During the 74th independence day speech, the Prime Minister of India mooted about increasing the minimum marriage age for women which is currently set to 18. While a section of the society supported the move, some did express disappointment with the announcement, which is not a surprise. Though marriage is personal to families and individuals, the state made laws specific to it to protect the rights and interests of women who had been vulnerable and deprived of equal opportunities for long, to materialise the ethos of the Constitution of India which vows to secure equal opportunities for all citizens. Let’s retrospect how effective these laws have been and understand the potential challenges for changing the status quo.
Despite enacting laws to prohibit child marriages and dowry, the government of India had to run several social campaigns to bring change in the society. Media, NGOs, semi governmental organisations, social activists-all these played an active role in eliminating child marriages (to a large extent) while dowry is still prevailing more or less. Also, the government introduced monetary benefits like incentives for refraining from performing child marriages. According to UNICEF India’s report in 2018, 27% of girls in India are married before their 18th birthday and 7% are married before the age of 15. The results could have been very negative without complementing laws with measures to bring social change and monetary benefits.
Coming back to the recent announcement by the Prime Minister to increase the marriageable age for girls, the aim of this move is not merely to cause a delay in marriage but to give space and time for girls to attain social and financial independence by getting educated, skilled and employable. The ability to lead a dignified life without depending on others gives an individual the confidence required to protect his/her rights, interests and honour. According to 2011 census data, the median marriage age for women is 19.2 which could have increased by a little, now. By increasing marriageable age, more women would get an opportunity to complete graduation. But, is that the end goal? Are women going to achieve empowerment just by completing education? Let’s look at some reports on enrollment of women in higher education and their participation in the workforce.
According to an analysis by IndiaSpend, the enrolment of women in higher education improved from 39% in 2007 to 46% in 2014 which is a very positive outcome. According to a survey released by the Ministry of Human Resource Development in 2015, women accounted for 46% of the total enrolment in higher education which is an increase of 1.7% from 2012–2013. Despite the improvement, the gross enrolment ratio of women in higher education is 23.6% in 2015 that is lower than the global average of 27%. However, the workforce participation doesn’t show a positive sign. According to IMF data, participation of Indian women in the workforce reduced to 27% in 2014 from 34% in 1999. Ideally, when the ratio of female enrolment in education improves, the ratio in workforce participation is also expected to increase.
According to a study by IMF in 2015, the increased human-capital accumulation which resulted from the increase in female graduates is supposed to boost the potential output. But that’s not happening in India. According to a research by the UN in 2020, India topped in producing female graduates in STEM but ranks 19th in employing them. As many as 40% of STEM graduates are women but only 14% of them are working in the respective fields which show neither the women nor the country is gaining much by the rise in the ratio of female graduates.
If the aim of the new policy to increase marriageable age for women is to improve their ratio in workforce participation, then from the above numbers, it’s clear that a mere increase in access to education need not mean an increase in workforce participation. Employment cannot be coercive. Compelling industries to increase female workforce might lead to undesirable offshoots like reduction in ease of doing business. An implicit and genuine increase in female workforce participation can be brought only through a social change blurring the notion that the primary job of men is breadwinning and that of women is nurturing the family. The choice should rather be left to the individuals and their competencies and this change cannot be brought by laws. Laws cannot invade private spaces of individuals and families in a democratic country.
Another challenge is, one needs enough resources to attain education and skills. A mere increase in marriageable age isn’t going to help. Families with fewer resources coupled with patriarchal mindset might prefer the education of sons over that of daughters. In such a case, women get little to reap from this new policy and incentivising higher education could be draining on fiscal resources. Also, there could be a rise in illegal wedlocks burdening the law enforcement system and rehabilitation infrastructure. One solution to this is introduction of vocational skilling of girls after school and helping them become financially independent at a young age through already existing provisions like self-help groups and schemes like Stree Shakti, Mudra etc.
Late shri Sushma Swaraj once quoted, “There is an urgent need to tackle the ills of society against women through active participation of all-men, women, society, governments. It is imperative to make women empowerment a people’s movement”. In case of abolition of child marriages, the social campaigns and monetary schemes played a huge role. This decision of increasing marriageable age is bound to draw flack from functionalists who believe any change in status quo can result in devaluation of existing institutions and the backslash from society can impede the results. Social change cannot happen only by enforcing laws though they act as guards for the efforts to bring the change. A real change comes from the most non-coercive methods. The best way is to involve all stakeholders of the society and work towards eliminating the root cause. The announcement by the Prime Minister to change the status quo is a bold and positive move which might result in chaos initially but has the potential to bring desired results in the long term given a holistic roadmap and unfeigned execution.
©️ The content of this Article is intellectual property of The 4th Estate and can not be used except with prior written consent of the Editor, The 4th Estate.
