Gupta | 1
Two-Child Policy
On July 19th, Uttar Pradesh’s law commission proposed the contentious Uttar Pradesh
Population (Control, Stabilisation and Welfare) Bill. The bill will bar any individual with more
than two children from availing any government subsidies, applying for government jobs, or
benefiting from government welfare schemes. UP joins states such as Assam, Rajasthan,
Maharashtra, Orissa, Telangana, and Andhra Pradesh, where some form of the two-child
policy is already in place for individuals seeking government jobs or subsidies. The bill clearly
states that due to the state's "limited ecological and economic resources at hand, it is
necessary and urgent that the provision of the basic necessities of human life are accessible
to all citizens." To put this into perspective, UP's population of nearly 240 million would
make it the fifth most populated nation on earth, and its population density is almost
double the national average (828 per km2 vs. 464 per km2).
The one-child policy was China's brainchild from the 1980s, a response to the Communist
Parties growing concerns that the countries exponential population growth would be a
hurdle to economic progress. As such, to understand the long-term effectiveness &
consequences of such a policy in UP, it is vital to first analyse the policy's impact on China’s
economy & demographics nearly 40 years after its inception.
One-Child Policy in China
When the one-child policy was introduced in China, it was regarded as a unique event in
human history. The policy was made possible by the pressure on the nation to display high
levels of economic growth as a basis for political legitimacy. Experts were divided on the
issue: some said that the policy would mean less income spent per capita on children, which
would lead to more savings and investment – a guaranteed precursor for economic growth,
while others believed it would mainly lead to a rise in female foeticide, unsafe abortions and
women having lower agency over their bodies. The policy had instantaneous effects: the
birth rate dropped from an average of 8 children in the 1960s to just one child per woman in
later years. However, this steep drop in fertility had unintended consequences: In 2004, only
9% of the population was above 60 years of age; that number rose to 16% in 2017 and is
predicted to be approximately 40% by 2050.
Since 2011, the number of working-age people has been dropping sharply while the number
of individuals dependent on pension has been steadily rising. Most young Chinese couples
now have four parents and up to eight grandparents to take care of: this has led to many
elderly couples being neglected by their family members, who lack the finances to support
so many. The problem has gotten so severe that the government passed a law for the
"protection of elderly people's rights and interests," which stipulates that anyone over 60
has a right to regular contact with relatives. In short, the one-child policy has led to an aging
population and a dwindling labour force.
Gupta | 2
In 2015, China attempted to remedy the situation by substituting the one-child policy with a
two-child policy. Estimates suggest that this would add nearly 30 million people to the
workforce and increase the birth rate by nearly 8% year on year. But experts believe that
the damage is already done, and the nation’s demographic collapse is well underway.
Two-Child Policy in UP: Futile Attempt
It seems logical that if all couples were restricted to two or fewer children, the population
growth would eventually start decelerating. After all, the one-child policy in China, for all its
other drawbacks, was astoundingly successful in containing the population explosion.
However, it is imperative to understand that UP’s population growth stems not from high
fertility rates but because we simply have too many young couples in the state. Even if, due
to this proposed bill, young couples were to start having only two children, that would still
not stop population growth. In fact, the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) has indicated
that family sizes have reduced across states to such an extent that most young couples in UP
are already only having two children.
Additionally, it is also important to note that the state’s claim of limited ‘ecological and
economic resources’ being the key motivator is puzzling: the bill penalises households with
more than two children by taking away access to government welfare schemes and
subsidies- a vital source of sustenance for poorer households. This is an interesting strategy
considering poorer households consume lesser natural resources on average than wealthier
households, which will largely remain unaffected by the proposed penalties.
Gupta | 3
While the policy does little to tackle population growth, it is predicted to lead to a rise in
female foeticides, abandoning of female infants & even female infanticide. A 2005 study
conducted in five states which already had some form of the two-child policy in effect found
a rise in unsafe, sex-selective abortions, men abandoning their wives, or simply giving up
their children in order to contest elections. Moreover, Indian households still prefer males:
the sex ratio at birth in the nation today stands at 896 girls for every 1000 boys, which is
well below a 'normal ratio.' This means that if households were threatened with penalties
for having more than two kids, they were likely to abort a daughter in the hopes of having a
son in the future.
Is this policy even needed?
India’s population today stands at 1.37 billion, second only to China's 1.4 billion. Most
experts agree that India will surpass China over the next few years to become the most
populous nation in the world. With hundreds of millions below the poverty line, India's
resource scarcity is undoubtedly a cause for concern. However, there are promising signs as
well: India’s average number of children born per child-bearing woman dropped from 5.6 in
1950 to 2.14 in 2017. Uttar Pradesh’s fertility rate dropped from 4.82 in 1993 to 2.7 in 2016
and is expected to further drop to 2.1 by 2025. Between 2006 and 2016 itself, the total
fertility rate (TFR) in the state dropped by 1.1 children per woman, according to NHFS data.
It is important to note that women without education in the state had a fertility rate of 3.5
while women with 12+ years of schooling had a TFR of just 1.9, which is below the
replacement ratio. With female literacy just under 60% in the state, it clearly shows the
potential education has on lowering fertility rates. Additionally, the fall in TFR has coincided
with the rise of contraceptive use in the state, which rose from 27% in 1999 to 46% in 2016.
Keeping in mind that this drop in TFR was achieved primarily through education and greater
contraceptive access, it is essential to ask ourselves whether the Population Bill is even
required in the state.
The efficacy of a policy can be assessed by the impact that it creates on society in the long
term. While the rationale behind the adoption of this policy might be a noble one; to bring
about significant improvement in citizens' lives through equitable resource allotment, it
seems irresponsible to go this route when an example like China is right in the public eye for
scrutiny. Improving the quality of citizens’ life can be achieved through accelerated
investments in healthcare, family planning programmes, education, and other domains
where UP is falling short, instead of introducing a bill that jeopardizes one of India’s biggest
strengths: its dynamic youth population.
Gupta | 4
Gupta | 5
Bibliography
1) [Link]
[Link]
2) [Link]
control-bill-policy-and-politics-7412610/
3) [Link]
4) [Link]
norms-in-other-states/695086/
5) [Link]
wide-two-child-policy-is-the-right-decision-120121800194_1.html
6) [Link]
7) [Link]
consequences-millions-pensioners
