Gender-related Development Indicators

291

Significance of Gender-related
Development Indicators:
An Analysis of Indian States
PREET RUSTAGI
This article illustrates the complexities of gender-related development through an
analysis of individual indicators covering issues of womens work, education, health,
survival, safety and participation in public/private decision-making. State level comparisons based on selected individual gender-related indicators reveal divergent patterns
of development, highlighting the problems that complexity and non-linearity pose
for measuring gender development. In the absence of unilinear patterns of gender
development across Indian states, the significance of non-composite indicators and
their importance for problem identification and effective intervention is highlighted.

This article highlights the importance and significance of genderrelated development indicators for assessing relative levels of
progress or backwardness of womens status across the states of
India.1 An analysis of the current situation of women across the
Indian states based on a select set of indicators covering issues of
work, education, health, survival, safety and womens participation in private and public decision-making is undertaken here
to illustrate the relevance of adopting a simple methodology of
individual indicators. The indicators used here include both attainment levels as well as gaps between men and women in selected
spheres. This analysis reveals the utility of such a methodology in
identifying the areas of gender backwardness and possible intervention mechanisms that can prove to be effective in improving
the situation of women.2

Preet Rustagi is a Junior Fellow at the Centre for Womens Development Studies,
New Delhi. E-mail: preet@cwds.org.

Indian Journal of Gender Studies, 11:3 (2004)

Sage Publications New Delhi/Thousand Oaks/London

292

Preet Rustagi

The article emphasises three major points in the context of development indicators for womens status. First, it is safe to say that
gender development is a complex and dynamic process which does
not follow a uniform path. Second, for any planned development
to be effective and for replication of successful experiments, there
is a need for more specific details that can be provided by genderrelated development indicators. Third, the variables and indicators
for womens status oriented towards this objective need to be noncomplex, simple and individual/disaggregated rather than composite [that is, of the nature of the Human Development Index
(HDI) or Gender-related Development Index (GDI) as propounded
by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)]. The
purpose of gender development indicators is to generate specific
sets of information that can be usefully utilised for identification
of and intervention for the amelioration of the status of women.
Individual, disaggregated indicators provide statistical data in a
format that is amenable to the identification of problem areas as
well as for intervention, thereby making it a better tool in comparison to any composite index.
The development of any nation or region does not necessarily
follow a uniform path. Moreover, the direction, pace or intensity
of growth do not exhibit unique patterns (Kelley 1991; Krishnaji
1997; Rustagi 2000). That is to say, any impetus or stimulant introduced into an existing situation does not always lead to a predetermined outcome and even the path adopted to attain or reach a
particular goal often varies from individual case to case. This is
because the trajectory of growth is a dynamic process. The process
by itself is not an assimilation of different static parts but an ongoing, interlinked, intertwined combination of varied factors, each
of which may react differently even if one aspect alone undergoes
a change. The presence and operation of these multiple factors,
each of which can assume a different form with the slightest change
occurring in any dimension, makes the process dynamic.
To convert all these variables to form a single composite index
involves combining them by assigning different weights to different variables thereby subsuming them under one number, which
makes it non-transparent. There have been substantial debates and
deliberations on these matters of composite indexation and related
issues of weightage, standardisation and combination (see Baster
1972; Drewnowski 1977; Hilhorst and Klatter 1985; Morris and

Gender-related Development Indicators

293

McAlphin 1982; United Nations Educational, Scientific and

Cultural Organisation [UNESCO] 1981 among others).
The purpose here is not to undermine the importance of any
composite index, which may be a useful tool for certain crosscountry comparisons, but does not always help in focused, targeted
development planning. The use of composite indices since the
1990s introduced competitiveness among the countries/regions
being compared without offering any clues to diagnose or treat
the sources of backwardness since numerous variables are hidden
within a single number. Therefore, focused policy intervention
needs tools in the form of individual indicators without clubbing,
which are easily comprehensible and hence useful for implementing interventions.
The first section of the article deals with a few of the methodological issues on the choice of indicators, analysis and data sources.
Section II deals with the situation of women across Indian states
based on a diverse set of dimensions such as work, education,
health, survival, private/public participation in decision-making,
security and violence. This is followed by a few concluding
remarks.

Methodological Issues
This section deals with methodological issues, including selection
of indicators, different data sets and the method of analysis
adopted to illustrate the significance of using individual indicators.
The range of gender-related development indicators that can be
identified are numerous, but the feasibility of calculating or measuring them quantitatively is limited by availability of data. Hence,
in this article too, the issues under discussion are limited to the set
of indicators that can be quantified for state level analysis (for
deliberations on non-conventional indicators/other alternative
suggestions, see Gurumurthy 1998; Hirway and Mahadevia 1996;
Sonpar and Kapur 2001; Viswanathan 2001 among others).
A diverse set of indicators sheds light on womens status and
reflects the extent of gender equality and empowerment. Many
aspects of womens lives help us to understand their status, but
these are not adequately quantifiable. Statistical information for
deriving indicators for such aspects is either not available, or not
very reliable. For example, issues pertaining to choice and freedom

294

Preet Rustagi

regarding reproductive behaviour, sexuality, income autonomy

and so on pose difficulties.
Prior to the selection of the variables that can be used for the
assessment of gender development, the terms equality and empowerment need to be defined.
Questioning the assumptions of development as a genderneutral process formed the origins of various theories and debates
on the concept of gender development (Haddad and Kanbur 1990;
Sen 1992; Tinker 1990; United Nations Development Programme
1995; Woolley and Marshall 1994 among many others). In order to
work towards development that benefits women too, the need to
focus on women came to be recognised in the matter of policies
and various developmental programmes. This perspective moved
away from the earlier welfare approach wherein women were
relegated to being mere recipients of various beneficiary projects,
often under the assumption that some benefits would trickle down
to them (for a thorough exposition of the processes through which
these changes have occurred in the treatment of womens issues,
see Feldman 1998; Mazumdar et al. 2001). Gender development,3
within the gamut of human development (as opposed to income
development), lays emphasis on women as individuals, human
beings and citizens with equal rights and opportunities, while
recognising the need for enhancing their capabilities so as to ensure
equal participation and benefit-sharing in development.
Equality refers to equal opportunities in terms of access to
sources of livelihood, health, and education, as well as to social,
economic and political participation without discrimination.
Patriarchal structures aid the prevalence and perpetuation of
gender inequalities despite the constitutional provision of equality
(Agrawal and Rao 2004; Government of India 1974). Gender inequalities stem from relations of power and authority, classcaste
hierarchies and socio-cultural traditions, customs and norms. Empowerment may be defined as the process of transforming these
structures and institutions, thereby ensuring equality. The indicators selected and used to assess levels of gender development
cannot shed light on all the intricate patterns and dimensions of
the changes occurring. However, these indicators provide mechanisms for evaluation to strategise the directions and steps that need
to be taken to move towards gender equality and empowerment. 4

Gender-related Development Indicators

295

Statistical information is often malleable enough to form more

than one indicator. Indicators are designed on the basis of an identified purpose. This process brings in an extremely critical key factor
of values, that derives from socially produced knowledge, specific
cultural interests and historical circumstances.5 Feminist epistemologists have discussed the absence of womens issues and their
concerns in scholarly endeavours until they began to be addressed
in the 1980s and since [see Sutton (1998) for a detailed exposition
of the overlooking and silencing of women and their concerns in
academic research pursuits].
Individual indicators serve as a far better method for both the
identification and evolution of effective intervention strategies.
Since these variables transformed into indicators reflect a particular
aspect of womens well-being, any number of such dimensions
can be considered as may be desirable to understand levels of
gender development or backwardness. Hence, there is no upper
limit on the number of variables used or indicators constructed.
The number of indicators may need to be limited in the context of
composition into indices, as a large number of indicators can make
the index incomprehensible (see Krishnaji 1997; Rajivan 1998;
Rustagi 2000 among others). However, the limitations are only
related to the nature of data and methodological issues such as
comparability and appropriateness of different data sources for
the issue under consideration.
The use of individual indicators, thus, also highlights the fact
that different variables follow separate trajectories in the course
of development and a state may fare extremely well in one dimension and lag behind in another. Scholars working on indicators
have adopted different methods of comparison. The use of indices
formed on the basis of best performing level or by setting an optimum benchmark against which all other regions are compared is
common. This is a simplistic approach to the growth patterns of
regions that are very diverse in terms of their society, culture, geography, economy, polity and so on, since this implicitly or explicitly
assumes that the states lagging behind will follow the path
traversed by the leading state.
This article considers both attainment levels and gender gaps
as they refer to different dimensions of gender inequality and biases
against women. For instance, the low literacy or high mortality
rate among females depicts a poor status whereas the gap between

296

Preet Rustagi

men and women in literacy levels or mortality rates signifies

gender-based discrimination in society. The tremendous variations
in levels of gender development that exist across the states of India
are illustrated in this article.6
The indicators selected for a comparison of womens status
across Indian states serve an illustrative purpose here. The different
dimensions covered in this article can be broadly classified under
the following six headswork, education, health, survival, participation in private/public decision-making and safety/security.
Womens work is one of the most crucial indicators and serves
as an empowerment tool. However, the number of women who
work is poorly captured or enumerated since most of the work
they do is not remunerated and hence remains unrecognised. As a
consequence, the rate of womens participation in the workforce
is shown as low. Given poor human capital investment, the share
of women in the organised sector is also low. The only source that
reveals a high rate of womens participation is the time use survey
that calculates the number of hours per day and hours per week
women work.
Education forms a very basic indicator for womens equality and
empowerment. Levels of female literacy, gender gaps in literacy
levels, enrolment and dropout rates at the primary school level
are relevant indicators. Indicators used in measuring womens
health are limited to mean age at marriage, total fertility rate,
couple protection rate and anaemia levels. For the issue of survival
of women and girls, the chosen indicators are sex ratios, especially
child sex ratios; infant mortality rates among females; maternal
mortality rates and life expectancy at birth among females.
How significant is the participation of women in private and
public decision-making? Some information on autonomy levels
and the role of women in decision-making in the areas of the provisioning of food, healthcare, levels of mobility without having to
seek permission and so on have been provided by the National
Family Health Survey (NFHS) data that is used in this article.
The percentages of women as voters, contestants and winners
in general elections and in panchayati raj institutions as elected
representatives are used as indicators for the role of women in
public decision-making. Incidence of crimes against women is used
to reveal the safety and security experienced by women.

Gender-related Development Indicators

297

Based on the latest information available from numerous secondary government data sources, indicators have been constructed to
reflect the levels of womens status.7 For comparison across the
Indian states, a simple ranking exercise has been adopted. Ranks
have been assigned to highlight states which are most backward.
Hence, the lowest rank1is given to the state that requires
intervention in a given area and the highest rank, say 25, is assigned
to the state with the best record. The discussion highlights the
relatively backward and the more advanced states, taking all-India
rates as the benchmark generally.

The Status of Women in Indian States:

What do Different Indicators Reveal?
In this section, the status of women in the states of India is assessed
based on a selected set of gender development indicators. As
mentioned earlier, the indicators chosen are classified on the basis
of six aspects of womens liveswork, education, health, survival,
participation in private/public decision-making and safety/
security.
Womens Work and the Issue of Non-Recognition
Women work both for the labour market and for the household.
Some of this work is recognised and remunerated, while most of
it is not enumerated and remains unpaid. Womens contribution
to the household, economy and society goes unrecognised since
most of the activities females are involved in do not enter the sphere
of the market and remain non-monetised. Most of the work undertaken by women is often interspersed with other household chores,
making it difficult to separate the various tasks performed. The
perpetuation of gender stereotypes and the social division of labour
that typecasts women mainly as workers in the domestic sphere
has been the chief barrier to the recognition of womens economic
work participation (Bardhan 1985; Tinker 1990). Non-recognition
of womens participation in economic activities is not only an outcome of (a) their work being intertwined with household activities;
and (b) being unpaid, making it difficult for enumerators to identify
women as workers, but also stems from flawed definitions and

298

Preet Rustagi

the limited scope of economic activity8 (Agarwal 1985; Duvvury

1998; Government of India 1988).
The role played by women in the care sector, predominantly
their reproductive work (bearing, rearing, nurturing children and
household maintenance), falls outside the national accounting
systems. Many of the tasks non-working women are involved in
would be considered work if performed by a person hired for the
purpose or unrelated to the household (Visaria 1999). Because
women perform roles, which are not statistically counted as economic and hence not monetarily valued, womens roles and their
contribution are assigned a lower status.
The role fulfilled by women in household maintenance and care
activities cannot be trivialised. Assigning monetary value to all
the tasks undertaken by them, however, is not very easy. Some
efforts have been made to study the manner in which time is spent
by women in the course of the day through time use surveys (Government of India 2000). This reveals the significance of time spent
by women in unpaid care activities (Bhatia 2002; Hirway 2002
among others).
The shift from viewing women only as reproducers to recognising them as producers as well came gradually when the focus
on their contributions, non-recognition of their work and their
under-enumeration as workers began in the 1980s (Feldman 1998;
Government of India 1988; Papola and Sharma 1999). This led to
the shift within development planning from a concern with
womens livelihoods to alleviate their poverty to improving
womens access to and ownership of productive resources as well
as increasing their labour force participation. Efforts have also been
made to capture womens work better by undertaking gendersensitising exercises with census enumerators and introducing
guideline manuals for them to be able to identify the extent of
womens participation. This has improved coverage of womens
work participation rate ever since the 1980s.
The indicators used to cover economic participation are female
work participation rate (FWPR), share of women in organised
sector employment, gender differences in work participation rates
and unpaid work contributed by women based on time use survey
(TUS). Since the time use survey conducted by the Central Statistical Organisation was only a pilot survey9 covering six states,
no state level analysis is provided here.

Gender-related Development Indicators

299

Female Work Participation Rate and the Gender Gap

The female work participation rate (FWPR) is measured by calculating the proportion of female main plus marginal workers among
the female population. Standard definitions of economic activity
indicate low rates of FWPR. At the all-India level, only 30 per cent
of women are defined as workers, main or marginal. Among the
states, Kerala has the lowest FWPR, while Uttar Pradesh, West
Bengal and Punjab are also states where female work participation
is low (Table 1).
Female work participation rates are high in states with hilly
regions and those inhabited by tribals, such as most of the Northeast, Himachal Pradesh and Chattisgarh. These are also the states
where there are low gender disparities in terms of work participation. Higher FWPR can be partially explained by the fact that
community-based organisation of subsistence production requires
a high level of womens labour participation.
Table 1
Female Work Participation and Gender Gap in Participation
States/UTs
Kerala
Uttar Pradesh
West Bengal
Punjab
Bihar
Tripura
Goa
Assam
Jammu & Kashmir
Orissa
India
Gujarat
Uttaranchal
Haryana
Jharkhand
Tamil Nadu
Karnataka
Maharashtra
Madhya Pradesh
Andhra Pradesh

FWPR rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

FWPR
17.2
20.0
21.0
21.2
23.5
24.3
24.8
24.9
25.7
28.6
30.3
30.9
31.9
32.1
32.2
35.1
36.6
37.7
40.1
40.2

WGAP rank
3
4
1
2
6
8
5
7
10
9
12
18
14
15
11
13
17
19
16

WGAP
40.1
37.8
41.8
41.1
35.7
34.2
36.6
34.5
32.2
32.9
31.0
30.3
23.5
27.8
26.3
30.3
28.8
24.2
22.3
24.9

(Table 1 contd.)

300

Preet Rustagi

(Table 1 contd.)
States/UTs
Rajasthan
Meghalaya
Nagaland
Arunachal Pradesh
Sikkim
Manipur
Chhattisgarh
Himachal Pradesh
Mizoram

FWPR rank
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

FWPR
41.0
43.7
44.8
45.0
45.5
46.2
48.0
49.7
56.8

WGAP rank
21
23
28
22
20
27
24
25
26

WGAP
20.5
15.9
9.4
17.2
21.0
10.5
15.7
13.2
11.3

Source: Based on calculations from Census of India (2001).

Notes: Work participation rates are calculated as the proportion of total workers
(main + marginal) among respective populations above six years.
FWPRFemale Work Participation Rate; WGAPGender Gap in Work
Participation.

While in the northern states womens work participation is not

encouraged for reasons of social status, in the southern states the
participation of women is relatively higher. Some scholars have
linked higher participation of women with rice cultivation (Banerjee
and Jain 2001; Boserup 1970; Mencher and Saradamoni 1982).
A factor that is also associated with better work participation
levels is educational attainment, but not always. Although both
Punjab and Kerala have high female literacy levels as well as low
differences between male and female literacy levels, educational
attainment does not correlate with work participation rate for females.10 Literacy levels vary widely across social groups as well as
ruralurban locations. More in-depth and disaggregated analysis
is required to fruitfully examine the linkages between education
and economic participation which can be better perceived at the
sub-statethat is, district or taluklevels. The participation of
women in the organised sector, however, displays the expected
link to their educational attainment levels.

Organised Sector Employment

Organised sector employment constitutes a small share of total
employment in India. Reliable estimates for this sector are available
from the Ministry of Labour, Directorate General of Employment
and Training (DGE&T). Womens share in organised sector

Gender-related Development Indicators

301

employment is only 17 per cent. Even within the organised sector

most women are located in the lower rungs of the hierarchy (Joseph
and Prasad 1995; Srivastava 1997). Very few are managers, bosses
or decision-makers (Agrawal and Rao 2004; Menon-Sen and
Kumar 2001).
The highest shares of women in organised sector employment
are notably in the southern and northeastern states of India. In
Kerala, women constitute 39 per cent of all organised sector
workers (DGE&T). This is both an outcome of the educational
advancement of women and the widespread opportunities available in the state. The states with a low share of womens employment in organised sector jobs are Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal,
Jammu and Kashmir and Orissa. A much greater percentage of
women are located in the diverse range of unorganised sector activities, not all of which are enumerated despite efforts being made
to improve their coverage in data collection.

Time Use SurveyWomens Contribution to Unpaid Activities

The time use survey divides activities into three categoriesthose
accepted as economic activities as per the System of National
Accounting (SNA), extended SNA and non-SNA. Household maintenance, regarded as care activity, is not considered to be an economic activity by the SNA but is included in the second category
of extended SNA. SNA activities have been further classified into
paid and unpaid activities. While paid SNA activities are undertaken largely by men, women are found to be involved for a larger
number of hours in unpaid SNA activities, many of which are prone
to go unrecognised (Government of India 2001a).
In SNA activities, women spend 19 hours per week, while the
time spent by men is far higher at 42 hours per week on average.
The unpaid SNA work burden shared by women takes up 51 per
cent of their time, while men devote only 33 per cent of their time.
In extended SNA activities, the scenario of work participation
is reversed with women involved in most of the household management and care work (Figure 1). Women spent 35 hours per week
while men contributed only 4 hours on extended SNA activities.
Even the results of this pilot survey covering six Indian states reveal the excess contribution of work by women when both SNA

302

Preet Rustagi

and extended SNA are taken into consideration. An extension of

this time use survey by the Central Statistical Organisation to cover
all states would enable very useful comparisons.
Figure 1
Weekly Average Time Spent on Various Activities by Sex (in hours)

Source: Government of India 2001a.

Note: SNA is System of National Accounting.

On the whole, FWPR is low, partly as a result of the poor coverage

given to womens work, especially in the unorganised sector and
partly due to heavy domestic responsibilities that inhibit womens
economic activities. Nearly 50 per cent of women who are principally involved in home-making reported that there was no other
household member to undertake these responsibilities. It is noteworthy that even in this segment, 31 per cent urban and 26 per
cent rural women expressed their willingness to undertake work
within their homes (Government of India 2001b). Kalpagam (1999)
has argued in favour of income earning opportunities for housewives as a means of empowering and improving their economic
status.

Gender-related Development Indicators

303

There is a dire need for employment generation in newer and

more sustainable spheres of activities that can productively engage
women. In order for women to be able to optimally utilise these
opportunities, they must be educated and trained.
Education
Does womens education lead to a positive impact on gender development? Will improvement in female literacy ensure greater
gender equality? While it can be stated with a certain degree of
certainty that improving the education of women will lead to
gender development, it is difficult to affirm that improvements
reflected through this variable of female literacy alone will be
sufficient to bring about womens equality. Use of this or other
education-related indicators reflects attainment/achievement
levels and highlights the gap or extent of parity between men and
women. Existing levels of discrimination and biases are an outcome
of socio-cultural factors and patriarchal structures which are not
easily overcome by introduction of literacy alone. Nevertheless,
the benefits of education cannot be trivialised as these would have
a long-term impact upon the empowerment of women.
From the beginning of the planned era, education along with
health and social welfare were accepted as crucial services for
womens development. Allocations through the Five Year Plans
and special programmes for womens education together with efforts to reduce gender inequalities in school enrolment and dropouts have been undertaken by the state (Gopalan 2002; Mazumdar
et al. 2001). Involvement of grassroots organisations, especially
for delivering services in informal education and evolving ways
of mainstreaming women, have been underway. The challenge
posed in trying to increase retention rates of girls in schools surpasses the efforts required to enrol them. Unless girls continue
their education up to higher levels of schooling, the potential
benefits of education will remain limited.
The indicators that will be examined in this section are female
literacy, the gender gap in literacy, and enrolment and dropout
rates at primary schooling levels. The effective literacy rate is defined as the number of literates among the female population in
the age group 7 years and above.

304

Preet Rustagi

Female Literacy and Gender Gaps

Literacy is the first step towards formal education. It refers to the
ability to read and write. Female literacy has been improving over
the years. The proportion of women who are literate has increased
by 15 per cent over the last decade from 39 per cent in 1991 to 54
per cent in 2001. This is a remarkable improvement that reflects
the concerted efforts of the state along with the assistance of nongovernmental organisations and other concerned groups. Yet, even
today 193 million women lack the basic capability to read and
write.
The emphasis laid on education, especially for women, is visible
in the policy documents of the government such as the various
Five Year Plans (since the Sixth Plan, 198085, in particular), the
National Policy on Education (NPE) and so on (see Gopalan 2002;
Government of India 1974; Mazumdar et al. 2001, for a detailed
exposition of the evolution and planning of womens education).
Many programmes targeting different segments of the population
have been instituted to promote literacy among women, young
and old. These efforts have been only partially successful on account of the lower value ascribed to womens education in our
society.
All Indian states have registered improvements in female literacy
rates (Table 2). Rajasthan, with the worst literacy levels among
women in 1991 (as low as 20 per cent), has doubled its proportion
of literate women in a decade to 44 per cent in 2001. Chattisgarh,
the newly-formed state, and Madhya Pradesh are the other states
with similar levels of improvement in womens literacy. This is an
outcome of various educational programmes such as Mahila
Samakhya, District Primary Education Programme (DPEP), Adult
Literacy Mission and Non-Formal Education ventures (Karlekar
2000; Rampal 1996).
The states with high womens literacy levels are Kerala, Mizoram
and Goa. These are also the states where the gap in literacy rates
between men and women is low. Bihar, U.P. and Jharkhand remain
the worst states in terms of womens literacy, despite some improvements over the decade. The states of Madhya Pradesh, Orissa
and Andhra Pradesh exhibit literacy levels that are below the allIndia average. These are also the states with higher gender gaps

Bihar
Jharkhand
Jammu & Kashmir
Uttar Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
Rajasthan
Madhya Pradesh
Orissa
Andhra Pradesh
Chhattisgarh
India
Assam
Haryana
Karnataka
Gujarat
Manipur
West Bengal
Uttaranchal
Meghalaya

States

33.57
39.38
41.82
42.98
44.24
44.34
50.28
50.97
51.17
52.40
54.16
56.03
56.31
57.45
58.60
59.70
60.22
60.26
60.41

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

21.99
25.52
NA
24.37
29.69
20.44
29.35
34.68
32.72
27.52
38.79
43.03
40.47
44.34
48.64
47.60
46.56
41.63
44.85
3
7
1
6
9
8
5

12
10
13
18
17
15
11
14

2
4

FLIT 2001 Rank 2001 FLIT 1991 Rank 1991

Rajasthan
Jharkhand
Uttar Pradesh
Bihar
Madhya Pradesh
Chhattisgarh
Orissa
Jammu & Kashmir
Uttaranchal
Haryana
Gujarat
India
Arunachal Pradesh
Andhra Pradesh
Karnataka
Maharashtra
Manipur
Himachal Pradesh
Tamil Nadu

States
32.12
28.56
27.25
26.75
26.52
25.46
24.98
23.93
23.75
22.94
21.90
21.69
19.83
19.68
18.84
18.76
18.17
17.94
17.78
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

17
16
14
11
12
13
15

2
8
10

1
5
4
6
7
3
9

(Table 2 contd.)

34.55
30.28
30.45
29.38
29.19
30.55
28.41
NA
31.16
28.63
24.49
24.52
21.76
22.40
22.92
24.24
24.03
23.23
22.42

LGAP 2001 Rank 2001 LGAP 1991 Rank 1991

Table 2
Female Literacy and Gender Gap in Literacy Rates: Statewise1991 and 2001

Gender-related Development Indicators

l

305

61.46
61.92
63.55
64.55
65.41
67.51
68.08
75.51
86.13
87.86

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

46.76
54.75
50.41
51.33
49.65
52.32
52.13
67.09
78.60
86.17

16
24
20
21
19
23
22
25
26
27

FLIT 2001 Rank 2001 FLIT 1991 Rank 1991

West Bengal
Tripura
Assam
Sikkim
Goa
Punjab
Nagaland
Kerala
Meghalaya
Mizoram

States

Source: Census of India 1991 and 2001.

Note: FLIT - Female Literacy; LGAP - Gender Differences in Literacy Rates.

Sikkim
Nagaland
Punjab
Tamil Nadu
Tripura
Maharashtra
Himachal Pradesh
Goa
Mizoram
Kerala

States
17.36
16.06
15.90
15.27
13.37
12.08
9.85
6.34
5.73
4.56

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

21.25
20.93
18.84
18.94
16.55
15.25
12.87
7.45
8.27
7.01

18
19
21
20
22
23
24
26
25
27

LGAP 2001 Rank 2001 LGAP 1991 Rank 1991

(Table 2 contd.)

306
Preet Rustagi

Gender-related Development Indicators

307

in literacy. While the low literacy rate may be explained by a range

of factors such as non-availability of schools, teachers, equipment
and infrastructure, which affect both sexes, it is social attitudes
and perceptions that attach lower preference to girls education
that increase the gender gap in literacy.
Both non-economic and economic factors are discussed in the
literature to explain the prevalence of the gender gap in literacy
rates (Nayar 1993; Nuna 1990; PROBE 1999; Rustagi 2003; Tilak
2002; Wazir 2000 and so on). The situation among other disadvantaged groups such as the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes is even worse.

Enrolment and Dropout Rates

The enrolment of girls in schools even at the primary level is lower
when compared to boys. In 19992000, the enrolment ratio for girls
was 85 per cent in classes IV (611 years). This dropped further
to 50 per cent in classes VIVIII (1114 years) (Table 3). The emphasis laid upon training girls for marriage, inadequate facilities
for girls in schools, absence of adequate female teachers, fear for
their safety and so on are among the reasons for the low enrolment
of girls in schools. This is further compounded by higher levels of
dropouts among girls. In 19992000, 42 per cent of girls in primary
schools had dropped out (Table 4).
Table 3
Enrolment Ratio in Classes IV and VIVIII of Schools for
General Education

States/UTs
Andhra Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Goa
Gujarat
Haryana
Himachal Pradesh

(All students) 19992000

Classes IV (611 years)
Classes VIVIII (1114 years)
Boys
Girls
Total
Boys
Girls
Total
105.21
126.14
124.25
94.51
71.44
124.54
81.22
92.97

101.39
108.55
105.36
61.46
63.96
101.43
82.98
80.83

103.32
117.54
114.94
78.56
67.59
113.38
82.04
86.66

52.3
72.42
81.02
41.38
77.03
71.81
64.58
91.8

42.77
66.68
64.63
22.04
67.36
57.31
59.02
78.66

47.65
69.71
72.99
32.36
72.20
64.89
62.00
85.15

(Table 3 contd.)

308

Preet Rustagi

(Table 3 contd.)

States/UTs
Jammu & Kashmir
Karnataka
Kerala
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Manipur
Meghalaya
Mizoram
Nagaland
Orissa
Punjab
Rajasthan
Sikkim
Tamil Nadu
Tripura
Uttar Pradesh
West Bengal
A&N Islands
Chandigarh
D&N Haveli
Daman & Diu
Delhi
Lakshadweep
Pondicherry
India

(All students) 19992000

Classes IV (611 years)
Classes VIVIII (1114 years)
Boys
Girls
Total
Boys
Girls
Total
92.55
112.83
85.80
126.53
115.80
101.87
119.46
121.84
92.21
125.70
79.91
137.61
139.32
102.75
118.28
78.43
105.35
86.76
66.30
153.43
119.16
85.24
113.20
88.66
104.08

64.78
105.87
84.74
102.94
112.32
87.41
111.64
107.52
87.78
91.48
81.71
83.81
138.48
98.62
100.86
50.18
94.86
91.21
65.40
106.59
93.99
83.08
94.88
79.41
85.18

78.47
109.39
85.28
115.03
114.10
94.44
115.43
114.62
90.03
108.84
80.75
111.92
138.91
110.73
109.37
64.97
100.19
88.84
65.88
128.90
105.73
84.20
104.04
83.96
94.90

79.54
70.71
97.78
75.28
96.72
79.62
57.42
78.77
58.67
66.59
64.53
105.89
70.96
88.56
69.96
48.69
57.00
91.22
68.06
77.28
92.60
63.08
78.93
96.96
67.15

49.18
60.49
93.36
48.70
80.37
71.34
62.28
76.17
61.14
43.75
64.95
48.35
76.59
85.15
60.26
25.80
43.91
95.69
71.88
48.30
81.20
81.59
69.20
86.06
49.66

Source: GOI 2001c.

Table 4
Statewise Dropout Rate
States & UTs
Rajasthan
Uttar Pradesh
Bihar
West Bengal
Meghalaya
Sikkim
Mizoram
Arunachal Pradesh
Tripura

Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Primary (19992000)
Total
Girls
52.53
56.64
57.27
54.07
57.43
58.94
51.64
50.23
49.47

62.68
62.16
58.64
58.48
57.22
56.35
51.27
50.81
49.25

64.60
65.67
95.61
62.56
88.80
75.48
59.83
77.47
59.85
55.34
64.73
78.88
73.69
86.89
65.13
38.09
50.63
93.27
69.79
62.79
86.90
71.71
74.07
91.43
58.79

Gender-related Development Indicators

States & UTs

Jammu & Kashmir
Nagaland
Orissa
Manipur
India
Assam
D&N Haveli
Andhra Pradesh
Tamil Nadu
Himachal Pradesh
Gujarat
Karnataka
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Punjab
Haryana
Goa
Daman & Diu
Delhi
A&N Islands
Lakshadweep
Kerala
Pondicherry
Chandigarh

Rank
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32

309

Primary (19992000)
Total
Girls
51.84
46.73
36.12
43.30
40.25
33.69
31.53
40.28
41.10
35.35
29.49
28.87
19.03
20.29
22.49
14.57
8.58
3.59
5.67
5.64
2.70
7.05
6.32
66.70

47.39
46.68
44.38
42.90
42.28
42.20
41.29
41.23
39.19
33.90
28.10
27.19
22.97
21.72
20.15
12.78
11.51
6.60
6.03
5.77
4.08
5.00
6.19
66.17

Source: GOI 2001c.

Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and West Bengal are some of the
states where enrolment is low and dropout rate high, implying a
very low retention rate of girls at the primary school level. The
use of girls in sibling care, as additional hands for helping mothers
in the household, farm and off-farm work and so on operate to reduce the availability of formal education for them (Chaudhri 1999;
Hirway 2001; Rustagi 2002).
Given low retention at the primary level, very few girls reach middle and secondary school or higher levels of education (Figure 2).
This implies low human capital development, poor levels of skill/
training to meet market demands, lowering the probability of
women joining the labour market except in jobs that are in the
informal sector, which are low-paid and virtually with no protection or security. Lower literacy also impacts upon womens awareness levels regarding their own health needs, thereby foreclosing

310

Preet Rustagi

the possibility of improving their access to the available services

for their well-being.
Figure 2
Educational Attainment among Women

Source: GOI 2001c.

Most of the states are still far behind the goal of universal elementary education that has to be met by 2010.11 Unless improvements in womens educational status take place, their chances of
participating in the social, economic and political spheres will
remain severely curtailed.
Womens Health
In the states approach to the issue of womens health there is an
excessive focus on reproductive health (see Datta 2003; Gopalan
and Shiva 2000; Mazumdar et al. 2001). Women are viewed mainly
as the means of reproduction, often at the cost of their own personal, individual identity. Even now, despite some efforts to widen
womens health concerns to include the issues of nutrition, sexuality and control over their bodies, state policies and programmes
still emphasise and concentrate on family welfare and reproductive

Gender-related Development Indicators

311

health. A major share of the budgetary allocations are under these

heads (see Gopalan and Shiva 2000 and references cited therein).
The indicators selected to reflect the health status of women in
the states of India are: mean age at marriage, total fertility rates,
anaemia levels in women and couple protection rate.

Age at Marriage among Females

Despite the legally stipulated minimum age of 18 years at marriage,
girls still get married before attaining this age in the states of
Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal
and Uttar Pradesh (Table 5). The NFHS-II (199899) states that
nearly 60 to 80 per cent of married women surveyed between the
ages of 25 and 49 years were married before they were 18 years
old [International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) 2000].
Early marriage often accompanies early pregnancy, with young
unprepared mothers being saddled with responsibilities beyond
their capacities. Pregnancies at young ages are more likely to result
in underweight babies, stillbirths or abortions, especially where
mothers suffer from poor health and deficiencies.
Table 5
Mean Age at Marriage among Females (MAMF)
States
Madhya Pradesh
Rajasthan
Andhra Pradesh
Bihar
West Bengal
Uttar Pradesh
India
Tripura
Haryana
Maharashtra
Orissa
Karnataka
Himachal Pradesh
Assam
Arunachal Pradesh
Gujarat
Tamil Nadu

Rank

MAMF

1
2
3
4
5
6

16.62
16.67
16.81
16.95
17.21
17.27
17.68
17.82
17.88
17.91
17.96
18.00
18.13
18.23
18.50
19.01
19.12

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

(Table 5 contd.)

312

Preet Rustagi
(Table 5 contd.)
States
Sikkim
Meghalaya
Manipur
Punjab
Kerala
Nagaland
Mizoram
Goa

Rank

Total

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

19.22
19.33
19.45
19.70
19.85
20.12
20.30
20.42

Source: Census of India 1991.

Total Fertility Rate

The fertility rate as per the NFHS-II is an average of three babies
per woman for the country as a whole. The number of childbirths
among women from the states of Meghalaya, Uttar Pradesh,
Rajasthan, Nagaland, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh is even higher
(Table 6). Although declining for the country as a whole, the total
fertility rate is close to replacement level in only some of the states.
Low total fertility rates are recorded in the states of Goa, Kerala,
Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh and Tamil Nadu.
Table 6
Total and Desirable Fertility Rates
States
Meghalaya
Uttar Pradesh
Rajasthan
Nagaland
Bihar
Madhya Pradesh
Manipur
Mizoram
Haryana
India
Sikkim
Gujarat
Jammu & Kashmir
Arunachal Pradesh
Maharashtra

Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

Total desirable
fertility rate
3.83
2.83
2.57
2.98
2.58
2.40
2.50
2.66
2.10
2.13
1.65
2.08
1.74
1.74
1.87

Total fertility
rate
4.57
3.99
3.78
3.77
3.49
3.31
3.04
2.89
2.88
2.85
2.75
2.72
2.71
2.52
2.52

Gender-related Development Indicators

States
Orissa
Delhi
Assam
West Bengal
Andhra Pradesh
Punjab
Tamil Nadu
Himachal Pradesh
Karnataka
Kerala
Goa

Rank

Total desirable
fertility rate

Total fertility
rate

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

1.90
1.72
1.75
1.78
1.88
1.55
1.71
1.50
1.56
1.81
1.47

2.46
2.40
2.31
2.29
2.25
2.21
2.19
2.14
2.13
1.96
1.77

313

Source: IIPS 2000.

Frequent childbearing, often an offshoot of the predominant

preference for a son in our society, takes a heavy toll on women
(Dasgupta and Bhat 1998; Murthi et al. 1995; Srinivasan 1996
among others). Among resource poor households, it is distressing
to note that women breastfeed more than one child simultaneously
due to lack of money to feed the older child with an alternative or
supplementary diet. During childbirth, several serious complications are commonly reported, such as haemorrhage, excessive
bleeding, anaemia, toxicity, premature babies and associated
problems (IIPS 2000). Among these, anaemia is a prominent cause
leading to maternal deaths, apart from resulting in physically weak
children.

Anaemia among Women

Every second woman in India suffers from some degree of anaemia
according to NFHS-II. Severe anaemia is reported by 2 per cent
women, while 35 per cent and 15 per cent are affected by mild and
moderate anaemia levels respectively (Figure 3).
The majority of women in 10 states are anaemic (Table 7). Iron
deficiency is particularly pronounced among women inhabiting
the eastern and some of the northeastern states. Lowest prevalence
of anaemia is recorded in the states of Kerala, Manipur, Goa and
Nagaland. It is difficult to explain such wide variations in the
proportion of women suffering from anaemia within Indian states,
especially among those belonging to the same region. Efforts to

314

Preet Rustagi

collate more information from hospital records are needed to make

more useful data available on other health-related variables
affecting women.
Figure 3
Anaemia among Women in IndiaNFHS-II (% of women by levels)

Source: IIPS 2000.

Table 7
Women Suffering from AnaemiaStatewise

States

Rank

Assam
Bihar
Meghalaya
Orissa
West Bengal
Arunachal Pradesh
Sikkim
Jammu & Kashmir
Tamil Nadu
Madhya Pradesh
India
Andhra Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh
Maharashtra
Rajasthan
Mizoram
Haryana
Gujarat

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Percentage of
women with
any anaemia
69.7
63.4
63.3
63.0
62.7
62.5
61.1
58.7
56.5
54.3
51.8
49.8
48.7
48.5
48.5
48.0
47.0
46.3

Percentage of women with:

Mild
Moderate
Severe
anaemia
anaemia
anaemia
43.2
42.9
33.4
45.1
45.3
50.6
37.3
39.3
36.7
37.6
35.0
32.5
33.5
31.5
32.3
35.2
30.9
29.5

25.6
19.0
27.5
16.4
15.9
11.3
21.4
17.6
15.9
15.6
14.8
14.9
13.7
14.1
14.1
12.1
14.5
14.4

0.9
1.5
2.4
1.6
1.5
0.6
2.4
1.9
3.9
1.0
1.9
2.4
1.5
2.9
2.1
0.7
1.6
2.5

Gender-related Development Indicators

States

Rank

Percentage of
women with
any anaemia

Karnataka
Punjab
Delhi
Himachal Pradesh
Nagaland
Goa
Manipur
Kerala

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

42.4
41.4
40.5
40.5
38.4
36.4
28.9
22.7

315

Percentage of women with:

Mild
Moderate
Severe
anaemia
anaemia
anaemia
26.7
28.4
29.6
31.4
27.8
27.3
21.7
19.5

13.4
12.3
9.6
8.4
9.6
8.1
6.3
2.7

2.3
0.7
1.3
0.7
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.5

Source: IIPS 2000.

Couple Protection Rate

Apart from anaemia, poor nutritional status, and the strain of
maternity and childcare, the additional burden of contraception
also falls overwhelmingly on women. The latest data available from
the Department of Family Welfare (Ministry of Health and Family
Welfare) reveals that female sterilisations account for 95 per cent
of all sterilisations. It is as if to emphasise that since women conceive and bear children, it is their sole responsibility to control or
protect themselves against further reproduction.
Less than 50 per cent of couples in the reproductive age groups
have resorted to some method of contraception (as on 31 March
1999). Punjab, Gujarat, Karnataka and Haryana are the best states
in terms of couple protection rates (Table 8). In the states of the
Northeast with large tribal populations where traditional beliefs
predominate, modern methods of contraception have not made
much headway.
The NFHS-II in its states series records very high awareness
levels (close to universal) of contraception among the surveyed
population. However, adoption of these measures varies across
age cohorts due to specific preferences, cultural considerations regarding family size, ideal sex composition of offspring and so on
(Basu 1992; Jejeebhoy 1993; Khan et al. 1988 among others). It has
been noted that the adoption of contraceptive measures among
the older age cohort of women of reproductive age is higher (IIPS
1995 and 2000). Male contraception, however, is still poor, with
very few men agreeing to vasectomy.

316

Preet Rustagi
Table 8
Effective Couple Protection Rate (CPR)
States
Meghalaya
Nagaland
Arunachal Pradesh
Jammu & Kashmir
Assam
Bihar
Manipur
Sikkim
Tripura
Goa
West Bengal
Mizoram
Rajasthan
Orissa
Kerala
Uttar Pradesh
India
Himachal Pradesh
Tamil Nadu
Andhra Pradesh
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Haryana
Karnataka
Gujarat
Punjab

Rank

1998

1999

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

3.9
7.9
12.6
16.4
17.6
20.9
21.3
20.7
25.6
27.8
33.8
38.2
34.6
39.0
41.3
39.1
45.4
50.3
50.8
49.1
47.7
50.7
50.7
55.4
53.8
68.9

4.8
7.9
14.6
15.4
17.3
20.1
21.2
22.6
27.2
29.3
34.4
35.3
41.8
41.9
42.4
42.4
48.6
51.5
52.1
52.4
52.4
52.5
55.8
57.4
60.4
73.1

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Source: Government of India 2001a.

Note: As on 31 March 1999.

Public awareness creation measures have been adopted by the

state, aid agencies and various non-governmental organisations
through the media regarding the option, possibility and relative
ease of male sterilisation. These efforts will have to spread more
widely to remote areas in the country.
The decline in fertility rates has been linked to falling sex ratios
among the child population in both South Asian and East Asian
countries (Krishnaji 2001). The introduction of hazardous injectible
contraceptives such as Depo-provera, Net-En, and so on has been
opposed by womens groups (Agnihotri Gupta 2000). With the
advent of newer technologies it is very easy to trample upon and

Gender-related Development Indicators

317

violate the human rights of women who in any case have poor
control over their bodies.
The Issue of Survival
The indicators chosen to represent this aspect of womens or girls
survival are child sex ratios, infant mortality rates among girls,
maternal mortality rate and life expectancy at birth among women.
Child sex ratios are defined as the number of girls for every 1,000
boys in the 06 years group in the population. This indicator is insulated from the disturbances created by migration in the overall
sex ratio for the population (Agnihotri 2000; Bhat 2002a; Mazumdar
and Krishnaji 2001 among others).
The share of the female infant mortality rate in the overall mortality rate is very high (Clark 1987; Dyson and Crook 1984; Visaria
1985 among others).12 Among adults, the maternal mortality rate
(MMR) is the selected indicator (Sample Registration System
2000a). At the overall level, the life expectancy at birth among
females is the chosen indicator.

Sex Ratios
A decline in the proportion of women in the populations of many
countries the world over has been witnessed over the years
(Krishnaji 2000; Dasgupta and Bhat 1997). This is especially so in
societies with a strong cultural tradition of son preference. Strong
male preference is common not only in India but also in other Asian
societiesJapan, China, South Korea, etc. Patrilineal property transfers, religious and ritualistic practices and other patriarchal social
structures together lay emphasis on the need for a male offspring.
This forms the basis for a family which aspires to have at least one
or more boys. The lower status ascribed to women stemming from
societal beliefs and practices that view them as burdens, costs and
dangers to family honour and dignity, further intensifies son preference. Among the younger cohorts, the sex ratios are most strikingly
imbalanced and have been declining over the years in India.
India has had an imbalanced sex ratio from the beginning of the
last century (Mitra 1979; Visaria 1971). Even if this could have been
explained by the sex ratio at birth and other factors such as mortality differentials among male and female children at different ages,

318

Preet Rustagi

what is not explicable is the continuing decline in sex ratios over a

period of time. Waldron (1998) suggests that either more males are
conceived or females have higher mortality than males during the
embryonic and foetal stages of the childs growth. This is based on
certain evidences that indicate a possibility of there being far more
males than females by the second month of foetal development.
The reduction of male mortality at younger ages due to the improvements in health services and the existence of a gender bias
in availing healthcare facilities may account for some of the imbalance. Nevertheless, this is inadequate explanation of the extent
of imbalance (Bhat 2002b; United Nations 1998). Researchers have
linked son preference to gender bias against girls in healthcare,
nutrition, food allocation and so on to explain the declining sex
ratio (Clark 1987; Kanitkar 1991; Miller 1981; United Nations 1998
among others). The desired family size and gender composition of
children under the prevalent regime of male preference (Dasgupta
and Bhat 1998; Jejeebhoy 1993 among others) work towards the
elimination of girls in the foetal stages through intervention of
advanced scientific technologies (Agnihotri Gupta 2000), infanticide, neglect and discrimination (Bardhan 1982; George et al. 1992;
Mazumdar 1994; Muthulakshmi 1997; Sudha and Irudaya Rajan
1999).

Child Sex Ratios

Table 9 presents child sex ratios for all the states of India between
1991 and 2001. This reveals the low proportion of girls in the states
of Punjab, Haryana, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttar
Pradesh and Maharashtra. The declining trend is almost universal,
except for the states of Sikkim, Tripura, Kerala and Mizoram. Although not conclusive, historical prevalence of matriliny, womens
control over property and resources, greater economic participation
and a more significant role in decision-making are some of the
likely factors that may explain the better demographic balance and
the improvements in sex ratios in these states.
A rapid decline in sex ratios has been observed in northwestern
India from the beginning of the 20th century (Mazumdar and
Krishnaji 2001; Mitra 1979). The low status of women in these
regions is the most likely explanation for the adverse sex ratios

Gender-related Development Indicators

319

Table 9
Child Sex Ratio over the Decade 19912001 among States
States
Punjab
Haryana
Gujarat
Himachal Pradesh
Rajasthan
Uttar Pradesh
Maharashtra
India
Goa
Madhya Pradesh
Bihar
Tamil Nadu
Karnataka
Orissa
Manipur
Arunachal Pradesh
Kerala
West Bengal
Andhra Pradesh
Assam
Mizoram
Tripura
Nagaland
Meghalaya
Sikkim

Rank 2001
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Child sex ratio

2001
1991
793
820
879
897
909
915
917
927
933
933
938
939
949
950
961
961
963
963
964
964
971
975
975
975
986

875
879
928
951
916
928
946
945
964
952
959
948
960
967
974
982
958
967
975
975
969
967
993
986
965

Rank
1991

Difference
20011991

1
2
4
8
3
5
6

82
59
49
54
7
13
29
18
31
19
21
9
11
17
13
21
5
4
11
11
2
8
18
11
21

13
9
11
7
12
15
19
22
10
16
20
21
18
17
24
23
14

Source: Calculated from Census of India 1991 and 2001.

(Dasgupta 1987; Khan et al. 1988; Miller 1981 and others). Originally, the prejudice against girl children arose because girls by nature
are vulnerable to sexual assault and kidnapping, thereby compromising family honour. Second, marriages were costly affairs,
turning girls into financial liabilities. Son preference has been a
steady reason for the discrimination against girl childreneven
today the expanding custom of dowry, adding to the cost of securing the future of a girl, and decreasing family size with a preference
for sons, not daughters, are factors accounting for the rejection of
girl children (Centre for Womens Development Studies 2002;
Kishor 1993).

320

Preet Rustagi

It seems rational to expect poor sections of society, for whom

bringing up a daughter might be economically burdensome, to
resort to various measures against the girl childs survival; on the
contrary it is those who are prosperous who pose a threat to the
lives of girls, before and after birth (Agnihotri 2000; Mazumdar
1994; Rustagi 2003). This explanation holds good for the fall in sex
ratios in the states of Punjab, Haryana, Gujarat and Maharashtra.
The role of advanced scientific technologies in facilitating the elimination of female foetuses has been highlighted by many researchers and groups in these states where due to the connivance of
greedy medical professionals the rates of female foeticide are high
(Patel 1997; Sharma and Joseph 1994).

The Female Infant Mortality Rate

Mortality rates are the highest in the stages of infancy as compared
to all other ages (Sample Registration System 2000b). The infant
mortality rate (IMR) is defined as the probable number among
every 1,000 babies who would fail to survive within the first year
of being born. Male infants are known to be more susceptible to
death than females due to biological and genetic reasons (Waldron
1976). However, in India, the female infant mortality rate surpasses
that of males, which reflects socio-cultural influences on mortality
(Agnihotri 1999; Clark 1987; Visaria 1985).
The indicators used here are the infant mortality rate among
females (IMRFs) and gender differences in the infant mortality rate
(IMRD). The gender gap in infant mortality rate is defined as the
difference between the female infant mortality rate and the male
infant mortality rate. A positive value of IMRD implies higher infant mortality rate among females as compared to males, while a
negative figure reflects excess male mortality among infants.
The data for IMR is based on the Sample Registration System
(SRS) of 1999. The infant mortality rate among females for India
from this source is 71, while the male infant mortality rate is lower
at 70. The gender gap reveals one excess female not surviving during infancy, as compared to males, among every 1,000 babies born
(Table 10). Among the 16 major states for which SRS provides
information for 1999, eight states recorded higher mortality rates
for females.

Gender-related Development Indicators

321

The states of Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan and Gujarat, where sex

ratios among children of 06 years have been low and declining,
are among those where infant mortality rates among females are
higher than those of male infants. Tamil Nadu is a state that is
joining this group. In some of the districts of Tamil Nadu, infanticide practices have been prominently reported (George et al. 1992;
Muthulakshmi 1997; Sunanda 1995). In other words, the SRS data
on IMRs does not seem to contradict the census-based sex ratios.
Although these mortality figures may not be adequate in explaining the rate of decline in womens share as represented in the sex
ratios (Bhat 2002b; United Nations 1998), there is no doubt, however, that discrimination in access to healthcare services for females
and the lower status ascribed to females in our society is at the base
of excess female mortality in the infancy stages (see Basu 1989;
Basu and Basu 1991; Levinson 1974; Timaeus et al. 1998; Visaria
1988).
Table 10
Infant Mortality Rates among Females and
Gender Differences1999 (Total)
States
India
Andhra Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Gujarat
Haryana
Himachal Pradesh
Karnataka
Kerala
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Orissa
Punjab
Rajasthan
Tamil Nadu
Uttar Pradesh
West Bengal

IMRF
70.8
63.5
76.4
62.3
64.8
78.4
51.1
56.7
15.3
89.5
48.5
96.0
56.4
83.9
54.5
83.5
43.0

Gender gap
1.0
5.4
1.7
0.9
3.1
19.3
5.8
1.9
1.6
0.1
0.7
1.3
5.9
5.0
4.2
1.7
17.7

Source: Sample Registration System (SRS) 2000a.

Note: IMRF refers to infant mortality rates among females.
The Gender gap is the difference between female and
male infant mortality rates.

322

Preet Rustagi

Maternal Mortality Rate

The Maternal Mortality Rate (MMR) is calculated as the number
of maternal deaths per 100,000 live births. This indicator is based on
information collected that refers to deaths of women on account
of pregnancy, childbirth or within 42 days of childbirth. MMR indicates how safe motherhood is. The all-India rate for 1998 is 407
(Figure 4). The range of MMRs across the states of India varies
from 28 in Gujarat to 707 in Uttar Pradesh for the year 1998 (Sample
Registration System 2000a). It is the BIMARU states of Bihar,
Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh which record the
highest MMRs.13
The mean age at marriage for females in India stands at 17 years
despite the legal minimum age of marriage being 18 years (Census
of India 1991). Early marriage leads to girls becoming mothers at
a younger age. Often these young mothers are neither mentally
nor physically prepared for the responsibility of bearing and rearing children. Poor health and nutritional status further take their
toll, raising the number of maternal deaths.
Among rural females, tuberculosis and anaemia are the prominent causes of death. This is a reflection of low immunity levels
due to lack of balanced food intake, proper nutrition and healthcare for women. Even deaths during childbirth are often an outcome of these factors together with the unhygienic conditions in
which both institutional and non-institutional deliveries occur,
which increases the chances of severe infections that adversely
affect the survival of women. Deliveries that occur without formal
help or with the assistance of untrained dais (midwives) increase
the risk of non-survival of infants, especially in cases of complicated
pregnancies. Women living in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar
and Assam have a higher propensity to die in childbirth (IIPS 2000).
It needs to be highlighted here, however, that contrary to popular
belief, the high rates of maternal mortality are not due to reproduction, but are a result of poor health conditions that are an outcome
of gender discrimination meted out over the years from childhood
(Gopalan and Shiva 2000; Krishnaji and James 2002; Qadeer 1998).
Deprivations in healthcare and nutrition on the one hand and the
compulsions of marriage and reproduction on the other, adversely
affect female bodies, and lead to fatalities. Women who survive

Source: SRS 2000a.

Figure 4
Maternal Mortality Rate for India and the Larger States1998

Gender-related Development Indicators

l

323

324

Preet Rustagi

beyond their reproductive years tend to outlive men as is seen in

the life expectancy figures.

Life Expectancy at Birth among Females

The expected years of survival at birth for females has been showing a positive trend over the years. Women live up to an average
of 62 years (Table 11). A number of explanatory factors which have
led to this improvement over a long period of time in India can
be identified. The NFHS-II lists a few as follows: reduction of the
crude birth rate from 40.8 births per 1,000 people in 1951 to 26.4 in
1998; halving of the infant mortality rate from 146 per 1,000 live
births in 1951 to 72 per 1,000 live births in 1998; reduction of the
crude death rate from 25 deaths per 1,000 people in 1951 to 9 in
1998; quadrupling of the couple protection rate from 10 per cent
in 1971 to 44 per cent in 1999; and reduction in the total fertility
rate from 6.0 in 1951 to 3.3 in 1997 (IIPS 2000).
Table 11
Expectation of Life at Birth by Sex: India
Year

Male

Female

Percentage

190111
191121
192131
193141
194151
195161
196171
197175
197680
198185
198690
198791
198892
198993
199094
199195
199296
199397

22.6
19.4
26.9
32.1
32.4
41.9
46.4
50.5
52.5
55.4
57.7
58.1
58.6
59.0
59.4
59.7
60.1
60.4

23.3
20.9
26.6
31.4
31.7
40.6
44.7
49.0
52.1
55.7
58.1
58.6
59.0
59.7
60.4
60.9
61.4
61.8

22.9
20.1
26.8
31.8
32.1
41.3
45.6
49.7
52.3
55.4
57.7
58.3
58.7
59.4
60.0
60.3
60.7
61.1

Sources: Registrar General of India, 1. Census Actuarial

Reports, 2. Sample Registration System based on abridged
life tables 198690, 3. Central Statistical Organisation 2001.

Gender-related Development Indicators

325

These developments have occurred at the same time as an overall

improvement in the standards of living over the years and have
enhanced life chances and longevity, even for women. It is worth
noting that unlike the sex ratios which exhibit a correlation with
prosperity, the life expectancy at birth indicator seems to correlate
positively with estimates of poverty (Rustagi 2003). The states with
low life expectancy at birth among females are Madhya Pradesh,
Uttar Pradesh, Orissa, Assam, Bihar and Rajasthan, which rank
among the poor states in the country. The states judged best by
this indicator are Kerala, Punjab, Maharashtra, Himachal Pradesh
and Tamil Nadu.
Increased life expectancy at birth reflects a positive trend for
gender development. However, this implies that there are bound
to be many more women in the older age cohorts in the future. Given
the absence of social security on the one hand, and declining support structures such as the family on the other, feminisation of old
age is bound to be a cause of concern for policy makers and planners in the immediate future.
Womens Participation in Decision-making
Since women are located in different households, castes, communities and regions and are bound by distinct rituals, practices and
structures of power, they rarely view themselves as a group with
similar demands and needs. They are often governed by decisions
that others take on their behalf which are unquestioningly followed.
Do women have any autonomy? What is the extent of their public
presence and participation as voters, contestants and winners in
the general elections of the country? Womens presence in local
governance structures, the panchayati raj institutions and its
implications are considered in this section.

Autonomy
Autonomy indicators ought to reflect the level of control women
have over themselves, their bodies, their incomes and in conducting
their lives. Not all of these aspects are amenable to easy quantification. Case studies based on qualitative surveys have shown that
even when women work and earn their own incomes, they have little
or no control over expenditure (Batliwala et al. 1998; Visaria 1993).

326

Preet Rustagi

Some aspects of womens lives which are only partially indicative of the extent of autonomy they have are captured by the
NFHS-II. This data is used here to emphasise the relative levels of
autonomy women have across these states in the limited spheres
covered (Table 12). NFHS-II information has been collated on
decision-making in certain common spheres of womens daily lives
to assess their autonomy in what to cook, their own healthcare,
purchasing jewellery and similar items, and staying with their
parents/siblings. The extent of mobility and womens ability to
make these choices to go to the market or visit friends/relatives
without having to seek permission to do so are also covered.
A large percentage of women in most states have the freedom
to choose what to cook. Mobility indicators reveal that women
have a very low degree of freedom of movement.

Public Decision-making
Womens participation in public decision-making is gradually improving. In the last eight general elections from 1977 to 1999, 51 to
59 per cent of women have participated as voters. Of the few contestants among women, the winning rate is higher than that of
men (Figure 5).
Figure 5
Number of Contestants and Percentage of Elected
CandidatesVarious Elections

Source: GOI 2001a.

States

Andhra Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Delhi
Goa
Gujarat
Haryana
Himachal Pradesh
Jammu & Kashmir
Karnataka
Kerala
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Manipur
Meghalaya

7.4
1.4
4.6
13.5
5.3
3.6
4.1
3.4
0.8
12.4
8.1
7.2
12.5
7.2
3.3
2.6

% not involved
in any decisionmaking

86.2
93.6
88.4
82.4
83.0
89.9
90.4
93.5
95.1
80.0
88.4
80.9
81.7
87.5
87.4
91.7

What to
cook
56.1
70.0
65.1
47.6
68.7
61.6
71.4
67.2
80.8
55.5
49.3
72.6
36.6
49.9
43.3
78.9

61.4
76.5
54.3
42.9
58.5
62.5
73.6
77.8
93.4
58.2
47.3
63.4
44.3
50.3
66.3
70.6

57.7
74.8
45.4
44.0
46.5
72.4
65.1
64.5
91.4
48.9
44.5
59.7
38.1
44.4
63.2
78.4

% involved in decision-making on:

Purchasing Staying with
Own
jewellery,
her parents/
healthcare
etc.
siblings

Table 12
Womens Autonomy by State

20.1
46.8
13.2
21.7
51.7
66.7
55.1
36.7
32.5
12.0
43.0
47.7
21.0
48.5
28.6
46.5

Go to the
market
14.6
53.7
13.9
20.5
33.9
58.7
50.6
20.8
31.1
7.8
34.3
37.9
19.5
32.1
28.3
48.5

57.7
78.6
35.0
66.7
82.3
82.4
73.6
70.8
80.1
58.1
67.0
66.2
49.3
64.2
76.8
81.5

% with
access
to money

(Table 12 contd.)

Visit friends/
relatives

% who do not need

permission to

Gender-related Development Indicators

l

327

Source: IIPS 2000.

Mizoram
Nagaland
Orissa
Punjab
Rajasthan
Sikkim
Tamil Nadu
Uttar Pradesh
West Bengal
India

States

5.8
0.4
10.6
1.0
13.3
2.7
2.4
16.4
8.0
9.4

% not involved
in any decisionmaking

88.2
97.4
86.3
96.7
82.3
92.1
92.1
77.8
87.4
85.1

What to
cook
73.2
69.4
38.6
78.5
40.6
60.2
61.1
44.8
45.1
51.6

77.8
77.3
54.8
75.3
42.7
57.9
67.4
41.4
48.4
52.6

77.0
80.0
48.3
67.6
39.3
56.7
62.4
36.1
46.7
48.1

% involved in decision-making on:

Purchasing Staying with
Own
jewellery,
her parents/
healthcare
etc.
siblings
64.2
17.3
18.2
50.1
19.0
38.2
78.5
17.4
17.8
31.6

Go to the
market
59.5
20.1
15.4
28.0
17.0
41.6
55.9
12.4
14.1
24.4

Visit friends/
relatives

% who do not need

permission to

55.0
27.9
46.3
78.3
40.5
78.9
79.0
52.3
51.4
59.6

% with
access
to money

(Table 12 contd.)

328
Preet Rustagi

Gender-related Development Indicators

329

Panchayati Raj Institutions

Nearly a million women have gained entry at different levels of
governance through a policy of reservation of one-third seats for
women in village level panchayats and urban municipalities. This
space in local governance structures has been created in the 1990s
by the 73rd and 74th Amendment to the Constitution of India
(Kasturi 1999; Mazumdar et al. 2001). Opportunities for women
to participate in local politics have opened up to allow them to
advance the interests of the local people, especially women and
children. Despite cases of misuse and the incidence of proxy members and sarpanches, there have been encouraging results, more
gender-just developments and hope for the empowerment of
women (Buch 2000; Institute of Social Science 19952001). Only
the future will reveal whether this can be sustained. The bill on
reservations for women in Parliament is stuck in the pipeline for
the last few years, not yet accepted by a male-dominated Parliament (see John 1999; Kasturi 1999; Raman 1999 for discussions on
the proposed bill).
Safety and Security
The extent of violence in a society and crimes against women reflect
how secure women feel and how safe they actually are. To live life
with dignity is a basic necessity for all people, including women.
Placed on the wrong side of power and hierarchies, women often
face the brunt of violence. Since they are viewed as the property
of the men in their lives, whose responsibility it is to protect them,
conflict between men and women over any issue provokes violence
against women (Centre for Womens Development Studies 2002;
Gurumurthy 1998; International Centre for Research on Women
1999). The fear of violence permeates all spheres and persons of
all ages, proving to be a severe hindrance to womens capacitybuilding and attainment of their potential. How safe and secure a
place is considered by women and society at large affects girls
education, their mobility, employment, skill enhancement, incomeearning capacity and political participation. Discrimination and
neglect in different spheres of their lives can also be considered
forms of violence. Violence assumes various forms, not all of which
are quantifiable.

330

Preet Rustagi

The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) collates information based on police records of different crimes on an annual basis.
Crimes against women (CAW) under the Indian Penal Code (IPC)
include dowry deaths, rape, molestation, sexual harassment, cruelty
by husband and his relatives and kidnapping and abduction of
women and girls.

Crimes against Women (CAW)

Crimes against women have been increasing at a higher rate than
crimes overall. Between 1998 and 1999, CAW increased from 123
to 127 cases per million persons (Table 13), while the total cognisable crime rate declined from 1,837 to 1,823 over the same period.
Table 13
States/UTs Ranked by Crime Rates against
Women in 1998 and 1999
States
Rajasthan
Madhya Pradesh
Mizoram
Haryana
Jammu & Kashmir
Andhra Pradesh
Kerala
Arunachal Pradesh
Maharashtra
Gujarat
Assam
Himachal Pradesh
India
Orissa
Uttar Pradesh
Tamil Nadu
Tripura
West Bengal
Karnataka
Punjab
Goa
Sikkim
Bihar
Manipur
Meghalaya
Nagaland

Rank 1999

1999

Rank 1998

1998

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

231
206
171
152
184
143
153
123
151
139
130
134
123
121
103
83
102
89
74
53
61
75
54
39
33
18

1
2
4
6
3
8
5
12
7
9
11
10

246
221
176
166
165
161
154
148
144
140
138
135
127
124
101
100
98
90
81
66
58
56
53
29
25
11

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Source: NCRB (relevant years).

13
14
17
15
16
19
22
20
18
21
23
24
25

Gender-related Development Indicators

331

However, CAW constitutes only 6 per cent of total crimes. The

low share of CAW as a proportion of total crimes may also be due
to low reportage.
Women often face violence at the hands of their so-called
protectors (Centre for Womens Development Studies 2002).
Among crimes against women, cruelty by the husband and his
relatives as defined by Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)
consistently tops the list, followed by molestation. Cruelty/torture
cases constitute 36 per cent, while the figure for molestation is 26
per cent of total CAW (Figure 6). The crimes that have increased the
most are sexual harassment and cruelty at home (Figure 7).
Figure 6
Components of Crimes against Women
India 1999

Source: NCRB 1999.

The decline in the dowry death rate over the years 1998 to 1999
cannot be seen as a reduction in the incidence of dowry-related
violence. The incidence of female deaths classified as suicide or
accidental deaths by burns are very useful in this context. Many
womens organisations, concerned groups or individuals highlight
the false categorisation of female murders as suicides or accidents
(Vimochana 1999; Viswanathan 2001). Eleven per cent each of
all accidental deaths and suicides in India are by fire. Womens
deaths by fire comprise an exceptionally high share of this figure
(Table 14).

332

Preet Rustagi
Figure 7
Percentage Change in Crime Rates per Million Persons
199899

Source: NCRB, 1998 and 1999.

Table 14
Accidental Deaths and Suicides by Fire (2000)
Category

Males

Females

Accidental deaths by fire

Suicides by fire/self-immolation

7,531
3,904

17,936
7,701

Source: NCRB 2000, Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India.

Efforts are being made to improve institutional mechanisms and

to sensitise police personnel to approach and judge these cases
more carefully. Various channels are being developed for obtaining
the assistance of concerned groups.
Crime rates based on recorded data available with the police
differ widely from state to state. Crimes against women are the
highest in Rajasthan with a rate of 246 cases per million persons.
This is followed by Madhya Pradesh (221) and Mizoram (176) in
1999.
Mizoram and Madhya Pradesh recorded particularly high rates
of rape and molestation. Torture and the killing/burning of women
are prominent among the northern states of Haryana, Uttar Pradesh,
Punjab and Rajasthan.
Reportage of crimes against women has been low due to the social
taboos associated with them. Nevertheless, a greater number of
cases are being reported now. More effort is required to work

Gender-related Development Indicators

333

towards creating an appropriate environment for women to be

able to access the institutional structures that exist to assist them.

Concluding Remarks

Each individual indicator has its own significance in measuring

gender development or backwardness. When a set of indicators is
used to measure one particular dimension of womens status, say
survival, each indicator under this broad headsuch as sex ratio,
mortality rate, life expectancy and so onwill have a distinct body
of information to convey, with patterns diverging for each state.
Often, puzzlingcontradictions occur within each state. Thusa
state may be shown as advanced as well as backward, its profile
changing with each individual indicator used. The use ofseveral
indicatorsto reveal womens statuson one dimensionthus providesa more nuanced picture in all its complexity. For example
in Maharashtra, a relatively prosperous state, the child sex ratio is
clearly in favour of males with fewer females than the Indian average. Yet the female infant mortality rate is far lower than what prevails inmany other states. Among the states with lowerchild sex
ratios, such as Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan and Gujarat, the level
of female infant mortality is also high, underscoring the grim
picture. Another example to illustrate the complexity of ground
realities (justifying the use of individual rather than composite
indices) is in the measurement of the educational status of females
in different states. In the northeastern states of Meghalaya, Mizoram
and Nagaland, the female literacy levels are above average and
the gap in literacy levels strikingly low; however, enrolment rates
for girls as they grow beyond the age group of 611 years and
move into the 1114 years age group decline drastically. The
dropout rates for girls at the primary school level in these states
are also fairly high. A third example is Keralaotherwise a
developed state with positive indicators in terms of literacy, health
and sex ratioswhere there is much scope for improvement in
the areas of womens work, womens autonomy and crimes against
women (Panda 2003; Visaria 1993).
A truer, more refined picture calls fordifferent approaches and
remedies to bridge gender imbalances in different spheres within
states. This article seeks to emphasise that clubbing together different variables to provide a composite index to depict a particular
aspect of womens development does not reveal the contradictions

334

Preet Rustagi

that would require each state to have its own individual policy to
achieve gender development and gender equality within its borders. For each state is advanced as well as backward in clear-cut
ways.
State-level analysis as undertaken in this article illustrates the
usefulness of individual gender development indicators to identifya particular problem or constraint requiring specific remedial
policy interventions. Since states fare differently according to different indicators evenwithinbroad heads such as education and
survival, it is more than clear that development has generally
followed a non-linear path. A detailed examination of womens
development using different indicators even at district level and
below to elicit specific information is essential to understand, then
strategise, plan and formulate new programmes as well as implement existing government policies effectively. To improve the
status of women in different regions and locales in India, specific
interventionsvarying from state to statebased on specific needs
and priorities should be the order of the day.

Notes
1. Alternatively, gender is a relational term used to signify aspects pertaining
to both men and women. Some scholars view this as a physical descriptive
term and the tendency to use it to connote gender relations is considered
erroneous. These advocates of womens equality still consider the shift from
women to gender as tokenism, meaningless and, even more strongly, as
erroneous (see Feldman 1998 and references cited therein; Mazumdar et al.
2001). However, another stream of scholars within womens studies as well
as the U.N. agencies (which spearheaded at the international level the movement for gender equality and empowerment) have articulated the shift from
women to gender within development discourse as an advance towards
recognising the power relations within institutional structures that
subordinate women and therefore, need to be transformed for the elimination
of prevailing gender inequalities (see Kabeer and Subrahmanian 1999). In
gender analysis, the problem of the subordination of women is addressed
and womens backwardness in different spheres is considered both individually and relative to men. As Kabeer (1994: xiii) states Just as a class analysis can be used to understand and address the problems of the poor, so too
a gender analysis can be used to understand and address the problems of
womens subordination. Similarly, gender-related development indicators
are used to reflect the situation of women per se as well as to assess their
relative position vis--vis men. For purposes of analysis here in this article,

Gender-related Development Indicators

2.

3.

4.

5.

335

the two terms are used interchangeably to refer to womens subordination,

gender discrimination and biases against women that stem from patriarchal
mindsets entrenched within social, economic, political and cultural institutions. Since the focus is on measuring inequalities through a range of indicators to illustrate the need for adoption of individual indicators of womens
status for understanding the extent of gender-related backwardness, the
discussion pertaining to the changing terminologies and their meanings is
beyond the scope of this article.
Gender backwardness is a term used to connote womens poor status measured by selected indicators in one sphere or area, denoting the opposite of
gender development. The term gender development gained coinage while
questioning the assumption of gender neutrality in development thinking
and planning. The shift from addressing womens specific (practical and
strategic) needs through policy intervention in planned development (either
WID or WAD) to gender and development (GAD) recognises the need for
transforming power relations embedded in institutional structures to make
possible a process of transformation and the realisation of equality/empowerment. It is from this point of view that the two terms gender development
and womens development are used interchangeably here.
It must be stated here that the term gender development differs from the
GAD approach, for while the former highlights the importance of engendering human development without which it is endangered (United Nations
Development Programme 1995), the latter signifies the institutionalised basis
of male power and privilege within which the relational dynamics of gender
inequality in the development process need to be analysed. Gender development focuses on enhancing capabilities for improving womens participation
in development and ensuring that women share the benefits of development
equally too. This may be further extended to mean that women must be recognised as individual entities with their own sets of rights.
The spearheading role of the United Nations and its agencies along with
other international and national efforts in generating awareness of gender
inequalities, measuring gender gaps in education, health, work, income, and
so on together with making efforts to identify and fill data gaps by advocating
more gender disaggregated information from different sources needs to be
acknowledged. These efforts include setting objectives/targets in different
spheres that are viewed as critical for womens development and movement
towards gender equality. These form the basis for advocacy with national
governments and many of these have been successfully adopted in policies/
programmes for improving the status of women and their empowerment (a
term that has gained coinage in the 1990s) (see Agrawal and Rao 2004).
In the choice of indicators, this plays a critical role. It is not always obvious
which is the most appropriate indicator to depict a particular concern. For
instance, when considering whether sex ratio or life expectancy is the appropriate indicator for survival, life expectancy was found to be more acceptable
and included in the composite indices [Physical Quality of Life Index (PQLI)
as well as in the Human Development Index (HDI)]. Currently, however, in
South Asian countries as well as in some East Asian countries such as China
and South Korea where the female to male sex ratios are declining, especially

336

6.

7.

8.

9.
10.
11.
12.
13.

Preet Rustagi

among child populations, the sex ratio as an indicator is increasingly favoured.

However, in this article value-based choice and prioritising of indicators is
not being discussed. Rather, the author is supporting a multiple indicator
approach that can accommodate as many dimensions as data makes feasible.
Even a simple correlation coefficient calculated among different indicators
of womens status reveals this variation: among the indicators denoting survival status, child sex ratios (CSR) and infant mortality rate among females
(IMRF) have a low insignificant correlation. However, the gap between males
and females in infant mortality rates (IMRD) correlate significantly with CSR
(0.629**). The IMRF and IMRD indicators do not exhibit a significant correlation, strengthening the point regarding use of individual indicators both
for attainment levels and gender gap measurement to assess womens status.
These observations are for readers who prefer statistical measurements to
substantiate the analysis offered in the article. I would like to emphasise that
composite indices using variables which have very dissimilar patterns can
result in extremely confusing conclusions.
The data sources used for various gender development indicators have been
procured from the Registrar Generals officethe Census of India, Sample
Registration System (SRS), and information collected by the Vital Statistics
Division; the Central Statistical Organisation (CSO); the National Family
Health Survey (NFHS); the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB); and
the Election Commission of India (ECI). Other sources include various departments and ministries of the Government of India, such as the Department of
Family Welfare, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare; Ministry of Rural
Development, Directorate General of Employment and Training (DGE&T)
in the Ministry of Labour and so on.
A number of tasks women perform have either remained outside the definition of economic activities or remain invisible since enumerators are not
clued in to notice these tasks. The labour contributed by women to subsistence
production, for instance in tasks such as drying, husking, winnowing and
parboiling thus remains invisible (see Bardhan 1985; Feldman 1998).
This innovative exercise was designed to test the validity and usefulness of
undertaking an independent time use survey in six regionally representative
Indian states.
The correlation coefficient among female literacy and work participation
levels is insignificantly low.
The Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan envisages achieving the goal of Universal Elementary Education by 2010 (Mehta 1998; Ministry of Human Resource
Development 2000).
The likelihood of female infants not surviving beyond the age of one year
among every 1,000 female babies is calculated and is known as the female
infant mortality rate.
BIMARU (meaning sick or ailing in Hindi) refers to the backward states
of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh.

Gender-related Development Indicators

337

References
Agnihotri Gupta, Jyotsna. 2000. New Reproductive Technologies, Womens Health
and Autonomy. New Delhi: Sage.
Agnihotri, S.B. 1999. Inferring Gender Bias from Mortality DataA Discussion
Note, Journal of Development Studies, 35(4): 175200.
. 2000. Sex Ratio Patterns in the Indian PopulationA Fresh Exploration. New
Delhi: Sage.
Agarwal, Bina. 1985. Work Participation of Rural Women in Third WorldSome
Data and Conceptual Biases, Economic and Political Weekly, 20(5152):
A-15564.
Agrawal, Rashmi and B.V.L.N. Rao. 2004. Gender IssuesA Road Map to Empowerment. New Delhi: Shipra.
Banerjee, N. and Devaki Jain. 2001. Indian Sex Ratio through Time and Space:
Development from Womens Perspective, in Vina Mazumdar and
N. Krishnaji (eds.), Enduring Conundrum, pp. 73119. New Delhi: Rainbow
Publishers.
Bardhan, Kalpana. 1985. Womens Work, Welfare and Status: Forces of Tradition
and Change in India, Economic and Political Weekly, 20(50, 5152): 220720
and 226169.
Bardhan, Pranab K. 1982. Little Girls and Death in India, Economic and Political
Weekly, 17(36): 144850.
Baster, N. 1972. Development Indicators: An Introduction, in N. Baster (ed.),
Measuring Development, pp. 120. London: Frank Cass.
Basu, A. 1989. Is Discrimination in Food Really Necessary for Explaining Sex
Differentials in Childhood Mortality?, Population Studies, 43(2): 193210.
. 1992. Culture, the Status of Women and Demographic Behaviour. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
Basu, A. and K. Basu. 1991. Womens Economic Roles and Child Survival: The
Case of India, Health Transition Review, 1(1): 83103.
Batliwala, S., B.K. Anita, A. Gurumurthy and C.S. Wali. 1998. Status of Rural Women
in Karnataka. Bangalore: National Institute of Advanced Studies.
Bhat, P.N. Mari. 2002a. On the Trail of Missing Indian FemalesI: Search for
Clues, Economic and Political Weekly, 37(51): 510518.
. 2002b. On the Trail of Missing Indian FemalesII: Illusion and Reality,
Economic and Political Weekly, 37(52): 524463.
Bhatia, Rajesh. 2002. Measuring Gender Disparity Using Time-Use Statistics,
Economic and Political Weekly, 37(33): 346469.
Boserup, Ester. 1970. Womens Role in Economic Development. New York: St. Martins
Press.
Buch, Nirmala. 2000. Womens Experience in New Panchayats: The Emerging
Leadership of Rural Women. Occasional Paper No. 35. New Delhi: Centre
for Womens Development Studies.
Census of India. 1991 and 2001. Provisional Population Totals. Registrar General of
India. New Delhi: Government of India.

338

Preet Rustagi

Centre for Womens Development Studies. 2002. Crimes against Women: Bondage
and BeyondRevelation of Data. New Delhi: Centre for Womens Development Studies.
Chaudhri, D.P. 1999. Female Child Labour and Gender Bias in School Education
in Indian States: 19611991, in T.S. Papola and A.N. Sharma (eds.), Gender
and Employment in India, pp. 27895. New Delhi: Vikas.
Clark, Alice. 1987. Social Demography of Excess Female Mortality in India: New
Directions, Economic and Political Weekly, 22(17): WS1221.
Dasgupta, Monica. 1987. Selective Discrimination against Female Children in
Rural Punjab, India, Population and Development Review, 13(1): 7799.
Dasgupta, Monica and P.N. Mari Bhat. 1997. Fertility Decline and Increased
Manifestation of Sex Bias in India, Population Studies, 51: 30715.
. 1998. Intensified Gender Bias in India: A Consequence of Fertility Decline, in M. Krishnaraj et al. (eds.), Gender, Population and Development,
pp. 7393. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Datta, Anindita. 2003. Articulation of an Integrated Womens Health Policy Using
the Life Cycle Approach, Indian Journal of Gender Studies, 10(1): 2543.
Drewnowski, J. 1977. Poverty, its Meaning and Measurement, Development and
Change, 8(2): 183208.
Duvvury, Nata. 1998. Women and Agriculture in the New Economic Regime, in
M. Krishnaraj, Ratna M. Sudarshan and Abusaleh Shariff (eds.), Gender,
Poverty and Development, pp. 22344. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Dyson, Tim and N. Crook. 1984. Indias Demography: Essays on Contemporary
Population. New Delhi: South Asian Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
Feldman, Shelley. 1998. Conceptualising Change and Equality in the Third
World Contexts, in Nelly P. Stromquist (ed.), Women in the Third World
An En-cyclopedia of Contemporary Issues, pp. 2436. New York: Garland
Publishing.
George, Sabu, Rajarathram Abel and B.D. Miller. 1992. Female Infanticide in
Rural South India, Economic and Political Weekly, 27(22): 115356.
Gopalan, Sarla. 2002. Towards EqualityThe Unfinished Agenda: Status of Women
in India2001. National Commission for Women. New Delhi: Government
of India.
Gopalan, Sarla and Mira Shiva. 2000. National Profile on Women, Health and Development. New Delhi: Voluntary Health Association of India (compiled for WHO).
Government of India. 1974. Towards Equality. Report of the Committee on the
Status of Women in India. New Delhi: Ministry of Education and Social
Welfare.
. 1988. ShramshaktiReport of the National Commission on Self-Employed
Women and Women in the Informal Sector. Delhi: Government of India.
. 2000. Central Statistical Organisation. Report of the Time Use Survey. New
Delhi: Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation.
. 2001a. Women and Men in India 2000. Central Statistical Organisation,
Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. New Delhi: Government of India.
. 2001b. Employment and Unemployment in India 19992000, National Sample
Survey 55th Round. Ministry of Statstics and Programme Implementation.
New Delhi: Government of India.

Gender-related Development Indicators

339

Government of India. 2001c. Selected Educational Statistics (as on 30 September

1999)19992000. New Delhi: Department of Secondary Education and
Higher Education, Planning, Monitoring and Statistics Division, Ministry
of Human Resources Development.
Gurumurthy, Anita. 1998. Womens Rights and StatusQuestions of Analysis and
Measurement. Gender in Development, Monograph Series No. 7. New Delhi:
UNDP.
Haddad, L. and R. Kanbur. 1990. How Serious is the Neglect of Intra-Household
Inequality?, The Economic Journal, 100: 86688.
Hilhorst, J.G.M. and M. Klatter (eds.). 1985. Social Development in the Third World
Level of Living Indicators and Social Planning. London: Croomhelm.
Hirway, Indira. 2001. Understanding Childrens Work in India: An Analysis of
their Time Use, Paper presented in Workshop on Food Security and Child
Work in Rural India organised by World Food Programme and Institute
for Human Development, New Delhi, 1517 March.
. 2002. Employment and Unemployment Situation in the Nineties: How
Good are the NSS Data?, Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 45(1): 6987.
Hirway, Indira and Darshini Mahadevia. 1996. Critique of Gender Development
IndexTowards an Alternative, Economic and Political Weekly, 31(43):
WS8796.
Institute of Social Science. 19952001. Women and Political Empowerment Series.
New Delhi: Institute of Social Science.
International Centre for Research on Women. 1999. Domestic Violence in India: A
Summary Report of Three Studies. Washington DC: International Centre for
Research on Women.
International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS). 1995. National Family Health
Survey (MCH and Family Planning) India 199293. Mumbai: IIPS.
. 2000. National Family Heath Survey (NFHS-II)199899India. Mumbai:
IIPS.
Jejeebhoy, Shireen J. 1993. Family Size, Outcomes for Children and Gender
DisparitiesCase of Rural Maharashtra, Economic and Political Weekly,
28(35): 181121.
John, Mary E. 1999. Democracy, Patriarchies and Reservations for Women: A
Note, Indian Journal of Gender Studies, 6(1): 14549.
Joseph, Cherian and K.V. Eswara Prasad (eds.). 1995. Women, Work and Inequality
The Reality of Gender. Noida: V.V. Giri National Labour Institute.
Kabeer, Naila. 1994. Reversed RealitiesGender Hierarchies in Development Thought.
New Delhi: Kali for Women.
Kabeer, Naila and Ramya Subrahmaniam (eds.). 1999. Institutions, Relations and
OutcomesA Framework and Case Studies for Gender-Aware Planning. New
Delhi: Kali for Women.
Kalpagam, Uma. 1999. Women, Work and Domestic Duties: Income Planning
for Housewives, Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 42(4): 56780.
Kanitkar, I. 1991. The Sex Ratio in India: A Topic for Speculation and Research,
Journal of Family Welfare, 37(3): 1822.
Karlekar, Malavika (ed.). 2000. Reading the World: Understanding the Literacy Campaigns in India. Mumbai: Asian South Pacific Bureau of Adult Education.

340

Preet Rustagi

Kasturi, Leela. 1999. Pernicious or Necessary, Indian Journal of Gender Studies,

6(1): 12328.
Kelley, A.C. 1991. The Human Development Index: Handle with Care, Population
and Development Review, 17(2): 31524.
Khan, M.E., Richard Anker, S.K. Ghosh Dastidar and Sashi Bairathi. 1988. Inequalities between Men and Women in Nutrition and Family Welfare Services:
An Indepth Enquiry in an Indian Village, Social Action, 38: 398417.
Kishor, S. 1993. May God Give Sons to All: Gender and Child Mortality In India,
American Sociological Review, 54: 24765.
Krishnaji, N. 1997. Human Development IndexA Critique, Economic and
Political Weekly, 32(35): 22025.
. 2000. Trends in Sex RatioA Review in Tribute to Asok Mitra, Economic
and Political Weekly, 35(14): 116163.
. 2001. The Sex Ratio Debate, in V. Mazumdar and N. Krishnaji (eds.),
Enduring Conundrum: Indias Sex Ratio: Essays in Honour of Asok Mitra, pp.
2835. Delhi: Rainbow.
Krishnaji, N. and K.S. James. 2002. Gender Differentials in Adult Mortality with
Notes and Rural-Urban Contrasts, Economic and Political Weekly, 37(46):
463337.
Levinson, F.J. 1974. Morinda: An Economic Analysis of Malnutrition among Young
Children in Rural India. Cambridge, Massachussetts: MIT/Cornell University Press.
Mazumdar, V. 1994. Amniocentesis and Sex Selection, CWDS Occasional Paper 21.
New Delhi: Centre for Womens Development Studies.
Mazumdar, V. and N. Krishnaji (eds.). 2001. Enduring Conundrum: Indias Sex Ratio:
Essays in Honour of Asok Mitra. Delhi: Rainbow.
Mazumdar, V., K. Sharma, N. Buch and C.P. Sujaya. 2001. Gender and Governance
A Country PaperIndia. Study commissioned by UNDP. New Delhi: Centre
for Womens Development Studies.
Mehta, Arun C. 1998. Education for All in IndiaEnrolment Projections. New Delhi:
Vikas.
Mencher, Joan P. and K. Saradamoni. 1982. Muddy Feet, Dirty Hands: Rice Production and Female Agricultural Labour, Economic and Political Weekly,
17(52): A14967.
Menon-Sen, Kalyani and A.K. Shiva Kumar. 2001. Women in India: How Free? How
Equal? Report commissioned by the Office of the United Nations Resident
Coordinator in India. New Delhi: UNDP.
Miller, Barbara D. 1981. The Endangered Sex: Neglect of Female Children in Rural
North India. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
Ministry of Human Resource Development. 2000. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan: A Peoples
Movement for Education for All, Draft Guidelines. New Delhi: Government
of India.
Mitra, Asok. 1979. Implications of Declining Sex Ratio in Indias Population. New
Delhi: Allied Publishers.
Morris, D. Morris and Michelle B. McAlphin. 1982. Measuring the Condition of
Indias Poor: The Physical Quality of Life Index. New Delhi: Promilla and Co.

Gender-related Development Indicators

341

Murthi, M., Anne Catherine Guio and Jean Drze. 1995. Mortality, Fertility and
Gender Bias in India: A District Level Analysis, DEP No. 61, June. London:
London School of Economics.
Muthulakshmi, R. 1997. Female InfanticideIts Causes and Solutions. New Delhi:
Discovery Publishing House.
National Crimes Record Bureau (NCRB). 1998. Crime in India. New Delhi: Ministry
of Home Affairs, Government of India.
. 1999. Crime in India. New Delhi: Ministry of Home Affairs, Government
of India.
. 2000. Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India. New Delhi: Ministry of Home
Affairs, Government of India.
Nayar, U. 1993. Universal Primary Education of Rural Girls in India. New Delhi:
National Council for Educational Research and Training.
Nuna, Sheel. 1990. Women and Development. New Delhi: National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration.
Panda, P.K. 2003. Rights-based Strategies in the Prevention of Domestic Violence, Working
Paper 344. Trivandrum: Centre for Development Studies.
Papola, T. S. and A. N. Sharma (eds.). 1999. Gender and Employment in India. New
Delhi: Vikas.
Patel, Vibhuti. 1997. Technology in Service of Female Foeticide, Humanscape,
4(7): 1920.
PROBE. 1999. Public Report on Basic Education in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Qadeer, Imrana. 1998. Reproductive HealthA Public Health Perspective,
Economic and Political Weekly, 33(41): 267584.
Rajivan, Anuradha K. 1998. Engendering Official Data SystemsAt State and
District Levels. Department of Women and Child Development, New
Delhi: Government of India.
Raman, Vasanthi. 1999. Womens Reservation and DemocratisationAn
Alternative Perspective, Economic and Political Weekly, 34(50): 349495.
Rampal, Anita. 1996. Education for a Possible Structural Change, in N. Rao,
Luise Rurup and R. Sudarshan (eds.), Sites of ChangeThe Structural Context
for Empowering Women in India, pp. 26998. New Delhi: UNDP.
Rustagi, Preet. 2000. Identifying Gender Backward Districts Using Selected
Indicators, Economic and Political Weekly, 35(48): 427686.
. 2002. Girl Child Labour: Regional Dimensions and Motivations, Indian
Journal of Labour Economics, 45(3): 46577.
. 2003. Gender Biases and Discrimination against Women: What do Different
Indicators Say? New Delhi: UNIFEM.
Sample Registration System. 2000a. SRS Bulletin, 33(1). New Delhi: Registrar
General of India.
. 2000b. Sample Registration System Statistical Report, 1998. New Delhi:
Registrar General of India.
Sen, A.K. 1992. Inequality Re-examined. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sharma, Kalpana and Ammu Joseph. 1994. Female Foeticide: The Abuse of Technology, in Ammu Joseph and Kalpana Sharma (eds.), Whose News? The
Media and Womens Issues, pp. 6469. New Delhi: Sage.

342

Preet Rustagi

Sonpar, Shobna and Ravi Kapur. 2001. Non-Conventional IndicatorsGender

Disparities under Structural Reforms, Economic and Political Weekly, 36(1):
6678.
Srinivasan, K. (ed.). 1996. Population Policy and Reproductive Health. New Delhi:
Hindustan Publishing Corporation.
Srivastava, Nisha. 1997. Striving for a Toe-hold: Women in the Organised Sector,
Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 40(3): 52743.
Sudha, S. and S. Irudaya Rajan. 1999. Female Demographic Disadvantage in
India 198191: Sex Selective Abortions and Female Infanticide, Development and Change, 30: 585618.
Sunanda, K.S. 1995. Girl Child Born to Die in Killing Fields? Madras: Alternative
for India Development.
Sutton, Margaret. 1998. Feminist Epistemology and Research Methods, in Nelly
P. Stromquist (ed.), Women in the Third WorldAn Encyclopedia of
Contemporary Issues, pp. 1323. New York: Garland Publishing.
Tilak, Jandhyala B.G. 2002. Education Poverty in India, Review of Development
and Change, 7(1): 144.
Timaeus, Ian, Katie Haris and Francesca Fairbairn. 1998. Can Use of Health Care
Explain Sex Differentials in Child Mortality in the Developing World?, in
Too Young To Die: Genes or Gender? pp. 15478. New York: United Nations.
Tinker, Irene (ed.). 1990. Persistent Inequalities. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO).
1981. Women and Development: Indicators of their Changing Role. SocioEconomic Studies 3. Paris: UNESCO.
United Nations. 1998. Too Young To Die: Genes or Gender? Department of Economic
and Social Affairs, Population Division. New York: United Nations.
United Nations Development Programme. 1995. Human Development Report. New
Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Vimochana. 1999. Unnatural Deaths of Women in Marriage: A Campaign Diary.
Bangalore: Vimochana.
Visaria, Leela. 1985. Infant Mortality in IndiaLevels, Trends and Determinants,
Economic and Political Weekly, 20(32, 33, 34): 135292; 13991405; and
144750.
. 1988. Sex Differentials in Nutritional Status and Survival during Infancy
and Childhood: Review of Available Evidence, Paper presented at the
Conference on Womens Position and Demographic Change in the Course
of Development, Asker, Norway, 1518 June.
. 1993. Regional Variations in Female Autonomy and Fertility and Contraception
in India. Working Paper No. 50. Ahmedabad: Gujarat Institute of Development Research.
Visaria, Pravin. 1971. Sex Ratio of the Population of India, Monograph No. 10, Census
of India 1961. New Delhi: Office of the Registrar General.
. 1999. Level and Pattern of Female Employment191194, in T.S. Papola
and A.N. Sharma (eds.), Gender and Employment in India, pp. 2351. New
Delhi: Vikas.

Gender-related Development Indicators

343

Viswanathan, Renuka. 2001. Development, Empowerment and Domestic

ViolenceKarnataka Experience, Economic and Political Weekly, 36(24):
217377.
Waldron, Ingrid. 1976. Why do Women Live Longer than Men?, Social Science
and Medicine, 10: 34962.
. 1998. Sex Differences in Infant and Early Childhood Mortality: Major
Causes of Death and Possible Biological Causes, in Too Young to Die: Genes
or Gender, pp. 6483. New York: United Nations.
Wazir, Rekha (ed.). 2000. The Gender Gap in Basic Education: NGOs as Change Agents.
New Delhi: Sage.
Woolley, F.R. and J. Marshall. 1994. Measuring Inequality within the Household,
Review of Income and Wealth, 40(4): 41532.