Disparity in SC and Non SC Child Sex Ratio in Rajasthan

 

Evy Mehzabeen

 

Understanding the society of India in all its complexities not only needs better measurements which can evaluate it but also an eye for linking details provided by societal parameters in order to obtain a realistic picture. Judging the position of a society, in terms of its socio-economic parameters no doubt provides a statistics based viewpoint but it becomes imperative to understand as to which socio-economic parameter should be used in understanding a particular aspect of the society, as in the case of this paper, understanding the gender disparity at its most crude level. The sex ratio thereby becomes the crude measure of analyzing gender disparity but the conclusion obtained by merely analyzing sex ratio may be distorted as migration affects the emergent result. Along with it, the longevity of a female is higher than that of a male which also modifies the actual scenario. Therefore, an analysis of the child sex ratio (i.e. sex ratio of age group 0-6) can be said to provide a better picture as changes in the sex ratios of children are better indicators of status of girl child and “it also reflects the sum total of intra-household gender relations”¹

 

In India, the scenario of child sex ratio (CSR) is very dismal as a declining trend in CSR has been noted for quite some decades. It appears to be the most prominent societal issue for the country. The society of India is layered by Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), Backward Castes and the General population which amalgamates into one entity under the overarching tag of ‘Indian society’. However, there exist marked variations among these sections of the Indian society. The scheduled castes and scheduled tribes has been constitutionally positively discriminated- the evidence that these sections are losing out on the opportunities enjoyed by the mainstream Indian population and hence needed to be safeguarded and discriminated against in their own interest. Therefore, assuming this situation of disparity to be all-existing among the scheduled castes population and the non-scheduled castes population, this paper attempts to study the CSR in reference to the scheduled castes and the non-scheduled castes population of Rajasthan.

 

The overall sex ratio imbalances are most stark in the north-western states of the country and hence, Rajasthan has been selected as the state under analysis. This paper seeks to provide an empirical evidence of disparity and discrimination among the SCs and non-SC population of the state of Rajasthan though the CSR. However, it is not be misunderstood that CSR is the ‘only’ measure to study the disparity levels, the disparity can be measured at various other levels and by applying many other parameters.

 

Database:

The data used in this paper has been obtained from Census of India 2011

 

Literature Review:

Various studies have been carried out concerning the differences in CSR and its emerging crisis.

The  deficit in the number of females as compared to the male population has led to the conceptualization of very many terms like “missing females” (Amartya Sen, 1990), “endangered females” (Basu, 1992), “masculinity in sex ratio” etc. The census of India 2011 shows that CSR is lowest in the states of Haryana (830/1000) and Punjab (846/1000) and Rajasthan (883/1000). This evidence points to a strict cultural preference of the male child over the female child. The age group of 0-5 is the most vulnerable in terms of imbalanced sex ratios, mortality differentials and also in cases of female disadvantage. Preference of the male child over the female also results in the neglect of the girl child leading to selective undercount of girls and gender-based discrimination in resource allocation. The most important factors that have resulted in the lesser number of females are the female infanticide which is increasing being replaced by sex selective abortions and neglect of the girl child after she is born leading to higher mortality rates so that “India is one of the few countries of the world where males outnumber females”². At the immediate level, such a skewed sex ratio can be said to be the resultant of these two forces at play, but such preferences could have arisen from the control on the number of children that every couple in modern times of “small family norm” is expected to produce. With the changing political norm of the country, the socio-cultural norms have not undergone similar progress. The parents still expect to be looked after by the male child so that having a male child in the house becomes an utmost necessity. in the absence of the limits to children, a couple could perhaps continue having female children till a male child is born, but in the case of the same couple, which their options are limited to two, and they still want a male child, then pre-natal sex determination is the course they resort to, killing the foetus if it is female otherwise retaining it. This is the ‘choice’ factor as explained by Raju³ which she explains to be “selectively exercised”. As so correctly stated, “the concept of ‘choice’ itself is rather contrived- the so called choice can be a matter of prolonged social condition and socializing process whereby women themselves follow the age-old ‘preference’ for sons.”⁴

 

 Therefore, access to that level of technology is also an important determining factor which has resulted in greater disparity in the urban areas as compared to the rural areas where the population are not able to avail that level of technology. This is what Amartya Sen terms as “technological revolution of a reactionary kind”.⁵ Improving the condition of CSRs requires commitment to changed ideology both at individual and community level. Though much focus has been stressed on ‘empowering the female’ so that they could take ‘informed’ decisions about their family planning, such empowerment via increase in the literacy rates, education and financial dependence does not really show any impoving picture. “And yet scores of studies have clearly shown that women’s education or employment status do not automatically translate in their agency and freedom of choices.” ⁶

 

Deriving from the literature, the following characteristics can be highlighted:

·        Skewed sex ratio is primarily due to sex selective abortions

·        Practice of sex-selection is relatively more among the urban households

·        Neglect of the girl child in various spheres of livelihood leads to higher female mortality in the age group 0-6.

·        ‘Preference’ of the boy has played the dominant role resulting into the ‘discriminated’ girl child.

·        Improving the education and financial dependence of the women does not automatically result into better CSRs as the patriarchal mindset dominates over and it is still all-pervasive.

 

Counted among the low sex ratio states of north-western India, Rajasthan is notoriously famous for recording low Child Sex Ratios (CSR). But, it is interesting to note that the Scheduled Castes (SC) CSR is much better as compared to the Non-Scheduled Castes (Non-SC). As per Census 2011, the SCs CSR at state level stands at 899 whereas the CSR for Non-SCs is 886, thereby showing a gap of 13 absolute points. Considering the natural count of 950 females per 1000 males, the CSR in Rajasthan is still low even for SCs and dismally low for Non-SCs.

 

The CSR for SC population interestingly is lowest in those districts which are closest to the border of Punjab and Haryana. This cluster comprises the districts of Alwar, Bharatpur, Dausa, Dhaulpur, Sikar, Jaipur, Karauli and Jhunjhunu.This area of Rajasthan combined with some districts of Haryana and Punjab forms the lowest sex ratio belt of the entire country. CSR remains comparatively better only in Ajmer, Chittorgarh and Barmer and Bhilwara has the CSR of 947 which is the only district showing a CSR close to natural level.

 

 

 

The Non-SC CSR is dismally low for the Non-SC population. Hanumangarh and Bikaner, which has SC CSR of 906 and 905 respectively, records very low Non-SC CSR of 831 and 844. Such a large gap shows that the position enjoyed by women as well as the girl child is comparatively much better as compared to the Non Scheduled castes population. Bharatpur, Dhoulpur and Karauli, the districts lying on the border of Punjab and Haryana has poor CSR for both Scheduled castes and non Scheduled castes population. Yet, the SC CSR for these districts are also far better than the non SC CSR, as a gap of 36 absolute points exists. Bhilwara, which records a SC CSR of 947 has a Non-Sc CSR of 886, showing a gap of 61 absolute points.

 

 

COMPARING SC AND NON-SC CHILD SEX RATIOS

The overall scenario of the comparison of the SC and non-SC CSR shows that there exists a remarkable difference between the two. In 32 out of 34 districts in Rajasthan, the SC CSR is far better than the non-SC CSR. In only two districts- Churu and Jhunjhunu, the non-SC CSR is better than the SC CSR.

 

Among the districts showing the widest gap in the SC and Non-SC CSR are the districts of Hanumangarh, Bikaner, Barmer, Bhilwara, Banswara, Pali and Chittorgarh. All these districts show a gap of above 50 points in the calculated CSR.

 

The following graph shows the gap in absolute points amongst the various districts of Rajasthan.

 

Disparity at the rural and urban level

The overall disparity noted previously changes to quite an extent when the disparity in SC and Non-SC CSR is analysed at the rural and urban levels. At the rural level, there are seven districts like Churu, Baran, Pratapgarh, Durgapur where the gap in the Sc and Non-SC CSRs are negative, i.e disparity is not there. In these cases, the Non-SC CSR is higher than the SC CSR. However, high disparity is still maintained by the rest of the majority of the districts. The most extreme gap is maintained by district Ganganagar, where the gap is the highest. 

 

 

The scenario of the urban areas is very different from those of the rural. In the urban areas, the gap in the SC and Non-SC CSR is almost balanced out as sixteen districts shows a negative disparity where the Non-SC CSRs are in fact higher than the SC CSR. However, in the rest of the eighteen districts, the gap is still maintained. The most remarkable gap is maintained by the urban areas of Jaisalmer, Sawai Madhopur, Jhunjhunu which are still high.

 

 

Analysis of the data is indicative of the fact that Rajasthan as a state has a low Child Sex Ratio. But, the process of urbanization has acted in a positive manner as far as disparity in SC and Non-SC CSR is concerned as the urban areas are marked by a comparatively balanced SC and Non-SC CSR. Urbanization provides people the option of accepting the modern paradigm of development and leading a multi-dimensional life; has acted in a positive way for the state as it has reduced the gap in the CSR between the SCs and Non-SCs. The scenario, however is still bleak for the rural areas of Rajasthan as the gap is remarkably high in these areas. Low CSRs in the rural areas results primarily from the over arching patriarchal control the appendages of which finds expression in various ways- selective undercount of the girl child, deliberate neglect of the girl child leading to her eventual death, killing the girl child right after her birth (female infanticide). ‘Taboo’ would be an under-statement to describe this heinous process. Why people are so selective of the male child can be explained by the reasons such as high dowry for the marriage of the girl child, the associated notion of ‘better social standing of the family having larger number of sons’, old age security for the parents (the explanation of ‘beti paraya dhan’). Thus, people actually practise it to uphold the continued notion of the “better male” which all melts down to the patriarchal control.  

 

Unlike the well sited reason that urbanization leads to greater accessibility to medical facilities (pre-natal sex determination) culminating in sex-selective abortions i.e. female foeticide, Rajasthan stands at the brink of it because in this state, it is the rural areas which shows the greater gap in the SC and Non-SC CSR. However, it is not to be understood that sex-selective abortions in urban Rajasthan is not taking place, rather, the urban areas CSRs just presents a comparatively better picture. As the CSR of the state still remains low when compared to the all India average (919/1000), it still is contributing to the low CSR. It could be better studied by analyzing Sex Ratios at Birth by accepting the natural norm 950 females per 1000 males.

 

A historical region of India, Rajasthan has her own set of customs and traditions which have evolved as the society did ever since the Neolithic age. The region, for better half of its evolution has been an agrarian and pastoral economy which has sustained its people for millennia. Such a society, characterized by continued functioning via agriculture and pastoralism has an evolved and settled character of agrarian societies among which gender inequality is a primary manifestation. Low sex ratios and low Child Sex Ratios of Rajasthan, no matter results from the already mentioned set practices, but at a deeper level, the reason why such practices continue to be followed might be answered by the fact that historically this region has been governed by the same code of conduct. The persistant low CSRs are a manifestation of the reluctant attitude of the people to forgo the notion of ‘better male than female” which has evolved over thousands of years. Advances in medical science now provide easy resources to practice this idea spiraling down to low CSRs.

 

APPENDIX

Table 1: SC CSR, 2011

Name	CSR_SC
Bhilwara	947
Ajmer	930
Chittaurgarh	925
Barmer	923
Pali	918
Jodhpur	912
Banswara	912
Jhalawar	912
Rajsamand	911
Jaisalmer	910
Baran	908
Jalor	907
Nagaur	907
Hanumangarh	906
Kota	906
Pratapgarh	906
Bikaner	905
Bundi	905
Udaipur	903
Sirohi	901
Dungarpur	898
Churu	897
Ganganagar	897
Tonk	893
Sawai Madhopur	893
Alwar	883
Bharatpur	881
Dhaulpur	879
Dausa	878
Sikar	873
Jaipur	872
Karauli	869
Jhunjhunun	866

 

Choropleth 1:   SC CSR

RANGE= 947-866= 81

mean= 901

std. dev= 18.43= 18

 

 

class 1	Mean + 2 SD	901 + 18 +18	937 - 919
class 2	mean + 1 SD	901 + 18	919 - 901
class 3	Mean - 1 SD	901 - 18	901 - 883
class 4	Mean - 2 SD	901 - 18 -18	883 - 865

 

natural CSR	class 1	class 2	class 3	class 4
Bhilwara (947)	Ajmer	Pali	Sirohi	Alwar
	Chittaurgarh	Jodhpur	Dungarpur	Bharatpur
	Barmer	Banswara	Churu	Dhaulpur
		Jhalawar	Ganganagar	Dausa
		Rajsamand	Tonk	Sikar
		Jaisalmer	Sawai Madhopur	Jaipur
		Baran		Karauli
		Jalor		Jhunjhunun
		Nagaur
		Hanumangarh
		Kota
		Pratapgarh
		Bikaner
		Bundi
		Udaipur

 

Table 2: Non-SC CSR

Name	CSR_NON SC	Name	CSR_NON SC
Jodhpur	909	Bundi	873
Churu	906	Barmer	871
Jhunjhunun	906	Ganganagar	871
Rajsamand	902	Pratapgarh	868
Jalor	896	Nagaur	868
Jhalawar	894	Chittaurgarh	860
Kota	893	Pali	855
Dungarpur	890	Dausa	852
Baran	889	Banswara	851
Sirohi	886	Sikar	851
Bhilwara	886	Alwar	848
Ajmer	882	Bikaner	844
Jaisalmer	880	Bharatpur	844
Tonk	880	Jaipur	842
Udaipur	878	Dhaulpur	839
Sawai Madhopur	875	Karauli	837
		Hanumangarh	831

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Choropleth 2:

Range= 909 - 831 =78

Mean= 871

std. dev=22.52=23

 

class 1	Mean + 2 SD	871 + 23 + 23	917 - 894
class 2	mean + 1 SD	871 + 23	894 - 871
class 3	Mean - 1 SD	871 - 23	871 - 848
class 4	Mean - 2 SD	871 - 23 - 23	848 - 825

 

class 1	class 2	class 3	class 4
Jodhpur	Kota	Pratapgarh	Bikaner
Churu	Dungarpur	Nagaur	Bharatpur
Jhunjhunun	Baran	Chittaurgarh	Jaipur
Rajsamand	Sirohi	Pali	Dhaulpur
Jalor	Bhilwara	Dausa	Karauli
Jhalawar	Ajmer	Banswara	Hanumangarh
	Jaisalmer	Sikar
	Tonk	Alwar
	Udaipur
	Sawai Madhopur
	Bundi
	Barmer
	Ganganagar

 

Table 3: SC and Non SC CSR, Rajasthan, 2011

Rajasthan-Total
Name	CSR_SC_POP	CSR_NON SC_POP	Absolute gap in points
Rajasthan	899	886	13
Ganganagar	897	871	26
Hanumangarh	906	831	76
Bikaner	905	844	61
Churu	897	906	-9
Jhunjhunun	866	906	-40
Alwar	883	848	36
Bharatpur	881	844	38
Dhaulpur	879	839	40
Karauli	869	837	32
Sawai Madhopur	893	875	18
Dausa	878	852	25
Jaipur	872	842	30
Sikar	873	851	22
Nagaur	907	868	39
Jodhpur	912	909	3
Jaisalmer	910	880	30
Barmer	923	871	52
Jalor	907	896	11
Sirohi	901	886	15
Pali	918	855	63
Ajmer	930	882	48
Tonk	893	880	14
Bundi	905	873	32
Bhilwara	947	886	61
Rajsamand	911	902	9
Dungarpur	898	890	8
Banswara	912	851	61
Chittaurgarh	925	860	65
Kota	906	893	13
Baran	908	889	19
Jhalawar	912	894	18
Udaipur	903	878	25
Pratapgarh	906	868	37

Data Source: Primary Census Abstract, census of India, 2011

CHOROPLETH 3:

Range= 76-3= 73

mean= 32

stand.dev= 19.54=20

 

CLASSES CALCULATION

Class 1	MEAN+2SD	32+20+20	52-72
Class 2	MEAN+1SD	32+20	52-32
Class 3	MEAN-1SD	32-20	32-12
Class 4	MEAN-2SD	32-20-20	12 AND BELOW

 

VERY HIGH	Class 1	Class 2	Class 3	Class 4	NEGATIVE
Hanumangarh	Chittaurgarh	Ajmer	Jaisalmer	Rajasthan	Churu
	Pali	Dhaulpur	Jaipur	Jalor	Jhunjhunun
	Bhilwara	Nagaur	Ganganagar	Rajsamand
	Bikaner	Bharatpur	Udaipur	Dungarpur
	Banswara	Pratapgarh	Dausa	Jodhpur
	Barmer	Alwar	Sikar
		Karauli	Baran
			Jhalawar
			Sawai Madhopur
			Sirohi
			Tonk
			Kota
			Bundi

 

Table 4: SC and Non-SC CSR, Rural Rajasthan, 2011

CSR Rajasthan-Rural
Name	CSR_SC_POP	CSR_NON SC_POP	Absolute gap in points
RAJASTHAN	902	886	16
Ganganagar	902	822	79
Hanumangarh	909	864	45
Bikaner	906	909	-3
Churu	904	904	0
Jhunjhunun	861	830	30
Alwar	885	861	24
Bharatpur	880	866	14
Dhaulpur	883	851	32
Karauli	874	846	27
Sawai Madhopur	885	864	21
Dausa	879	862	17
Jaipur	877	859	18
Sikar	879	843	37
Nagaur	908	894	15
Jodhpur	907	886	21
Jaisalmer	906	868	39
Barmer	925	900	25
Jalor	906	892	15
Sirohi	903	896	6
Pali	929	894	35
Ajmer	935	894	40
Tonk	899	891	8
Bundi	908	891	17
Bhilwara	954	924	30
Rajsamand	915	901	13
Dungarpur	890	923	-33
Banswara	907	935	-28
Chittaurgarh	930	910	20
Kota	923	896	27
Baran	904	913	-9
Jhalawar	909	912	-3
Udaipur	931	925	6
Pratapgarh	916	935	-19

Data Source: Primary Census Abstract, Census of India, 2011

Choropleth 4:

Range= 79-6=73
Mean= 24
Standard Deviation=15.76=16

 

Classes calculation

Class 1	Mean + 2 S.D	24 + 16 +16	56 - 40
class 2	Mean + 1 S.D	24+16	40 - 24
Class 3	Mean - 1 S.D	24 - 16	24 - 8
Class 4	Mean - 2 S.D	24 - 16 - 16	8 and below

 

Very high	Class 1	Class 2	Class 3	Class 4	Negative
Ganganagar	Hanumangarh	Jaisalmer	Sawai Madhopur	Sirohi	Bikaner
	Ajmer	Sikar	Jodhpur	Udaipur	Jhalawar
		Pali	Chittaurgarh	Churu	Baran
		Dhaulpur	Jaipur		Pratapgarh
		Jhunjhunun	Dausa		Banswara
		Bhilwara	Bundi		Dungarpur
		Karauli	Nagaur
		Kota	Jalor
		Barmer	Bharatpur
		Alwar	Rajsamand
			Tonk

 

Table 5: SC and Non-SC CSR, Urban Rajasthan, 2011

Name	CSR_SC_POP	CSR_NON SC_POP	gap in absolute points
Rajasthan	887	890	-3
Ganganagar	870	819	52
Hanumangarh	886	870	17
Bikaner	902	910	-7
Churu	858	903	-45
Jhunjhunun	886	825	61
Alwar	877	864	14
Bharatpur	887	870	17
Dhaulpur	858	854	4
Karauli	833	841	-8
Sawai Madhopur	931	867	64
Dausa	869	864	5
Jaipur	865	867	-2
Sikar	845	835	10
Nagaur	897	890	7
Jodhpur	932	888	43
Jaisalmer	955	867	88
Barmer	893	900	-7
Jalor	919	892	27
Sirohi	896	904	-8
Pali	871	898	-27
Ajmer	923	901	22
Bundi	894	896	-2
Tonk	866	892	-26
Bhilwara	914	929	-14
Rajsamand	890	903	-13
Dungarpur	951	926	24
Banswara	960	938	22
Chittaurgarh	891	914	-22
Kota	891	906	-15
Baran	922	917	5
Jhalawar	931	918	12
Udaipur	845	933	-89
Pratapgarh	849	937	-88

Data Source: Primary Census Abstract, Census of India, 2011

Choropleth 5:

range= 88-4=84

mean= 27

Standard Deviation= 24.13=24

 

Calculation of Classes

Class 1	mean + 2 S.D	27 + 24 + 24	75 - 51
Class 2	mean + 1 S.D	27 + 24	51 - 27
Class 3	mean - 1 S.D	27 - 24	27 - 3

 

very high	class 1	class 2	class 3	negative
jaisalmer	Sawai Madhopur	Jodhpur	Dungarpur	Jaipur
	Jhunjhunun	Jalor	Banswara	Bundi
	Ganganagar		Ajmer	Barmer
			Bharatpur	Bikaner
			Hanumangarh	Sirohi
			Alwar	Karauli
			Jhalawar	Rajsamand
			Sikar	Bhilwara
			Nagaur	Kota
			Dausa	Chittaurgarh
			Baran	Tonk
			Dhaulpur	Pali
				Churu
				Pratapgarh
				Udaipur

 

 

REFERENCES

1.       Background paper series, “Lives at risk: declining child sex ratios in India”, series- “Lives at risk; discrimination of female children in modern India”. www.sasnet.lu.se/EASASpapers/11Hatti_Sekher.pdf

2.       Background paper series, “Lives at risk: declining child sex ratios in India”, series- “Lives at risk; discrimination of female children in modern India”, page. 9. www.sasnet.lu.se/EASASpapers/11Hatti_Sekher.pdf

3.       Raju S, “Child Sex Ratios in India: the emerging pattern”, Yojana, July 2011, pp. 21-27

4.       Raju S. et.al

5.       Mishra, George, et. al, “Declining Child Sex Ratio in India: A review of literature and annoted bibliography”, Centre for development studies, United Nations Population Fund, India, page. 3

6.       Raju S, “Child Sex Ratios in India: the emerging pattern”, Yojana, July 2011, pp. 21-27