Population census at last: Several pending issues need fresh attention

There was a polarisation of views on getting the caste data included in the Census, with the government taking a negative posture while the Opposition was united in demanding it

The government has announced that the next population census along with caste counting will be done in 2027. The census was due in 2021 but was postponed due to the Covid pandemic. The preparations for the first phase of the Census 2021 were complete, and house listing work was scheduled during April-September 2020 and population count in February 2021. The passage of almost six years would mean that basic exercises would have to begin afresh.

 

There was a polarisation of views on getting the caste data included in the census, with the government taking a negative posture while a united Opposition demanded it. A few states with non-BJP governments went ahead and collected caste data covering almost their total population. These, however, have been called surveys, as constitutionally, only the central government can conduct a census. Their results have been subjects of controversy, putting in doubt their use in programmatic interventions. Also, the confidentiality clause of the Census Act, 1948, would imply that no validation of poverty status can be done through community participation, as was done in the Socio Economic Caste Census (SECC), which was conducted outside the Act in 2012. 

The decision by the central government to conduct a caste census piggybacking on the population census has generally been welcomed. Not collecting caste data in the post-Independence period is not accidental, but results from a policy of wilful and avowedly well-intentioned side-tracking of the caste issue. This has resulted in a majority of castes lower down in hierarchy being bypassed for six decades of “caste-blind development” and that “the practical difficulties of caste enumeration were exaggerated”, it is argued. 

The situation was very different when the UPA government had announced conducting the SECC in 2011. There was a good deal of concern and even resentment among political parties, academics, and media, describing it as “the curse of caste”, “competitive casteism”, “surrendering to populism”, etc. A segment among the researchers has supported the caste count, but argued that the data should be collected through a large-scale survey, outside the census operation. Given the conflicting perspectives, it would be important to probe into the operational issues of conducting the census. 

There was no plan to include the caste question in the 2021 census. But the government had announced that the National Population Register (NPR) would be updated from census data, paving the way for the preparation of a National Register of Citizens (NRC). The home minister had noted that in the chronology, the NPR would be the base document to prepare the NRC, an exercise earlier carried out in Assam with no useful outcome. This had raised concerns on the quality of census data, as it was feared that using the census data for a citizens’ register would impact the responses. The previous NPR was based on the 2011 census and supposed to have been updated in 2015, though none of these is in public domain. The home minister on 23rd July 2014 had stated in the Rajya Sabha, that an electronic database of 1.18 billion people was prepared in the NPR from the 2011 census. The 2011 census had enumerated 1.21 billion people. Together with the likely undercount of another 30 million in the census, this would suggest that close to 60 million people were missed in this NPR exercise last time. This problem of missing population remains unresolved. 

Operationalising the inclusion of caste question in the population census at national level, as announced now, would be a major challenge, as the experience of SECC and state-level surveys would be of limited validity. The caste data of SECC had to be dumped as the list of castes was not predetermined and people mentioned their caste based on their own understanding (often mentioning occupation or activity), using their own language and spelling, resulting in the total number running into millions. It would therefore be important to prepare the lists of castes for OBC and general population. 

The approach followed for recording caste status for SC and ST population has been state specific. For example, while Delhi has a substantial Scheduled Caste (SC) population, it does not have any officially recognised Scheduled Tribe (ST) population according to the census. The 2011-12 National Sample Survey, however, identified roughly half a million people in Delhi based on their self-reporting. These individuals are most likely migrants from other parts of India where their ST status is recognised. This approach can be accepted in preparing the lists for OBC. A person who identifies as OBC should select her caste from the central list or that of the state where she is being enumerated. 

A state-level list of castes must mention all the existing ones in that state and be manageable. The list should be inclusive, so that no one gets excluded because of a minor spelling or linguistic variation, to the extent possible. Understandably, it would be a challenge to prepare the central list and those specific to states. With substantial inter-state migrants, the de-facto approach followed for the census will be under stress for counting caste-wise population. 

Having said this, it is also an occasion to pay close attention to the data content in the census schedules. In the past, the census office has valiantly attempted to gather information that is clearly outside its competence such as gathering data on economic activity and industry occupation details of citizens or details of their physical disabilities. With substantial progress in housing amenities like drinking water provisions and electrification, one can question the need of the census to expend their resources on collecting these details.

Amitabh Kundu is a senior advisor in Development Alternatives, and P C Mohanan was acting chairperson at the National Statistical Commission