports 85 per cent of its oil needs and so prices retail fuel at import parity rates.
With the global surge in energy prices, the cost of producing petrol, diesel and other petroleum products also went up for oil companies in India.
They raised petrol and diesel prices by Rs 10 a litre in just over a fortnight beginning March 22 but hit a pause button soon after as the move faced criticism and the opposition parties asked the government to cut taxes instead.
India imports most of its oil from a group of countries called the ‘OPEC +’ (i.e, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Russia, etc), which produces 40% of the world’s crude oil.
As they have the power to dictate fuel supply and prices, their decision of limiting the global supply reduces supply in India, thus raising prices
The government charges about 167% tax (excise) on petrol and 129% on diesel as compared to US (20%), UK (62%), Italy and Germany (65%).
The abominable excise duty is 2/3rd of the cost, and the base price, dealer commission and freight form the rest.
Here is an approximate break-up (in Rs):
a)Base Price | 39 |
b)Freight | 0.34 |
c) Price Charged to Dealers = (a+b) | 39.34 |
d) Excise Duty | 40.17 |
e) Dealer Commission | 4.68 |
f) VAT | 25.35 |
g) Retail Selling Price | 109.54 |
Looked closely, much of the cost of petrol and diesel is due to higher tax rate by govt, specifically excise duty.
So the question is why government is not reducing the prices ?
India, being a developing country, it does require gigantic amount of funding for its infrastructure projects as well as welfare schemes.
However, we as a society is yet to be tax-compliant. Many people evade the direct tax and that’s the reason why govt’s hands are tied. Govt. needs the money to fund various programs and at the same time it is not generating enough revenue from direct taxes.
That’s the reason why, govt is bumping up its revenue through higher indirect taxes such as GST or excise duty as in the case of petrol and diesel.
Direct taxes are progressive as it taxes according to an individuals’ income however indirect tax such as excise duty or GST are regressive in the sense that the poorest of the poor and richest of the rich have to pay the same amount.
Does not matter, if you are an auto-driver or owner of a Mercedes, end of the day both pay the same price for petrol/diesel-that’s why it is regressive in nature.
But unlike direct tax where tax evasion is rampant, indirect tax can not be evaded due to their very nature and as long as huge no of Indians keep evading direct taxes, indirect tax such as excise duty will be difficult for the govt to reduce, because it may reduce the revenue and hamper may programs of the govt.
Globally, around 80% of wastewater flows back into the ecosystem without being treated or reused, according to the United Nations.
This can pose a significant environmental and health threat.
In the absence of cost-effective, sustainable, disruptive water management solutions, about 70% of sewage is discharged untreated into India’s water bodies.
A staggering 21% of diseases are caused by contaminated water in India, according to the World Bank, and one in five children die before their fifth birthday because of poor sanitation and hygiene conditions, according to Startup India.
As we confront these public health challenges emerging out of environmental concerns, expanding the scope of public health/environmental engineering science becomes pivotal.
For India to achieve its sustainable development goals of clean water and sanitation and to address the growing demands for water consumption and preservation of both surface water bodies and groundwater resources, it is essential to find and implement innovative ways of treating wastewater.
It is in this context why the specialised cadre of public health engineers, also known as sanitation engineers or environmental engineers, is best suited to provide the growing urban and rural water supply and to manage solid waste and wastewater.
Traditionally, engineering and public health have been understood as different fields.
Currently in India, civil engineering incorporates a course or two on environmental engineering for students to learn about wastewater management as a part of their pre-service and in-service training.
Most often, civil engineers do not have adequate skills to address public health problems. And public health professionals do not have adequate engineering skills.
India aims to supply 55 litres of water per person per day by 2024 under its Jal Jeevan Mission to install functional household tap connections.
The goal of reaching every rural household with functional tap water can be achieved in a sustainable and resilient manner only if the cadre of public health engineers is expanded and strengthened.
In India, public health engineering is executed by the Public Works Department or by health officials.
This differs from international trends. To manage a wastewater treatment plant in Europe, for example, a candidate must specialise in wastewater engineering.
Furthermore, public health engineering should be developed as an interdisciplinary field. Engineers can significantly contribute to public health in defining what is possible, identifying limitations, and shaping workable solutions with a problem-solving approach.
Similarly, public health professionals can contribute to engineering through well-researched understanding of health issues, measured risks and how course correction can be initiated.
Once both meet, a public health engineer can identify a health risk, work on developing concrete solutions such as new health and safety practices or specialised equipment, in order to correct the safety concern..
There is no doubt that the majority of diseases are water-related, transmitted through consumption of contaminated water, vectors breeding in stagnated water, or lack of adequate quantity of good quality water for proper personal hygiene.
Diseases cannot be contained unless we provide good quality and adequate quantity of water. Most of the world’s diseases can be prevented by considering this.
Training our young minds towards creating sustainable water management systems would be the first step.
Currently, institutions like the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras (IIT-M) are considering initiating public health engineering as a separate discipline.
To leverage this opportunity even further, India needs to scale up in the same direction.