The 2001 census in India highlighted interesting facts about the literacy rate in India vis-a-vis the spread across various regions & disparities due to gender.
I. Literacy rate of males is 75.85% while that of females is 54.16%.
- the rate of growth of female literacy over the past decade is heartening. Karnataka grew from 45% literate (females) in 1991 to 54% in 2001. While males grew less spectacularly from 67% to 75%.
- Urban is better than rural. Urban areas have almost 20% greater literacy rates. The urban poor, miserable as they seem, are better off than their rural brethren. To give an example: Bangalore-Urban in 2001 had total literacy of 83.91% (88% male, 79% female), while Bangalore-Rural had 65% (74% male, 55% female). Clearly, urbanisation bodes well for reducing the gender-equality gap.
II. The disparity between states although well known, is still staggering. Bihar is the equivalent of sub-Saharan Africa in terms of statistics on development and its associated benefits. The literacy rate is a dismal 47% (60% male, 33% female). In other words, Bihar is half-as literate as western, northern or southern parts of India. Moreoever, its women have it worse. Roughly 20 million of Bihari women are illiterate. For comparison purposes that's like stating that the whole of Iraq (pop 25M) is illiterate.
- Even in Bihar, urbanisation has helped. Patna has a literacy level of 63% (73% male, 52% female). i.e. a 20% jump for females when compared to the state avg.
III. The 5 best states/UT to be, for a girl child, vis-a-vis literacy rates:
- Kerala - 87%
- Lakshadweep - 81%
- Chandigarh - 76%
- Andaman & Nic - 75%
- Goa/Delhi - 75%
- Bihar - 33%
- Jharkhand - 39%
- Dadra &NH - 42%
- UP - 42%
- Arunachal - 44%
IV. As shocking as it may seem, slums in urban India have a higher literacy rate than (regular) rural India. [The govt is rechecking stats for Patna and Lucknow since the reported stats are dubious. Officially, only 1500 persons live in slums in Patna and no one in Lucknow!]
The nation does have a long road ahead of it. Clearly, access to education in and of itself is not the sole factor. There are other factors at play: feudalism, non-urbanization (evidenced in the Economist articles as well) that is prolonged by agro-subsidies, supersition, and gender inequality. For instance, the high stats of Kerala could possibly be attributed to the benefits of a matriarchal society.
The timing of the two census (censi?) is very relevant. While 1991 was the fag-end of a more-or-less closed economy, 2001 had the post-satellite tv generation. It would be interesting to determine if there is a correlation between that and education (largely as a causal factor attributable to increased aspiration levels).
References
1. Census of India 2001.
2. GIS maps on literacy, pop and other demographics
3.Provisional literacy by state
View comments