Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Coming Back To Normal 0
Coming Back To Normal 0
EPW
INSIGHT
Table 1: Population Sex Ratio, 06 Sex Ratio, 01 Sex Ratio in India, 19012011
Year
1901
1911
1921
972
964 955
1961
976
1971 1981
1991
2001
2011
935 906
948 934
905
904
906
940
919
905
923
899
893
901
Total
Year
All ages
Less than 15
1519
2024
2529
3034
3539
4044
4549
50+
<30
30+
2001 2011
905 899
944 881
924 938
898 927
883 896
892 877
917 870
964 856
1003 824
1322 883
894 915
930 865
Rural
2001
906
927
922
896
883
895
919
962
1007
1322
893
932
2011
901
882
939
927
898
882
875
859
827
887
916
869
Urban
2001
904
1043
936
906
882
878
906
972
988
1318
897
920
2011
893
879
935
926
894
865
856
847
819
874
911
854
Table 2: 01 and 06 Sex Ratios, India, States and Union Territories, 2001 and 2011
Country /States
India
Jammu and Kashmir
Himachal Pradesh
Punjab
Chandigarh
Uttarakhand
Haryana
Delhi
Rajasthan
Uttar Pradesh
Bihar
Sikkim
Arunachal Pradesh
Nagaland
Manipur
Mizoram
Tripura
Meghalaya
Assam
West Bengal
Jharkhand
Odisha
Chhattisgarh
Madhya Pradesh
Gujarat
Daman and Diu
Dadra and Nagar Haveli
Maharashtra
Andhra Pradesh
Karnataka
Goa
Lakshadweep
Kerala
Tamil Nadu
Puducherry
Andaman and
Nichobar Islands
34
Total
(01)
2011
Rural
Urban
Total
904
966
854
791
844
857
790
855
841
914
917
982
1022
963
1001
1014
960
965
982
1007
918
953
913
888
802
924
823
889
968
948
895
751
962
960
992
899
774
948
843
895
869
824
869
899
890
892
968
935
965
905
966
956
978
930
937
903
910
948
908
868
902
946
862
924
922
908
858
977
934
969
901
776
949
839
865
871
825
798
897
894
894
973
937
965
886
952
964
981
931
942
912
913
958
913
890
971
1005
851
925
924
890
940
979
923
945
893
767
928
849
896
862
824
872
907
872
876
952
928
968
948
982
927
958
918
922
863
888
913
890
835
877
875
877
921
920
919
835
975
947
981
-6
-177
103
56
45
16
39
17
35
-11
-25
31
-62
-18
-71
-28
-17
20
-18
-39
-4
-19
20
5
34
49
-11
-15
-27
-14
-13
-106
8
-1
-21
-4
-172
105
54
-22
19
40
-29
28
-4
-23
39
-55
-24
-82
-25
-11
24
-13
-26
0
-12
27
7
41
152
14
-19
-20
-8
-58
42
8
4
-39
934
964
961
968
-15
-37
Total
2001
Rural
Urban
905
951
845
787
850
853
786
852
864
901
917
937
997
984
976
994
973
958
948
975
907
928
928
903
834
853
957
877
951
936
921
964
969
935
989
906
949
844
786
887
852
785
828
869
899
917
933
991
988
969
978
975
957
945
968
912
925
931
906
848
819
992
871
946
931
948
898
971
919
984
979
998
Change
Rural Urban
Total
(06)
2011
Rural
Urban
Total
906
873
844
796
845
872
808
870
887
890
924
922
980
939
961
963
948
969
943
948
930
933
938
907
837
943
888
908
955
940
924
900
958
955
967
919
862
909
846
880
890
834
871
888
902
935
957
972
943
930
970
957
970
962
956
948
941
969
918
890
904
926
894
939
948
942
911
964
943
967
923
865
912
844
871
899
835
814
892
906
938
964
975
933
923
966
960
972
964
959
957
946
977
923
914
932
970
890
941
950
945
911
965
936
953
905
850
881
852
880
868
832
873
874
886
912
934
957
973
949
974
947
954
944
947
908
913
937
901
852
894
872
899
935
946
940
911
963
952
975
-9
-79
14
48
35
-17
15
3
-20
-13
-7
-6
8
-20
-27
5
-9
-3
-3
-4
-18
-11
-6
-14
7
-22
-54
-19
-22
3
5
-48
4
1
1
-10
-92
12
44
24
-19
12
-36
-22
-15
-6
-2
15
-35
-32
1
-9
-1
-3
-4
-16
-9
-5
-17
8
16
-32
-26
-22
1
-7
-88
4
3
-15
-1
-23
36
55
35
-4
24
3
-14
-5
-12
13
-23
34
-13
11
-1
-16
1
0
-22
-21
-1
-6
15
-50
-17
-9
-20
7
17
11
5
-4
8
936
968
976
954
11
10
18
Total
2001
Rural
Urban
-11
-199
73
58
52
5
34
17
66
-42
-41
-31
-94
4
-53
-32
-33
-8
-64
-85
-55
-65
-1
3
32
-47
52
-12
-47
-27
24
85
13
-13
-11
927
941
896
798
845
908
819
868
909
916
942
963
964
964
957
964
966
973
965
960
965
953
975
932
883
926
979
913
961
946
938
959
960
942
967
934
957
900
799
847
918
823
850
914
921
944
966
960
969
956
965
968
973
967
963
973
955
982
939
906
916
1003
916
963
949
952
999
961
933
967
34
957
966
vol l no 52
EPW
Change
Rural Urban
INSIGHT
Table 4: 01 Sex Ratio by Currently Married Women Below 30 and 30+ Years of Age, India, States and UTs, 2001 and 2011
Area
India
Jammu and Kashmir
Himachal Pradesh
Punjab
Chandigarh
Uttarakhand
Haryana
Delhi
Rajasthan
Uttar Pradesh
Bihar
Sikkim
Arunachal Pradesh
Nagaland
Manipur
Mizoram
Tripura
Meghalaya
Assam
West Bengal
Jharkhand
Odisha
Chhattisgarh
Madhya Pradesh
Gujarat
Daman and Diu
Dadra and Nagar Haveli
Maharashtra
Andhra Pradesh
Karnataka
Goa
Lakshadweep
Kerala
Tamil Nadu
Puducherry
Andaman and
Nicobar Islands
Economic & Political Weekly
Total
2001
Rural
<30
30+
930
992
851
783
851
851
785
839
881
939
956
952
1037
1015
996
979
1002
972
979
1034
923
935
941
919
832
796
997
876
968
963
923
1139
989
962
1043
906
949
844
786
887
852
785
828
869
899
917
933
991
988
969
978
975
957
945
968
912
925
931
906
848
819
992
871
946
932
948
1136
971
919
984
893
915
841
784
879
854
782
834
860
871
889
925
963
951
942
986
963
951
928
950
899
921
924
898
846
825
969
870
942
921
954
1073
966
913
971
932
986
853
789
923
848
793
810
887
936
956
950
1032
1022
996
962
1005
964
973
1026
934
933
944
924
854
790
1035
873
960
962
937
1252
987
939
1053
909
998
1013
953
Total
Total
<30
30+
905
951
845
787
850
853
786
852
864
901
917
937
997
984
976
994
973
958
948
975
907
929
928
903
834
853
957
877
951
936
921
964
969
935
989
894
915
843
789
849
854
786
858
857
873
889
930
971
953
957
1001
962
947
929
955
897
925
922
896
835
868
938
878
947
927
920
872
962
927
977
979
1000
EPW
vol l no 52
Total
2011
Rural
<30
30+
Total
Urban
<30
30+
865
764
889
784
828
822
776
822
923
865
863
1031
915
964
873
921
945
986
887
902
861
853
917
872
835
818
890
812
851
855
895
835
987
911
956
901
776
949
839
865
871
825
798
897
894
894
973
937
965
886
952
964
981
931
942
912
913
958
913
890
971
1005
851
925
924
890
940
979
923
945
916
787
970
866
907
886
839
819
888
910
909
947
947
974
911
976
967
974
951
951
932
937
966
926
902
962
1032
869
948
950
902
1000
976
932
948
869
764
891
778
756
827
780
741
918
869
867
1040
922
953
855
908
953
993
891
911
873
862
936
881
862
1000
939
790
842
851
878
873
986
891
935
893
767
928
849
896
862
824
872
907
872
876
952
928
968
948
982
927
958
918
922
863
888
913
890
835
877
875
877
921
920
919
835
975
947
981
911
770
980
879
925
885
849
894
892
888
909
925
950
949
977
1014
930
968
952
941
890
931
937
912
853
915
893
895
939
947
929
846
968
953
989
854
765
840
794
831
813
768
824
940
848
822
1007
886
1001
914
935
919
940
861
883
806
808
850
846
795
754
814
836
866
861
907
826
988
929
965
967
961
943
1012
968
1002 889
Total
Total
<30
30+
899
774
948
843
895
869
824
869
899
890
892
968
935
965
905
966
956
978
930
937
903
910
948
908
868
902
946
862
924
922
908
858
977
934
969
915
784
971
871
925
886
842
892
889
906
909
942
948
966
930
993
960
973
951
948
924
936
960
923
883
928
965
879
945
949
919
882
972
942
974
934
964
962
Total
Urban
<30
973
30+
954
35
INSIGHT
Conclusions
The article examined temporal and spatial patterns emerging from data on 01
sex ratio from Censuses 2001 and 2011.
Despite the increase in overall population sex ratio between 2001 and 2011,
the 06 sex ratio and 01 sex ratio have
continued to decline. This suggests that
there is no let-up in daughter deficit. According to both the 2001 and 2011 census,
much of the deficit occurs before birth or
in the first year after birth (01) while
sex ratios tend to increase after age one.
While ruralurban differences are not
pronounced, in most states the sex ratio
in the 01 age group tends to be lower in
urban compared to rural areas. Lower
01 sex ratios are pan Indian with a
weakening of the well-known northwest/south-east divide. In fact, the
southern and eastern regions experienced the largest decline in the decade
preceding the 2011 Census. A positive
and striking aspect is that the northwestern states which have had a long
history of high levels of daughter deficit
have shown an increase in the 01 sex
ratio between 2001 and 2011. Whether
this is because of the various interventions launched in these states still needs
to be determined. Another positive aspect is that daughter deficit seems to be
lower amongst the younger cohort of
currently married women. It will be interesting to see whether this persists as
the cohort ages.
There are two implications, one for
research and the other for policy. First,
research will need to identify the factors
that have contributed to the observed
patterns and to understand the trajectories through which changes in the 01
sex ratios have occurred. Second, states
that have registered an increase in the
01 sex ratio are those that have witnessed efforts to prevent daughter elimination. Policy efforts to prevent daughter discrimination and elimination will
need to be universal rather than focused
only on states that have a long history of
skewed sex ratios.
Notes
1 While the census contains more data than the
NSS, according to Guilmoto and Rajan (2013),
some of the information on relatively smaller
statesJammu and Kashmir, Arunachal Pradesh,
4
5
References
Basu, A M (1999): Fertility Decline and Increasing
Gender Imbalance in India, Including a Possible South Indian Turnaround, Development
and Change, 30(2): 23763.
Dyson, T and M Moore (1983): On Kinship Structure, Female Autonomy and Demographic Behaviour in India, Population and Development
Review, 9(1): 3560.
Guilmoto, Christophe Z and S Irudaya Rajan
(2013): Fertility at the District Level in India:
Lessons from the 2011 Census, Economic &
Political Weekly, 48(23): 5974.
International Institute for Population Sciences
(IIPS) (2007): National Family Health Survey
(NFHS 3), 200506, India, Volume 1, Mumbai:
IIPS.
Kaur, Ravinder and Surjit Bhalla (2011): No Country for Old Mens Values: Yes, Sex Ratios Are
Coming Back to Normal, and the Middle Class
is Responsible, Indian Express, 12 November,
accessed on 15 November 2011, http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/nocountry-for-old-mens-values/#sthash.UGjAYmto.dpuf.
Office of the Registrar General (2012): Census 2011,
Government of India, http://censusindia.gov.
in/2011-prov-results/census2011_PPT_paper1.
html, accessed on 4 April 2011.
Premi, M K (2001): The Missing Girl Child, Economic & Political Weekly, 36 (21): 187580.
Sekher, T V (2010): Special Financial Incentive
Schemes for the Girl Child in India: A Review of
Select Schemes, prepared for the Planning Commission, Government of India in collaboration
with United Nations Population Fund, New
Delhi.
Srinivasan, Sharada and Arjun S Bedi (2009):
Tamil Nadu and the Diagonal Divide in Sex
Ratios, Economic & Political Weekly, 44(3):
5663.
(2008): Daughter Elimination in Tamil Nadu,
India: A Tale of Two Ratios, Journal of Development Studies, 44 (7): 961990.
UNFPA (2013): Lest More Girls Go Missing: Initiatives of UNFPA India to Address Gender-biased
Sex Selection, New Delhi: United Nations Population Fund.
Visaria, P M (1967): The Sex Ratio of the Population of India and Pakistan and Regional Variations during 190161, A Patterns of Population
Change in India, 195161, A Bose (ed), Bombay:
Allied Publishers.
vol l no 52
EPW