Making India146;s people count

While interacting with the print and electronic media on data on religion in the 2001 Census, I came across at least three misconceptions wh...

While interacting with the print and electronic media on data on religion in the 2001 Census, I came across at least three misconceptions which need clarification. It has been reported that data on religion were collected for the first time in India in 2001. Not true. Ever since the first regular census of India in 1881, data on religion were collected through the census questionnaire. The 2001 Census also had a question on religion. What is new in 2001 Census is the cross-tabulation of data on religion by other variables like literacy, 0-6 age group sex ratio, work-force status.

I have been complaining for decades that the religion data per se are not of much use unless such cross-tabulations are done. For example, one could not answer from census data a simple question like: Which religious community has the lowest female literacy rate? These data were suppressed by the Home Ministry because religion data were considered sensitive. But surprisingly, other data sets like the National Sample Survey NSS, National Family Health Survey NFHS sponsored by the Government of India did collect data on religion and these were cross-classified by demographic and socio-economic variables.

I had gone to the extent of suggesting to the census authorities that the question on religion be dropped unless data could be suitably cross-classified but successive Governments took the view that such data were sensitive and should not be presented. My reply was: you should have the courage to face facts. I, therefore, congratulate the Census Commissioner for 2001 on making available at least some tables giving such cross-classification. I always thought that the Christians have the highest literacy rate. It turns out that the Jains have the highest literacy rate.

The second misconception about the data on census is that the 2001 Census was a religion-based census. Absolutely untrue. As in all past censuses, there was one question on religion in the questionnaire. I was asked by the media if the census would divide religious communities and disturb communal harmony. My answer was that it would promote communal harmony if we have a better understanding of the demographic and socio-economic condition of the population belonging to different communities.

But at the same time, we must remember that the British rulers in India used census data on religion and caste to the hilt to divide Indian society, culminating in the Partition of India in 1947 which was done on the basis of census data on religion. I can quite understand the genuine fear on the part of some political parties about the high rate of population growth among Muslims, particularly in the border districts, which indicates a high rate of migration, legal or illegal.

The third misconception among so-called secular commentators is that the Census has no business to present data on religion without giving at the same time data on income and other socio-economic categories. This shows a lack of understanding of Indian census data. There is no information on income level in the Indian Census because such data are not collected. The Census of USA does collect data on income but not on religion. I would not recommend collection of data on income in the Indian Census. It will ruin the Census, apart from collecting questionable data.

But that does not mean the Census should not present data on religion, having collected the data. Why should we not know how many Hindus and Muslims there are in this country? Secularism does not mean ignorance. And it is not the business of the Census department to analyse data and do regression analysis. This job is best left to researchers, not politicians or even journalists, though credit must be given to a national daily which pointed out a serious error in the calculation of the Muslim growth rate, which the Census Commissioner had to admit and issue corrected figures.

Story continues below this ad

This brings me to the role of the Census Commissioner who has been unfairly accused on manipulating census data. Let me begin by narrating the sequence of events which have led to so much of confusion and controversy. I received an invitation from the Census Commissioner and Registrar General, J K Banthia on the September 2, to preside over the function on September 6, at Vigyan Bhavan, when the First Report on Religion 8212; Census 2001 would be released. He also added: 8216;8216;You will be very happy on that day as the cross-tabulations you have been asking for all these years have been given in this report8217;8217;.

I was indeed happy to preside over the function but felt disturbed by the power-point presentation of the Registrar General and the press release which said that the Muslim growth rate during 1991-2001 decade was as high as 36 per cent. My statistical intuition told me that this figure cannot be correct. So at the cost of being impolite, I asked the Registrar General if he had adjusted the figure for Jammu 038; Kashmir where the Census enumeration did not take place in 1991 because of disturbed conditions.

His answer was 8216;8216;no8217;8217;. I then commented that in that case the figure for Muslim growth rate was exaggerated. RGI then suggested that we should sit together and work it out. Next morning, the media had a sensational news to report: the Muslim population had grown by 36 and Hindu population by 20. Some politicians were quick to comment: this is a threat to national security. Some even went to the extent of saying that the Hindu population had decreased and the Muslim population had increased very fast, meaning that India will become Pakistan very soon. How soon? One newspaper said after 247 years. Another said after 100 years. I am exhausted answering questions from the print and electronic media about the implications of the census data on religion.

PART II

The writer is a leading demographer and heads a four-member panel to analyse the recent census.