Family Planning in Asia and the Pacific - International Council on ...
Family Planning in Asia and the Pacific - International Council on ... Family Planning in Asia and the Pacific - International Council on ...
TableTable11 Total fertility rate
TableTable12 Conditions foster
- Page 108 and 109: likely to use contraception than yo
- Page 110 and 111: 15 Tests of statistical significanc
- Page 112 and 113: of the South <stro
- Page 114 and 115: 104
- Page 116: Figurewill exceed the</stro
- Page 119 and 120: in urban (67%) tha
- Page 121 and 122: ased service delivery poin<
- Page 123 and 124: Most FWAs who were recruited two to
- Page 125 and 126: are considered, unmet need for effe
- Page 127 and 128: Households pay the
- Page 129 and 130: Effective public-private partnershi
- Page 131 and 132: ConclusionThe Bangladesh Fa
- Page 133 and 134: the Family
- Page 135 and 136: National Institute for Population R
- Page 137 and 138: IndiaIndiaFamily <
- Page 139: IntroductionThe use of contraceptiv
- Page 142 and 143: TableTable2Indicators of tra<strong
- Page 144 and 145: FigureFigureFigure1Contraceptive pr
- Page 146 and 147: TableTable5Indicators of contracept
- Page 148 and 149: TableTable6Adjusted odds ratios for
- Page 150 and 151: FigureFigure3Contraceptive prevalen
- Page 152 and 153: TableTable7Adjusted and</st
- Page 154 and 155: the north
- Page 156 and 157: TableTable10Differences between nor
- Page 160 and 161: End Note1The first camp was success
- Page 162 and 163: 152
- Page 164 and 165: 154
- Page 166 and 167: Figure1980s and ex
- Page 168 and 169: health care and ed
- Page 170 and 171: assistance from UNFPA and</
- Page 172 and 173: in CPR. Likewise,
- Page 174 and 175: International supp
- Page 176 and 177: in development has
- Page 178 and 179: __________ (2007). Population <stro
- Page 180 and 181: 170
- Page 182 and 183: TableTable2What has the</st
- Page 184 and 185: 174
- Page 186 and 187: per cent of women reported us<stron
- Page 188 and 189: is provider bias that such methods
- Page 190 and 191: TableTable7skewed distribution of h
- Page 192 and 193: TableTable8TableTable9182
- Page 194 and 195: that of the nation
- Page 196 and 197: TableTable12 7some policies that ex
- Page 198 and 199: The system guides the</stro
- Page 200 and 201: FigureFigure4Total donor expenditur
- Page 202 and 203: FigureFigureagain
- Page 204 and 205: Impact of family plannin</s
- Page 206 and 207: marketing of contr
TableTable11 Total fertility rate <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> percentage decl<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>e, by states <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> India: 1996-2004StateIndiaPanelIndiaPanelTotal fertility rate (TFR)NFHS-1:1990/92NFHS-2:1996/98NFHS-3:2003/05Year 1966 1971 a 1991 1997 20041971to 1991Percentage decl<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> TFR1991to 20041971to 2004Sou<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>rn statesAndhra Pradesh 5.01 4.80 2.60 2.25 1.79 -46.0 -30.9 -62.7Karnataka 5.51 5.50 2.85 2.13 2.07 -48.2 -27.4 -62.4Kerala 4.70 4.49 2.00 1.96 1.93 -55.5 -3.5 -57.0Tamil Nadu 4.66 4.58 2.48 2.19 1.80 -45.9 -27.4 -60.7Nor<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>rn statesBihar 5.62 5.62 4.00 3.49 3.80 -28.8 -5.0 -32.4Madhya Pradesh 6.40 6.16 3.90 3.31 3.10 -36.7 -20.5 -49.7Rajasthan 6.34 6.38 3.63 3.78 3.21 -43.1 -11.6 -49.7Uttar Pradesh 6.45 6.45 4.82 3.99 3.80 -25.3 -21.2 -41.1O<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>r large statesAssam 6.85 6.35 3.53 2.31 2.42 -44.4 -31.4 -61.9Gujarat 5.83 5.97 2.99 2.72 2.42 -49.9 -19.1 -59.5Haryana 6.91 6.64 3.99 2.88 2.69 -39.9 -32.6 -59.5Maharashtra 5.29 4.92 2.86 2.52 2.11 -41.9 -26.2 -57.1Orissa 5.72 5.54 2.92 2.46 2.37 -47.3 -18.8 -57.2Punjab 5.52 5.57 2.92 2.21 1.99 -47.6 -31.8 -64.3West Bengal 5.93 5.93 2.92 2.29 2.27 -50.8 -22.3 -61.7All-India 5.72 5.60 3.39 2.85 2.68 -39.5 -20.9 -52.1Source: India Panel (Bhat et al., 1984); N FHS (IIPS 1995, 2000, 2007).a. Bihar <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> West Bengal TFR for 1966.<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> sou<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>rn states were exposed to televisi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> 25per cent to newspapers <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> comparis<strong>on</strong> to 37 per cent <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>13 per cent <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> nor<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>rn states (Table 10).The four lagg<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>g nor<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>rn states (Bihar, Uttar Pradesh,Rajasthan <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> Madhya Pradesh) may now be ready fora faster fertility transiti<strong>on</strong> because wanted fertility <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g><str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>se states is already close to <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> replacement level <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>because of <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> existence of a substantial unmet need forfamily plann<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>g 13 . What is needed now is wider accessto <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> means of fertility regulati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> c<strong>on</strong>t<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>uati<strong>on</strong> of<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>vestment <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> educati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> health.C<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong>While socially just policies <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> educati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> health areimportant <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>ir own right, we have shown here that<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>re is a synergistic effect of socially just policies <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>educati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> health <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> family plann<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>g programme<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> differential pace of fertility decl<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>e am<strong>on</strong>g states <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>India. The fact that fertility decl<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>ed <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> all states reflects<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> importance of <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> family plann<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>g programme. Thefact that <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> tim<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>g <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> pace of fertility decl<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>e variesacross states reflects <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> importance of state-specific socialsett<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>gs.At <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> nati<strong>on</strong>al level, c<strong>on</strong>traceptive use rose from about 13per cent <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> 1970s to 56 per cent <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> 2005/06 <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> fertilitydecl<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>ed from about 6 births per woman <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> 1960s <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>1970s to about 2.7 <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> 2004. The implementati<strong>on</strong> of <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>family plann<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>g programme has been a critical piece <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>this achievement. Method mix, however, rema<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>s skewedtowards female sterilizati<strong>on</strong>, <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> quality of care alsorema<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>s poor. Even though more couples are us<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>g familyplann<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>g methods to space childbear<str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>g, a more focused<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> c<strong>on</strong>centrated effort is necessary to <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g>crease <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>availability of o<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>r c<strong>on</strong>traceptive methods <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> to improve<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> quality of care.C<strong>on</strong>traceptive use rose <str<strong>on</strong>g>in</str<strong>on</strong>g> all subgroups of <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> populati<strong>on</strong>:uneducated <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> educated, poor <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> rich, <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> rural <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>148