From traffic jams and garbage dumps to unemployment and corruption, so many of our problems seem to link back to too many people.
Since 2023, India has held the title of the world’s most populous country, with an estimated 1.46 billion people, overtaking China which has around 1.41 billion.
But now, something significant has happened, quietly but surely: India’s fertility rate has dropped below the replacement level for the first time in history.
What low fertility rate means
The Total Fertility Rate (TFR) is the average number of children a woman has in her lifetime.
The replacement level, which is 2.1, is the average number of children that is needed for a population to replace itself without migration.
India’s TFR is now 1.9.
In the 1950s, our TFR was around 6.2. That’s a huge shift.
South Indian states like Kerala and Tamil Nadu have led the decline, while northern states such as Uttar Pradesh and Bihar still have higher fertility rates.
Why fertility rate has dropped
There are several reasons:
* Cost of living has been going up, but income has been rising much slowly
* There is better access to education and careers for both women and men
* Attitudes towards marriage and parenting have been changing
* More people are choosing to marry later, or not at all
Today’s millennials and Gen Z simply don’t feel the same pressure to start large families. Some don’t want children at all, while many prefer to raise just one.
Low fertility rate: good or bad?
Well, it has some benefits:
- Fewer people means less demand for resources, infrastructure, and public services
- Families and governments can invest more in each child’s health and education
- Quality of life gets better
But there’s a flip side too:
- Number of older people will steadily become more than younger ones. By 2050, over 20% of Indians will be senior citizens, that is double the current figure
- Fewer working-age people may impact productivity and economic growth
- More elderly people could also mean higher spending on healthcare, pensions, and social support
- Loneliness, already a big problem, may get just worse
Have more kids?
India’s historic family planning campaign, launched in 1952, carried slogans like Hum do, hamaare do (We two, our two) to encourage smaller families. It seems to have worked. In fact, the slogan gradually became Hum do, hamaare ek (We two, our one).
Over the past year, there have been suggestions from some leaders that the trend has to be reversed.
In December last year, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat said families should have at least three children, warning that a fertility rate below 2.1 could spell the extinction of communities.
Over the past few months, Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu has been echoing similar thoughts. “I used to advocate family planning. Now I’m promoting population growth. India’s biggest strength is its demographic dividend. If we manage it well, our future is bright.”
He’s even hinted at financial incentives for larger families.
While such voices are still few, they’re becoming louder, and some of their warnings feel a bit alarmist.
Do we need to panic?
Not really.
Even though TFR is now below 2.1, India’s population is expected to keep growing until around 2065, reaching a peak of 1.7 billion. A decline will begin only after that, and any major negative effects will take even longer to appear.
So, while this shift is historic and important, there’s no need to rush into drastic policy changes.
What should we do?
Instead of pushing people to have more children, we should focus on making it easier for those who do want to raise families. For example:
- Affordable childcare
- Tax incentives
- Better parental leave policies
- Simpler, transparent adoption procedures
These practical measures help families balance work and home life, and let couples make decisions based on their own comfort, not societal pressure.
Leverage demographic strength
India is at a crucial moment. The drop in fertility rate shows that social change is happening, and fast.
But it doesn’t mean the sky is falling. With thoughtful policies and forward-thinking support systems, India can maintain a sustainable population and continue to benefit from its demographic strength.
Let’s not panic about fewer children. Let’s focus on making sure every child and family thrives.
Hari OM
ReplyDeleteHear! Hear! to that closing sentence! There was a similar discussion in the UK recently - mainly due to the weight of aged care already required and also balanced again care workers who have mainly been from immigrant background... The young may think they don't want to bring children into the world, but they have no concept of how it will be for them when they are part of the aged population... YAM xx
This is what I read in papers. North Indian states lagged behind the Southern states in effective population control measures. As you correctly pointed out, North Indian states have high fertility rate and Southern states have low fertility rate. The upcoming 2027 census will punish the Southern states and reward the North Indian states. Political representation of Southern states could diminish.
ReplyDeleteThose who are panicking over this are worried for reasons that they're not stating, I think. I think it's good that birth rates are falling. We really don't need as many people as there are, as there are a whole lot. And babies are still being born.
ReplyDeleteA lower birth rate may be good in the short term but long term I am not sure about
ReplyDeleteThe birth rate in Australia is 1.63 and falling, but we have a high immigration rate - I'm not sure if that's a good thing? I agree with you that what counts is the quality of life we can provide for our children and trying to reduce poverty and the extremes between the very wealthy and those at the other end of the financial spectrum.
ReplyDeleteWhile you have mainly dealt with falling fertility for the country as a whole, you have not taken into account the vital need for equitable population among the different states. To determine an uniform rate of population for a square kilometre of livable land excluding deserts, mountainous regions and rocky areas. This would enable the norm for the population of each state. Depending on the census in 2026, one can say where fertility is more or less compatred to national level. The population in each state based on the norm would also facilitate eqitable distribtion from the central pool and not on the basis of actual population
ReplyDeleteIt's a very complicated issue, for sure.
ReplyDeleteI think that few people would disagree that the population of the Earth is already exceeding the capacity of the planet to support it, and that all other life forms are suffering as a result of anthropogenic over exploitation. Habitat loss is especially severe to say nothing of the poisoning of air, soil no water. Fewer people with better health, nutrition and life expectancy is desirable. In fact, it is imperative.
ReplyDelete