India’s Occupational Transformation: A Tale of Two Escalators

India’s rapid expansion in higher education has coincided with stagnant growth in skilled, white-collar jobs, leading to hyper-competition and underemployment among graduates. Using panel data from the India Human Development Survey (IHDS), this chapter tracks 12,084 young men between 2004–05 and 2011–12 to assess whether college degrees facilitate access to white-collar employment beyond background advantages. Applying a propensity-score stratification framework, the study examines heterogeneous returns to higher education across social origins. In sharp contrast to US patterns where marginalized individuals gain the most from higher education, the occupational benefits of a college degree in India are heavily concentrated among the already privileged. Interestingly, non-graduates from the highest-propensity backgrounds secure white-collar jobs at higher rates than college-educated men from disadvantaged backgrounds. Thus, while education offers an occupational escalator out of casual work, it moves faster for the privileged, reinforcing existing socioeconomic inequalities.

Create the right digital ecosystem for children

While enhancing online safety, opportunities to learn, connect and develop digital capabilities must be preserved

The debate over children’s access to social media has entered a new phase worldwide. Governments are moving towards age restrictions, while technology companies are being pushed to strengthen age assurance, parental controls and safer platform design. Meta, in a US lawsuit, has agreed to introduce features for teens to address concerns around addiction and excessive screen time. In India, the Supreme Court recently sought the Centre’s response to a petition seeking safeguards against minors independently maintaining social-media accounts.

The concern is legitimate: children need protection online. But as India considers its response, it should also consider whether a blanket social media ban could deepen existing digital inequalities and widen gaps in children’s opportunities to participate meaningfully online.

Use of social media

For much of the past decade, India’s digital agenda has focused on narrowing the access divide through affordable mobile internet and smartphones. A recent report (Ganguly et al., 2026), based on the India Human Development Survey (IHDS-3, 2022-24), shows that 95.1 per cent of households own a mobile phone. Yet access to, and participation in, the digital world remain unequal among children and teenagers.

For many young people, social media and other online platforms are spaces for communication, information, creativity and social connection.

At the same time, India lacks evidence on how children use social media and which online experiences are harmful. ASER 2024 reports that 57 per cent of rural adolescents aged 14-16 who can use a smartphone used it for an education-related activity in the preceding week, but it does not identify the platforms used. The same platforms can serve educational and recreational purposes, making the boundary between “useful” and “harmful” online experiences less clear-cut.

The inequalities become clearer in social media use. The IHDS-3 report shows that among children aged 13-16 years, 65.3 per cent have access to a mobile device, 37.8 per cent use the internet, and 21.3 per cent use social media. Social media use is higher among boys than girls (26.4 per cent versus 16 per cent) and declines sharply from metropolitan areas (30.7 per cent) to rural India (18.5 per cent). It increases steadily with parental education.

Children do not begin their digital lives from the same starting line. A teenager from a metropolitan, higher-educated household inhabits a different digital environment from a first-generation internet user in a rural household. A blanket restriction could therefore reduce exposure to online harms for some children while simultaneously removing opportunities for digital participation for others. Uniform regulation may not produce uniform outcomes in an unequal society.

None of this diminishes the harms associated with social media. Protecting children from cyberbullying, harmful content, addictive platform design, online exploitation and excessive use remains an important policy objective. But protection and participation should not be treated as competing goals.

The emerging policy landscape offers more tools than a simple choice between unrestricted access and a blanket ban. Age assurance, parental controls, safer defaults, limits on harmful platform design and greater accountability for technology companies are increasingly part of the policy toolkit. For India, the challenge is to determine which combination of safeguards can reduce harm while preserving opportunities for children to learn, connect and develop digital capabilities. India should also assess the distributional consequences of any restriction — who is likely to lose access, who can compensate through other devices or support, and which children are already least able to participate online. These questions are central to equitable digital policy.

India’s first digital divide was about who could get online. The next is about who can participate meaningfully and safely once connected. The goal should be to protect children online while keeping the door open to opportunities for learning, skill development and connection that the digital world can offer.

Ganguly is Associate Fellow, NCAER–National Data Innovation Centre, and Agarwal is Policy Analyst at The Quantum Hub. Views are personal.

Population spectres do harm. Managing demographic change is the challenge

Discussions of population devolve into debates about childbearing and ultimately centre on women’s bodies. Modern global discourse emphasises a return to traditional ways of life

Visions of population explosion or implosion seem to provoke strong passions. Three centuries ago, Malthus argued that population growth would outpace the food supply, leading to famine and disease. Today, the focus seems to have shifted to concerns about underpopulation in India and globally. Elon Musk even claims that population collapse poses a much greater risk than global warming.

This is a strange turnaround. In the 1800s, the world population was a billion, and life expectancy was less than 30 years. Despite the population growing to over 8 billion, Malthus’s doomsday predictions have not materialised, and life expectancy now exceeds 70. Are fears of a shrinking workforce equally flimsy? Just as improvements in agriculture and the Green Revolution have continued to feed the world, it seems highly likely that AI and other technological advances will cope with a smaller workforce.

However, the harm to the social fabric from these overblown claims may be incalculable. Discussions of population devolve into debates about childbearing and ultimately centre on women’s bodies. Malthus advocated chastity for women to reduce fertility. Modern global discourse emphasises a return to traditional ways of life, controlling access to contraception, and sometimes criminalises abortion. The Indian discourse echoes the global disconnect, with some unique twists, leaving fear and dissension in its wake. Hence, it is important to address some of these fears directly.

First, is India on the verge of depopulation, as a recent article suggests? If we accept the United Nations projections using their medium variant, the Indian population will grow to 1.7 billion and then decline by the end of the 21st century, returning to the present level of about 1.4 billion. However, projections from the Seattle-based Institute for Health Metrics (IHME) suggest it will dip below 1 billion. Unfortunately, IHME projections assume that future college graduates will follow the same path to low fertility as current graduates and that increasing education will further reduce fertility. But between 2015-16 and 2019-21, the Total Fertility Rate (TFR) for women with 12 more years of education held steady at 1.7, while that for women with lower levels of education dropped. A narrowing gap between educated and less-educated women has been observed in many countries, undermining confidence in the IHME methodology.

Second, with an ageing population, will India face a worker shortage? Projections from the Population Foundation of India indicate that the share of the population aged 60 and older will rise from 11 per cent to 28 per cent between 2021 and 2051. However, this will be offset by a decline in the child population, and the working-age population will decline only slightly from 66 per cent to 64 per cent. With an AI-led increase in productivity and the potential to recruit women workers who are largely outside the formal labour force, even this slight decline should pose no problem.

Third, is the population in north India growing faster than that in south India, and if so, will it diminish the power of southern states in the Indian Union? South India experienced a fertility decline earlier than the north. For example, in 1971, Tamil Nadu accounted for 7.5 per cent of India’s population; by 2011, it had dropped to 6 per cent, and it is likely to have declined further by 2026. Consequently, if electoral seat allocation is based on population share in 2026 rather than 1971, the southern states will lose. But it is also important to remember that higher economic growth, driven by low population growth and increased investment in children, has increased productivity in states like Tamil Nadu. Sanjeev Sanyal estimates that Tamil Nadu’s share of GDP grew from 7.1 per cent in the 1990s to 8.9 per cent in 2023-24. Balancing economic and demographic power and ensuring adequate representation of geographic minorities is a challenge that will need to be addressed in the coming years.

Fourth, is the Muslim population in India likely to overtake the Hindu population? Muslim fertility is slightly higher than Hindu fertility, but across the three waves of the National Family Health Survey between 2005 and 2021, both communities have seen a similar decline in TFR of about 0.7, leaving the Hindu-Muslim fertility gap unchanged. Rudimentary calculations suggest that even after 50 years, this fertility differential, if unchanged, would result in a small increase in the share of the Muslim population in India from about 15 per cent to 19 per cent. It seems more likely that Muslim fertility will follow a path similar to that of Hindus, and the increase will be smaller.

The above discussion suggests the need for a cautious, balanced approach to adapting to population change and for avoiding aggressive rhetoric that does more harm than good. Consider the discourse on declining fertility, which has led to political calls for a return to traditional values and for deprioritising contraception and child bonuses.

India stands in stark contrast to countries like Japan. Faced with an inflexible gender culture and work-family constraints, nearly 30 per cent of Japanese women remain unmarried into their 30s. In contrast, marriage and family remain the linchpin of Indian family life. The NFHS shows that 97 per cent of women are married by age 30. Yet the very importance of family also leads to smaller families. My research with Alaka Basu shows that parents often choose to have a single child so they can invest more in that child’s education. Reducing educational costs, improving the quality of education, and easing the burden on parents to supervise homework may do more to increase fertility than a call for higher fertility.

The writer is professor, University of Maryland, and NCAER. Views are personal

The Evolving Landscape of Digital Inclusion in India

India’s digital expansion over the past decade has been unprecedented. The country’s internet user base grew from roughly 198 million in 2015 to more than 1.03 billion by 2025, driven by affordable smartphones, low-cost mobile data, and rapid expansion in digital infrastructure. Drawing on nationally representative data from the India Human Development Survey (IHDS-III), this report highlights a layered and evolving hierarchy of digital participation in India. It argues that India’s next digital challenge is not merely expanding connectivity, but ensuring meaningful and equitable participation in the digital economy. As digital technologies increasingly mediate access to education, employment, finance, welfare, and social opportunity, this report takes a step towards answering the key policy question of whether digital transformation will reduce, or reproduce, existing social and economic inequalities.