News Analysis / Insightful survey
Published on: December 20, 2021
Issues and Aspects of NFHS 5
Context:
The Authors raise some general queries and answer them widely, regarding THE FINDINGS OF the recently released NFHS-5 on population and health indicators.
Editorial Insights:
Findings of the recently released NFHS-5 on population and health indicators have received extensive attention. The finding that there are 1,020 women for 1,000 men, an improvement over the last round of surveys, has led to a wide-ranging conversation.
The finding, of course, has implications for a range of other issues, especially those related to gender equality — they carry pointers for those wishing to gauge the success of government programmes that aim to remove gender-based discrimination. Some have also questioned the data.
It is important to state that the correct interpretation of data has been lacking in both these cases.
Considering the overwhelming anxiety over the reported sex ratio of a surveyed population, it is pertinent to clarify the limitation of generalisations, and caution against drawing firm conclusions while also showing how these surveys help understand certain trends.
The progress in sex ratio as evidenced by the comparison between the last and the latest round of NFHS clearly conveys the improving sex ratio situation in the country. The design of the NFHS, explicated in all final reports that are in the public domain, clearly indicates its representativeness. There is no reason for any misgiving on the ability of NFHS to provide household representativeness.
Facts Regarding NFHS 5
National Family Health Survey 5
Concerns & Confusions:
At the outset, it is important to remember that an indicator like the sex ratio of a surveyed population can never be a replacement for the population sex ratio obtained in a complete enumeration — the Census, for instance— that includes population beyond the household. Household surveys will not capture the population living in institutions — these have more men than women.
The household-based approach of the NFHS might leave out male migrants—though there are possibilities of them getting included in their place of destination if they live in a household.
The sex ratio, characteristics, and composition of a surveyed population are often compared to the Census figures to justify the representational aspects of the survey. But, these sets of figures are by no means comparable.
Considering the overwhelming anxiety over the reported sex ratio of a surveyed population, it is pertinent to clarify the limitation of generalisations, and caution against drawing firm conclusions while also showing how these surveys help understand certain trends.
Way Ahead
Conclusion
Finally, though it is perhaps premature to confirm a balanced sex ratio in India, the NFHS results do indicate progress towards that end.