/ of pup ...·- ffi d --~ ~.

uau n lf
deosi~ can the country a or such an addition a_ the existin
f Cb1oa, t The country needs to stabilize its to_ its Popular g density of
oetWit)lY noat.e Table 6 reveals that all states apodpulation at the ea~ol_n density ea:hopdulation
C wth r . .. . n unio . iest po . ecad
jtS gro in their dens1t1es dunng 1991-2001 H n territories in .th ss1b\e by arr _e?
. crease f . owever . e cou estmg \
aJl lll_ 1/ ountainous states o Arunachal Pradesh (3) M' ' such an increa ntry recorded
b1l 01 d K hm' , 1zora ( se Was \
o: ·m (19), Jammu an . as ir (23) Meghalaya (24), Ma~ 10), Himachal Pr:w in case
gj]cl<l all those states which were sparsely populated ex ntpur (21 ), Uttarakhan:•sh (\6),
'fbUS,d s1'ties. By comparison, the densel" populat d penenced only a small . (26) etc.
·r en . "' · e states r d incre •
thet .. s signifying that change in density was the pr d ecor ed a huge increa .ase in
dens1tte . f . o uct of growth se n their
.,,as the function o both the population base and th of population whi h .
·tsel e growth r t s·
1. f to differentiate 1n growth rate of population from t t
Vl • • C in
a e. mce there was v
bttle . h • . . s a e to state th 1 ery
,,ariations 1n t e increase 1n density were more a d ' ere ore the state t0
state v • pro uct of regi 1 . .
ation base itself. ona vanations in the
popUl
pI~'ffl!BUTION OF PQPULATION iN INDIA, 2011
The pattern of population d1stnbut1on 1n the .country
. witnessed On1y l'ttl h .
I e c ange durmg a
long tenure. of post-Independence
. demographic history. Table 7 reveals that there has been
. change m the ranking of to? five most populous states of the country during 20 01 _201 1.
00
Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, B1har, West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh in this order continued
to occupy the top five positions among states and union territories in terms of population size.
However, Madhya Pradesh improved from its 7th position to 6th position during the same
decade. Similarly, Chandigarh shifted from 29th to 30th position and swaped its place with
Mizoram which shifted term 30th to 29th position. These were the only two changes that
were recorded by different states and union territories in their positions with regard to
population size implying that there was only little change in the distribution or concentration
index of population.
Table 7 reveals that with increasing population of the country, the density of population
has also been increasing The latest census of 2011 has shown that now country bas a general
. . . d . f 325 . 2001 Bihar (1102) among
density of 382 person/km2 in comparison to the ensity Ot t · mthe country. · Former1Y thi s
states has now emerged the most densely popu1ate d s a e m . . f Bihar
. . . .
distmction was enjoyed by West Bengal. Since the gro r:
wth te of population m case o
durin 2001 _201 l (Table 32),
~25.07%) was almost double that of the West Bengal (
1t · B'h '
13
density
3
:7
1/o), 81 2001 to 1102 in 2011
than 8 m · d
was natural to expect a quantum jump 1n 1 ar s . (EAG) states recognize
(Table 7). Bihar being one of the eight Empowered Action G~ou~1 likely to continue in the
by census of India in 2011 such a quantum jump in its de~Sity ~trolling its fertility levels
co · ' t succeeds tn co • l d d West
mi_ng decades also unless the state gove~en the national average me u e .ab
considerably. Other states that had a density higher than (573) Tamil Nadu (555), PunJ t
Bengal (1029), Kerala (859), Uttar Pradesh (82~), Harya:achal Pradesh (I?) bad;~~::~
(550), Assam (397) and Goa (394). By companson~ ArU ·n Other states with 1
dens. ' . st hilly terra1 .
tty of population in the country due to its va
 -· , "' iNiJ DEN$IT¥ . 1
' \ - \

~ ) , Sikkim (86), Nagaland (\ 19) J . .

iJlctlldet.1· ·achal Pradesh (123), and Meghalaya (132), anunu and l<.ashtni 93
1zz); rilrtl all of Which w r 024), Man·
( teS, . . d' ere, by and la ipur
sti tall union temtones isplayed very hi h d . . rge, hill
Mrnos . f 11297 persons km2 had th g ens1ties d
hi .wt'th a density o e d'tstinctio
. ue fto being h'ighly urb ·
pel . in the country. It was followed by Cha d' n having high anized. °
p0pulat1orn~to£Y· Puducherry had the third rank with: ~gar~ (9252) another ex.cl: de\nsity of
.. .,,on te h d h ens1ty of 2598 An ive Y urban
w» d the other an , was c aracterised by lowe t (46) . · daman and N' b
Islail s 00 . s density of . ico ar
union territones. population among

f ""'' . . ,':",>;':';.J;J:>nENSft'¥}: , oFCpoi>,T'.'nf''.i1fiio//( '·'v:

.t!!,,, ----~',,: :" , ~;,:·· .>''" '·•,, ,.,· ,,:,,, ->~ ~\l._~Q' ..,
, ,9,77~·

-~f
f f

'i's --~·ty of population has its impact upon the enviro~ment th · ·. -' \
oens1 . . f . . e region and hen •
·fe Therefore, 1t ts o specia1 interest for geographers to an 1 h .ce its quality
I

of l1 · . £ d d' a yse t e changmg p tt \

ity of population or
. un erstan ing h the processes of development affiectmg . a em off
d.""ens It may be mterestmg
.
to note t at during last century or so th
quality
.
0

l11e. . h . . d e general density of \

1 1
population in India as_ mu tip ie more than five times. At the beginning of 20th centu
2
the country had a density of only 77 persons per km which by 2011 has increased to 3~
(Table 9).
Prior to Independence the increase in density was only marginal, adding only a few more
people to each km2 • For instance, during 1901-11, the density of population increased only
by 5 persons from 77 in 1901 to 82 in 1911. This was in tune with the growth of population
during the decade. The population of the country recorded a growth of 5.75% during the
decade under review. During the following decade of 1911-21, the density of population
2
declined by 1 person. It decreased from 82 persons in 1911 to 81 persons per km in 2021
TABLE 9
India : Change in Density of Population, 1901-2011 _____
,. -:::
:-;- ,.,---:,:-;-
'Increase
.
.
--
. .......-:-:

77
1901 5
82
1911 -1
81
1921 9
90 13
1931
103 14
1941
117 25
1951
142 35
1961
177 39
1971
216 51
1981
267 58
1991
325
2001
382

--- 2011
Source •. f"pnc,n" ,..,f' T-,,J: ~ 'lf\ 1 1
I ·on Totals, P· 138 ·
P·wmi~innal Popu all
 94 . . . .. -. .. ... . . . .. . ·. . ·: GE.0,'qiu,llY'a.ii .i>o,..
l
I
I
because the population of the country decreased by 0.3% due to deaths exce .
. the country as deaths due to preventable causes were significantly h. ed1ng the b'
m igh du .
decades of the previous century. . . . . I'!ng earl
However, the year 1921 emerged as a s1gmficant turmng pomt in the detnogra h. Y

of the country as the control over the preventable

. . . h causes of death began dUring P 1c hist
ory
. •t· t· the p"ocess of demographic transt!ton m t e country. As the control 192 1_
mt ia mg ~· h h d . on Prev 31
causes of deaths in the country tigh~ened ~rt er, .t e ens1ty of popul~tion in the centable
began to increase gradually in tune with the mcreasmg gr~wth of po~ulatton. Both the ollntr,,
the density of population of the country contmued to mcrease in th . growth
rate and h . h &-. • • e next r
decades upto 1981 , due to sharp fall in death rate w. 11e t e. .1ert1hty
. continued to sore h',ew
during the second explosive stage of the demographic transition m the country. Th . d 1~
of population increased from 81 prrsons to 90 persons dunng . 1921-31. In the fol) e ens1h,. ·,
decade (1931-41) it increase to 103 persons. The country had a density only 117 persow~g
. . ons Ill
1951 at the time of first census conducted 1mmed1ately after Independence.
Tile post-Independence period witnessed_ a sharp increase i~ the co~try's density of
population mainly because of continuing fall m the death rate while the brrth rate continued
at high level until 1981. Thus, the density of population in the country increased by about
I 00 persons from 117 in 1951 to 216 persons in 1981 until when the fertility rate in the
country started showing signs of decline. Although, after 1981, the population growth rate in
the country started tapering off during 1981-91 yet the density of population continued to
increase until 200 I at much higher rate due to huge population base and as a consequence
of demographic momentum-being experienced by the country. These two decades of 1981-
2001 added more than 100 persons to the country's density as it increased from 216 in 1981
to 267 in 1991 and finally to 325 in 2001. The decade 2001-11 has emerged as another
turning point in the demographic history of the country as it recorded the largest ever decline
in th~ country's p~pulati~n growth rate. As a consequence, the magnitude of increase in the
density of populat10n which had been increasing decade after decade during the last century
has begun to decl_ine. While during 1991-2001 the density of population increased by 58
persons, the same. mcreased by 57 persons during the following decade of 2001-11 signalling
a welcome trend m the demographic history of th try Th . lik Iy
to expenence·
sti-1I higher
. .
declme in the magnitud Oefcoun· . · e commg decades are· et
seems to have stabilised at a tty 1 e mcrease in density as the mortahty ra e
pre ow 1evel and the fert1Tty
1 dec1me· has accentuated. With
the result, increasingly decreasin fi rt1T .
impact upon the countiy's growthg / Ity ~ate m the decades to come shall have direct
magrutu . de of mcrease
.
in the country' d . · This in tum WI·11 have its
o population . impact
. upon the
s ensity of population
Table 7 shows the trend m · th ·
e country' t .
!981 the countiy had a density of 216 w _s s ~te-w1se density of population since 1981. In
mcreased to 325 and finall . 20 . . h1ch mcreased to 267 in 1991 In 2001 ·t further
b . y m 11 In mer d . ' t
wd e~e emhg added to each kilometre of th , ease ,to 382. In every decade 50 to 60 persons
unng t e last decad f e country s area An . Ian2
was addin alrn0st e o 2001-11 was really sta . . mcrease of 57 persons per
g double the density of USA t ggenng. It means every decade the countrY
o each of its kilometre, thanks to the countrY's
 .~ ,w, . ENSifi."?/ . < ,.,
pi,;ilfJri9ftl A!f!J}L
w, . · ::

· ·. •·. • · ·· · .• .
t' on base of over a billion and an avera .
popu1at ge exponential 95
biJge growth of 1 6
eJllltJlll· ,..,., g the states, Bihar recorded the hi h . · per cent per
frotil i:»••00 km2 · . g est mcrea · .
d by 299 persons per Just m a decade W se m its density I ,
illcreased·•r1ng the same decade. Other states that ; edst Bengal added 126 . ts density
it)' w• ecor ed high • persons in 1•t8
dens .Jl included Uttar Pradesh (138), Haryana (95 tncrease in their den ..
d1J!l11~jab
(15~ h lllarginally by I person only from 120 in 2001 ,\~te~o2~ave
th0 tioD during the same decade. Such a decline in Na 1 d'
11
t:
2001 (66), and Assam (57). Nagaland was the on! { Jharkhand (76), Tamil ~t:s
tegistered a dee~~
due_ to decline in its
popu a probably due to improvement in its census count Oga an 'p~pulation during 200\.
11 was h . r enumeration at th t·
• comparison to t e previous censuses. Other states d' e ime of 2011
census J.11 recor mg only I .
their density during 200 -11 were ~achal Pradesh (4), Mizoram (9), Sikki~ ow mcrease in
pr,,desh (14) all of which were htll states with difficult terrain. (JO), Htmachal
From among
. the states
f 1957the. NCT
. d of .Delhi despite
. being
. most dense1y populated recorded
e highest mcrease
. o m its ensity.
. Its density
. · 2001 to 11297
. mcreased from 9340 IIl
thin 011. Chandigarh although recordmg a dechne m its growth rate of p 1 t· d .
2 . . . . opu a 10n unng
01-ll m c~mpanso~ to the previo~s decade still r~corded an increase of 1352 persons/km2
20
in its population_density from 7_900 m 2001 to 9252 m 2011. Most of union territories except
Andaman and Nicobar Islands, m fact, recorded a large increase in their density of population.
Only Andaman and Nicobar Islands registered a marginal increase (3) in its density mainly
due to its distance from the mainland country.
The preceding discussion reveals that :
(i) India is one of the most populous countries of the world. It ranks 2nd after China
and accounts for 17.5% population of the world. China accounts for 19.4% of the
world's population.
(ii) The average density of population according to 2011 census was 382 persons per
kni2.
(iii) Although country has an average density of 382 persons, there were wide regional
variations in the density from one part of the country to another. . .
·) B· • · · f h vi·ng the highest density
(iv ihar with a density of 1102 persons had the distmctton a °
of population
. among states. . h t d ity of popu1at10n· (11297
(v) Delhi amongst the union territories had the hig_ eS e~s ore (?l84) which' had
persons/km2). It was much higher than the density of Smgap
highest density among countries of the world. . These included
(vi) M . . d ·ty of population.
ost hill states with difficult terrain had low ensi 8 . chal Pradesh, Janunu
Arunachal Pradesh Mizoram Sikkim, Manipur, Nagaland,h limwaer than the national
' ' · muc 0
and Kashmir. In all these states, the density was
average (Table 7). . d sity of population
(Vii) Si . hl banized, thelf en
nee most of the union territories were big Yur. of the countrY·
was much higher than the national average density
 ~ 'G·.e:.;.;o
•Y~,G
'-' »'A 'DJIY 'op·po,nu "' i -:~ - .
~-:-••'('" ..,..__...~------e~-..'.°'«-! -
""" }'••. ,,.., -., ;· • - •• •...,.. ·=,--.- =--:;··· ~..
[96 :· . ,: .• . . f •• • • , ,. l · , . ~- 'D ~. . . • .r -~7011.;
.···•

(viii) From among the union territories only Andaman and Nicobar Islan._ds displayed a l
. 'ty f th t .
density, much below the national average. Poor _co~ectl~• 0 e emtory With
ow
country's mainland may explain such a low density m therr case.
(ix) The Gangetic plaifn has constituted the sub-continent's demographic heartland for
thousands of year and will remain so during the foreseeable future as well.
(x) The North-South divide in the pattern of density of population is also of long standing.
(xi) In every decade since 1981, there has been increase of almo st similar magnitude in
the country's density. Approximately over 50 persons have been added to each
kilometre of area each decade.
(xii) Such an increase has been almost double the existing general density of U.S.A. It
amounts to added two U.S.A. every decade as far as pressure upon land is concerned.
Thus, in case we want to catch up with developed countries, we need to increase the
I I
pace of our' development and also to control our addition to density of population of
the country:
(xiii) During the last decade of 2001-11, there were wide inter-state variations in the
magnitude of increase in the density. Nagaland which suffered depopulation recorded
a marginal 'decline in its population density.
(xiv) Bihar, on the other hand, recorded highest increment in density in the country. It was
followed by Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Haryana, Jharkhand, Tamil Nadu etc.
(xv) Most of the hill states, by comparison, recorded only marginal increase in the·
dens~ty. These included Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Sikkim, Himachal Prades:,
Marupur, Jammu and Kashmir, Uttarakhand etc.
(xvi) All the union territories except Andaman and Nicobar Islands T,ecorded 1 ·
· th · . . . .. arge mcrease
m err already existmg high densities mainly due to high degree of urbanization.
_(xvii) ~uring the last century or so the country's density has multiplied m th fi
times. . ore an ve

(xviii) Prior to Independence the density of population in th try .

. e coun mcreased only gradually.
(xix) The real spurt in country's density has b .
period. een recorded dunng the post-Independence

(xx) Ever since the initiation of processes of demo . . . '..

country's density of population increased i ~aphic ~ansfonnatu~m m 1921, the
the trend was halted with the . · d ncreasmgly until the decade 2001-11 when
margma1 ecrease in th · . • th
density. .. e magmtude of mcrease m , e

,•. ,_;, ,-,., ,. ,,,,:ij'. .,>) . ."

Ahmad, K.S. (1941),_"Environment and the Dis~ib ;. """' · ·., \

Journal, 16, pp. 117-134. u ion of Population in India", Indian Geographical
Chandna, R.C. et al (1980) Introduction to Populat· G , .
, ion eography, Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi,