Available via license: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
DOI: 10.14260/jemds/2014/2569
REVIEW ARTICLE
J of Evolution of Med and Dent Sci/ eISSN- 2278-4802, pISSN- 2278-4748/ Vol. 3/ Issue 19/May 12, 2014 Page 5172
NATIONAL FAMILY PLANNING PROGRAMME – DURING THE FIVE YEAR
PLANS OF INDIA
Drakshayani P. Kongawad1, G. K. Boodeppa2
HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE:
Drakshayani P. Kongawad, G. K. Boodeppa. “National Family Planning Programme – During the Five Year Plans
of India”. Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences 2014; Vol. 3, Issue 19, May 12; Page: 5172-5178,
DOI: 10.14260/jemds/2014/2569
ABSTRACT: India launched a nationwide Family Planning Programmed in 1952. India is the first
country in the world to launch such a programme. A separate department of family Planning was
created in 1966 in the ministry of health. In 1977, the Janata Government formulated a new
population policy ruling out compulsion. The acceptance of the programme was made purely
voluntary. Also the Janata government named the FP dept. as department of family Welfare. The
allocation for these programmes was just 0.1 crore in First Five year plan. It has increased to 6.3
crores merged with health in the eleventh five year plan.
KEYWORDS: Family Welfare.
INTRODUCTION: India is the second most populous country in the world sustaining 16.7 percent as
the world population on 2.4 percent of the world’s surface area. Realizing that high population
growth is inevitable during the initial phases as demographic transition and there is urgent need to
accurate the pace of the transition. India became the first country to formulate a National family
planning programme in 1952. The objective of the policy was “reducing birth rate to the extent
necessary to stabilize the population at a level consistent with requirement of national economy.” The
first five year plan stated that “the main appeal for family planning is based on considerations of
health and welfare of the family. Family limitation or spacing of children is necessary and desirable in
order to secure better health for the mother and better care and upbringing of children. Measures
directed to this end should, therefore, form part of the public health programme.” This statement
preceded the international conference on population and development (ICPD) 1994 by for decades.1
Contents:
1. First five year plan (1951 -1956)
2. Second five year plan (1956 -1961)
3. Third five year plan (1961-1966)
4. Fourth five year plan (1969-1974)
5. Fifth five year plan (1974-1979)
6. Sixth five year plan (1980-1985)
7. Seventh five year plan (1985-1990)
8. Eight five year plan (1992-1997)
9. Ninth five year plan (1998-2002)
10. Tenth five year plan (2002-2007)
11. Eleventh five year plan (2007-2012)
12. References.
DOI: 10.14260/jemds/2014/2569
REVIEW ARTICLE
J of Evolution of Med and Dent Sci/ eISSN- 2278-4802, pISSN- 2278-4748/ Vol. 3/ Issue 19/May 12, 2014 Page 5173
The First Five Year Plan (1951-1956): The population issue has engaged the attention of the
planning Commission. The Draft Outline of the First Plan, published in July 1951, contained a section
on “Population Pressure: Its Bearing on Development”’ which recognized that India had a population
problem. “The increasing pressure of population on natural resources retards economic progress and
limits seriously the rate of extension of social services, so essential to civilized existence. A population
policy is, therefore, essential to planning.”2 The final version of the first Plan reiterated: “The Pressure
of population in India is already so high that a reduction in the rate of growth must be regarded as a
major desiderarum.”3
The Second Five Year Plan (1956-1961): Pointed out that the rate of population increase was one
of the key factors in development and underscored the fact that “a high rate of population growth is
bound to affect adversely the rate of economic advance and living standards per capita. Given the
overall shortage of land and of capital equipment relatively to population as in India, the conclusion is
inescapable that an effective curb on population growth is an important condition for rapid
improvements in income and in levels of living.”4 It is important to note that the planning commission
has never considered a population control programme as an alternative to socio-economic
development. The population pressure was likely to increase; it accepted the need for curbing the
birth rates. “This highlights the need for a large and active programme aimed at restraining
population growth even as it reinforces the case for a massive developmental effort.”5
The Third Five Year Plan (1961-1966): While considering population control in the context of long
term development, stated: “The objective of stabilizing the growth of population over a reasonable
period must therefore be at the very centre of planned development.”6
The Fourth Five Year Plan (1969-1974): Viewed population not only from the point of view of
economic development, but also from that of social change. “Under Indian conditions, the quest for
equality and dignity of man requires as its basis both a high rate of economic growth and a low rate of
population increase. Even far reaching changes in social and economic fields will not lead to a better
life unless population growth is controlled. The limitation of family is an essential and inescapable
ingredient of development.”7
The Draft Fifth Five Year Plan (1974-1979): It concluded: “If family planning is less of a success
than assumed above, the total increase in population would be even larger. It is of the utmost
importance that family planning must achieve at least that much success as has been assumed for the
above projections. Given the needed effort, it is as attainable target.”8
The time and target oriented approach of family planning had been introduced in the fourth
plan had been continued in the fifth plan. The fifth plan had also laid down targets “a target for a birth
rate of 25 per thousand and a population growth rate of 1.4 percent by the end of the sixth plan
period was expected and those targets were expected to be reached”9
The Ministry of health and family planning has introduced a national population policy.in
April 1976, “The policy envisages a series of fundamental measures including raising the age as
marriage, female education, spread of population values and the small family norm, strengthening of
research in reproductive biology and contraception, incentives for individuals, groups and
communities and permitting state legislatures to enact legislation for compulsory sterilization.”10
DOI: 10.14260/jemds/2014/2569
REVIEW ARTICLE
J of Evolution of Med and Dent Sci/ eISSN- 2278-4802, pISSN- 2278-4748/ Vol. 3/ Issue 19/May 12, 2014 Page 5174
The Sixth Five Year Plan (1980-1985): The sixth five year plan laid down the long term
demographic goal of reducing the net reproduction rate (NRR) to one by 1996 for the country as a
whole and by 2001 in all states. The implication of this long –term demographic goals are as follows:
A. Birth rate per thousand population would be reduced from the level of 33 in 1978 to 21.
B. The death rate per thousand population would be reduced from about 14 in 1978 to- 09 and
infant mortality rate would be reduced from 129 to 60 or less.
C. The average size as the family would be reduced from 4.2 children to 2.3 children.
D. As against 22 percent as eligible couples protected in 1979-80, 60 percent would be protected
by the year 1984-85.
E. The population as India will be around 900 million by the turn of the century and will
stabilize at 1200 million by the year 2050 A.D.11
Seventh five year plan 1985-1990: The draft of the seventh five year states that “the family welfare
programme occupied an important position in the socio-economic development plans. It planned a
crucial role in human resources development and in improving the quality of our people. It has
formed an essential and integral part of 20 point programme which stressed the need for promotion
of family programme on a voluntary basis as a people’s movement. The health policy had targeted a
long-term demographic goal of reaching a net reproduction rate of 1 by the year 2000 A.D but a
review as achievements of the sixth plan indicated that this goal could be reached only by the period
2005-2011.A total out lay as Rs.3256 crores was allocated for the family welfare programme during
the seventh plan.12
Eighth five year plan 1992-1997: It was towards human development that health and population
control are listed as two of the six priority objectives of the eighth plan. It was towards this end that
population control. Literacy, Primary health care, provision of adequate food and safe drinking water
employment generation and basic infrastructure were listed as priorities” To reinforce the sense of
urgency and priority, along with the directional paper of eighth plan population control was also
included as an agenda in the meeting of National Development Council held on December 23, 1991
and a Separate paper prepared by the planning commission” the eighth plan clearly recognized if the
present trend of population growth did not halt, it would never be possible to render social and
economic justice to millions of our masses. The eighth plan has targeted to achieve the following
demographic goals by 1997.
A. Crude birth rate 26.1
B. Effective couples protection rate 56.1
C. Infant mortality rate 70.1
D. Literacy rate 75.1
E. Net reproduction rate equal to unity by the period 2011-2016 A.D.
DOI: 10.14260/jemds/2014/2569
REVIEW ARTICLE
J of Evolution of Med and Dent Sci/ eISSN- 2278-4802, pISSN- 2278-4748/ Vol. 3/ Issue 19/May 12, 2014 Page 5175
In order to achieve the targets the govt. had prepared an “Action plan” which had following
features.
Improving the quality of family welfare services.
Introducing a new packing as compensation and incentives with the co-operation of
state Govt.
Initiating innovative programmes in urban slums for propagating family welfare.
Adopting a differentials strategy for focusing attention on 90 districts of the country
where the crude birth rate is above 39 per thousand.
Increasing the involvement as voluntary agencies and private organizations in family
welfare programme.
Linking grants that are provided to state governments for rural development and
poverty alleviation to districts on the basis as their performance in the birth rate.
Reducing a strong preference for a son on part of a family having one or two
daughters by providing social security measures.
During eight plan, a sum as Rs. 6500 crores had been spent on the implementation of the
programme the eight plan envisages a series of incentives and disincentives in order to promote and
popularize the family planning programme. The incentives had been given to the employees of the
central govt. state govt. and public sector undertakings who had accepted two-child family norm.
these incentives included special increments cash award, priority in house building schemes and
grant of leave travel concession benefits disincentives included, restriction on free medical benefits,
no maternity leave no preference in govt. services.13
The govt. of India is the previous had appointed an expert group on national population policy
under the chairmanship as Dr. M S Swaminathan which submitted its reports on 22 may 1994.The
report had suggested a number of sociodemographic goals viz, the programme and the date is used
for mid-course corrections. The Department has drawn up the national population policy 2000(N P
2000).which aims at achieving replacement level of fertility by 2010 and population stabilization by
2045 the national population policy 2000 has set the following goals.14
A. Universal access to quality contraceptive services in order to lower the total fertility Rate to
2.1 and attaining two-child norm.
B. Full coverage of registration of births, deaths and marriage and pregnancy.
C. Universal access to information /counseling and services for fertility regulation and
conception with a wide basket of choices.
D. Infant mortality Rate to reduce below 30per thousand live births and sharp reduction in the
incidence as low births weight (below 2.5kg) babies.
E. Universal immunization as children against vaccine preventable disease, elimination of
tetanus and measles.
F. Promotes delayed marriage for girls, not earlier than age 18 and preferable after 20 years as
age.
G. Achieve 80 percent institutional deliveries and increase in the percentage as deliveries
conducted by trained persons to 100 percent.
H. Containing as sexually transmitted diseases.
DOI: 10.14260/jemds/2014/2569
REVIEW ARTICLE
J of Evolution of Med and Dent Sci/ eISSN- 2278-4802, pISSN- 2278-4748/ Vol. 3/ Issue 19/May 12, 2014 Page 5176
Complete elimination of marriage below the age as 18
Universal immunization of children
Reducing infant mortality rate to 30 per 1000 births or less etc.
Ninth five year plan 1998-2002: Reduction in population growth is one of the major objectives as
the ninth plan during the ninth plan period. The Department of family welfare implemented the
recommendations of the N D C subcommittee. Centrally defined method specific targets for family
planning were abolished. The emphasis shifted to decentralized planning at the district level based on
assessment of community needs and implementation of programmes aimed at fulfillment of these
needs. State specific goals for process and impact parameters for maternal and child health and
contraceptive care were worked out and used for monitoring progress efforts were made to improve
the quality and content of services through training to upgrade skills for all personal and building up
a referral network. A massive pulse polio campaign was taken up to eliminate polio. The department
of family welfare set up a consultative committee to suggest appropriate restructuring as in for
structure funded by the states and the center and revise norms for re-imbursement by the center and
has started implementing the recommendations of the committee monitoring and evaluation had
become a part of the
I. Reduction in maternal mortality Rate to loss than 100per one-lakh live births.
J. Universalization as primary education and reduction in the dropout rates at primary and
secondary levels to below 20 percent both for boys and girls. 15
Tenth five year plan 2002-2007: During the tenth plan. The paradigm shift, which began in ninth
plan, will be fully operationalized. The shift was from.
A. Demographic targets to focusing on enabling couples to achieve their reproductive goals.
B. Method specific contraceptive targets to meeting all the unmet needs for contraception to
reduce unwanted pregnancies.
C. Numerous vertical programmes for family planning and maternal and child to integrated
health care for women and children
D. Centrally defined targets to community need assessment and decentralized area specific
micro planning and implementation of program for health care for women and children, to
reduce infant mortality and reduce high desired fertility.
E. Quantitative coverage to emphasis on quality and content of care.
F. Predominantly women cantered programmes to meeting the health care needs as the family
with emphasis on involvement as men in Planned Parenthood.
G. Supply driven service delivery to the need and demand driven service. Improved logistics for
ensuring adequate and timely supply to meet the needs
H. Providing service provisions as per the choices and conveniences of the couple
The population growth rate continued to be high due to …
The large safe as the population in the reproductive age-group accounting for an estimated 60
percent as the total population on growth.
Higher fertility due to the unmet need for contraceptives (contributing to around 20 percent
of population growth).
DOI: 10.14260/jemds/2014/2569
REVIEW ARTICLE
J of Evolution of Med and Dent Sci/ eISSN- 2278-4802, pISSN- 2278-4748/ Vol. 3/ Issue 19/May 12, 2014 Page 5177
High wanted fertility due to the prevailing high infant mortality Rate and other socio-
economic reasons (estimated contribution as about 20 percent to population growth).
The Tenth plan had fully operationalized efforts to;
1. Assess and meet the unmet needs for contraceptives.
2. Achieve reduction in the high desired level of fertility through programmes for reduction in
IMR and MMR and
3. Enable families to achieve their reproductive goals.
If the reproductive goals of families are fully met the country would be able to achieve the
national population policy replacement level of fertility by 2010.The medium and long term goals will
be to continuing this process to accelerate the pace of demographic transition by 2045.Early
population stabilization on will enable the country to achieve its developmental goal of improving the
economic states and quality of life of the citizens.16
Eleventh five year plan 2007-2011: The 11Th plan will continue to advocate fertility regulation
through voluntary and informed consent.it will also address the special health care needs of the
elderly, especially those who are economically and socially vulnerable.
1. Reduce infant mortality rate to 28 and maternal mortality rate 0 to 1 per 1000 live births
2. Reduce total fertility rate to 2.1
3. Provide clean drinking water for all by 2009 and ensure that there is no slip –backs
Reduce malnutrition among children as age group 0-3to half its present level
Reduce anemia among women and girls by 50% by the end as the plan
Women and children:
Raise the sex ratio for age a group 0-6 to 935 by 2011-12 and to 950 by 2016-17.
Ensure that at least 33 percent of the direct and indirect beneficiaries of all government
schemes are women and girls children
Ensure that all children enjoy a safe childhood, without any compulsion to work.17
Outlay and expenditure as family welfare programme over different plan periods in India
Plan
Out as total Investment outlay
(%)
Total
Health
Family welfare
Ayush
First plan
3.3
0.1
----
3.4
Second plan
3.0
0.1
----
3.1
Third plan
2.6
0.3
----
2.9
Fourth plan
2.1
1.8
----
3.9
Fifth plan
1.9
1.2
-----
3.1
Sixth plan
1.8
1.3
-----
3.1
Seventh plan
1.7
1.4
------
3.1
Eighth plan
1.7
1.5
0.02
3.2
Ninth plan
2.31
1.76
0.03
4. 02
Tenth plan
2.09
1.83
0.05
3.9
Eleventh plan
6.3
merged with Health
0.18
6.5
DOI: 10.14260/jemds/2014/2569
REVIEW ARTICLE
J of Evolution of Med and Dent Sci/ eISSN- 2278-4802, pISSN- 2278-4748/ Vol. 3/ Issue 19/May 12, 2014 Page 5178
Source: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Family Welfare Programme in India Year book, 2011.
Government of India.
REFERENCES:
1. Government of India, Family Welfare Programme In India Year book, Tenth five year plan.
2002-07. P065.
2. Government of India. Planning Commission. The first five –year plan a Draft outline. New Delhi
1951. P16.
3. Government of India. Planning commission. The first five-year plan. New Delhi 1953. P. 23.
4. Government of India, Planning Commission, The second five Year Plan, New Delhi: 1953, p. 7.
5. Government of India, Planning Commission, The second five Year Plan, New Delhi: 1953, p. 7-8.
6. Government as India, Planning Commission, Third Five –Year Plan draft, Report, Vol. II, New
Delhi: 1961, p.12.
7. Government as India, Planning Commission, Fourth Five –Year Plan draft, Outline, , New Delhi:
1969, p. 22.
8. Government as India, Planning Commission, Draft Fifth Five –Year Plan Report, Vol. I, New
Delhi: 1974, p. 2.
9. Government as India, Planning Commission, Fifth Five –Year Plan, New Delhi: 1976, pp. 14-15.
10. Government as India, Planning Commission, Fifth Five –Year Plan, New Delhi: 1976, 15.
11. Government as India, Planning Commission, sixth Five –Year Plan, New Delhi: 1980-85, New
Delhi: 1981, p. 374.
12. Government of India, Planning Commission, seven five Year Plan, New Delhi: 1995-96; Ministry
of Health and Family welfare in India -1997, p.10.
13. Government of India, Planning Commission, Eight five Year Plan, New Delhi: 1997-98 Ministry
of Health and Family welfare in India-1998, p.19.
14. Agrawal, A N (1995). Indian Economy: Problems of development and planning: Wishwa
Prakashan.p.676.
15. S.C. Gulati Demography India Vol. 35, No.2 (2006). pp-177-191.
16. Government of India, Planning Commission, 10 five Year Plan, New Delhi: 2002-07 p.165-166.
17. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Family Welfare Programme in India Year book, 2011.
Government of India.
AUTHORS:
1. Drakshayani P. Kongawad
2. G. K. Boodeppa
PARTICULARS OF CONTRIBUTORS:
1. Research Scholar, Department Sociology,
Karnatak University, Dharwad.
2. Professor and Chairman, Department of
Sociology, Karnatak University, Dharwad.
NAME ADDRESS EMAIL ID OF THE
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR:
Dr. Drakshayani P. Kongawad,
C/o. M. H. Bellad, Ravikiran Building,
Siddeshwar Nagar, 4th Cross,
Sai Nagar, Hubli- 31.
E-mail: drakshyani1981@gmail.com
Date of Submission: 28/02/2014.
Date of Peer Review: 01/03/2014.
Date of Acceptance: 17/03/2014.
Date of Publishing: 09/05/2014.
