A census ward losing young men in Nagaon district
A census ward in Nagaon district had 12,000 people in 2011 and 13,800 in 2021. In 2021, 1,500 men aged 20–34 were absent from the ward for more than six months, working in Bengaluru and Kerala; in 2011 the figure was 600. The 2021 count shows 7,200 males and 6,600 females, and 1,900 children under 15. The ward has 4,100 workers, of whom 2,300 are cultivators or agricultural labourers. Village elders say paddy land is being left fallow and that elderly parents are looked after by daughters-in-law. A local planner wants to know whether the ward is ageing, how dependent it is, and whether out-migration is relieving or worsening land pressure.
1. Calculate the decadal growth rate and child proportion. What do these figures suggest about the ward?
Read the worked answer
Growth rate = (13,800 – 12,000) ÷ 12,000 × 100 = 1,800 ÷ 12,000 × 100 = 15% over the decade. Child proportion = 1,900 ÷ 13,800 × 100 ≈ 13.8%. A 15% growth is moderate, but the child share is low: in a young population it is often over 20%. A low child proportion with a rising total suggests either falling fertility or that young adults are leaving and taking children, or both. Here the ward still grew, so natural increase and maybe in-migration of other groups are balancing the outflow of young men. The figures alone cannot separate these causes. I would also check the age distribution: a low child share plus many absent 20–34-year-old men points to ageing and a ‘left-behind’ population, not simply a small family norm.
2. Can you calculate a dependency ratio from these figures? Explain what is missing and what a rough child-dependency ratio would show.
Read the worked answer
A full dependency ratio is (population under 15 + population 65 and over) ÷ population 15–64 × 100. We have under-15 = 1,900, but we are not given the over-65 population or the total 15–64 population. The 4,100 ‘workers’ are not the same as the working-age population: workers include only people who are economically active, and some may be under 15 or over 64. So a proper ratio cannot be calculated. A rough child-dependency ratio can use workers as a poor denominator: 1,900 ÷ 4,100 × 100 ≈ 46 children per 100 workers. That looks high, but it is misleading because absent men are still working-age even if not counted as workers here. The correct answer is to ask for the age table, not to force a figure.
3. Is out-migration relieving or worsening land pressure? Give a reasoned judgement.
Read the worked answer
It does both, depending on how remittances are used. Out-migration relieves pressure in the short run: fewer young men means less demand to cultivate every plot, and remittances can buy food instead of growing it. That fits the fallow paddy land. But it can worsen pressure in other ways. Land is left fragmented and may be rented out or encroached upon; the remaining farmers are older and may not invest in bunds or irrigation; and if remittances are spent on consumption rather than land improvement, agriculture declines. When migrants return, they may need land again. My judgement is that out-migration is mainly a temporary relief, not a solution. Land pressure would be genuinely reduced only if remittances were invested in higher-yielding cultivation, land consolidation, or local non-farm work.