Table of Contents

4.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................................2
4.2 CMR at a Glance: Existing Situation analysis......................................................................2
4.2.1 Existing Population Distribution.....................................................................................2
4.2.2 Population Growth rate....................................................................................................2
4.2.3 Trend of Population Share................................................................................................4
4.2.4 Population Density............................................................................................................5
4.2.5 Level of Urbanisation........................................................................................................7
4.2.6 Demographic Characteristics...........................................................................................8
4.2.6.1 Sex Ratio......................................................................................................................8
4.2.6.2 Literacy Rate...............................................................................................................9
4.2.6.3 Workforce Participation Rate.................................................................................10
4.2.6.4 Household Size..........................................................................................................12
4.2.6.5 Age - Sex Structure...................................................................................................13
4.3 Regional Disparities in Levels of Demographic Development (LDD)...............................13
4.3.1 Methodology Adopted.....................................................................................................14
4.3.2 Analysis............................................................................................................................15
4.3.3 Inference: Proximity to the City & the CMA gives a fillup to the LDD.....................18
4.3.4 Causes for variation in the Levels of Demographic Development..............................19
4.4 Population Projection............................................................................................................19
4.4.1 Population Projection Methods.....................................................................................19
4.5 Population Distribution.........................................................................................................22
4.5.1 Policy Adopted.................................................................................................................22
4.5.2 Procedure.........................................................................................................................23
4.6 Migration................................................................................................................................24
4.6.1 Inference..............................................................................................................................26

1
Table 4. 1 Factor loading based on PCA Analysis........................................................................19
Table 4. 2 Overall Score based on PCA analysis..........................................................................20
Table 4. 3 Different Levels of Demographic Development in CMR..............................................21
Table 4. 4 Distribution of population based on hierarchy............................................................28

Fig 4. 1 Trend of inter-decennial Growth Rate of Population: A comparison................................5

Fig 4. 2 Trend of inter-decennial Growth Rate of Population: A comparison of CMR with other
Regions............................................................................................................................................6
Fig 4. 3 Trend of Population share among the City, CMA outside the City and CMR outside the
CMA.................................................................................................................................................8
Fig 4. 4 Share between core and rest of the region – A comparison of BMR and CMR.................9
Fig 4. 5 Population Density for CMR in 2011................................................................................9
Fig 4. 6 Population Density of Population: A comparison of CMR with other Regions..............10
Fig 4. 7 Comparison of Level of Urbanisation of the CMR & CMA with that at National & State
level...............................................................................................................................................12
Fig 4. 8 Comparison of Level of Urbanisation – Regional Level.................................................12
Fig 4. 9 Comparison of Sex Ratio of the CMA & CMR with that for Tamil Nadu & India -2011 13
Fig 4. 10 Comparison of Sex Ratio – Regional Level in 2011......................................................14
Fig 4. 11 Literacy rate of the CMA & CMR with that for the State & the Nation, 2011...............14
Fig 4. 12 Literacy rate – A comparison of CMR with Other Regions in 2011..............................15
Fig 4. 13 Workforce Participation rate in 2011............................................................................15
Fig 4. 14 Workforce Participation rate in 2011- Comparison of CMR with BMR........................16
Fig 4. 15 Trend of declining Household Sizes...............................................................................17
Fig 4. 16 Household Sizes: A comparison of various Region.......................................................17
Fig 4. 17 Population by gender by age cohort..............................................................................18
Fig 4. 18 CMR Projected Population for 2038.............................................................................25
Fig 4. 19 Estimation of Error for Projected Method for 2011......................................................26
Fig 4. 20 CMR Rural Projected Population for 2038...................................................................27
Fig 4. 21 CMR Urban Projected Population for 2038..................................................................27
Fig 4. 22 Combined Analysis of Population Projection for 2038.................................................28
Fig 4. 23 Percentage of Migrants from Outside Taminadu and from Tamilnadu but Outside
District...........................................................................................................................................30
Fig 4. 24 Percentage of Migrants from inside the District...........................................................31
Fig 4. 25 Region Level Migration.................................................................................................31

2
 4. Demography

4.1 Introduction
Demography is the study of population related statistics such as population size, growth
rate, Population Density, Sex ratio, Household size, Literacy, Occupational Pattern and others,
which illustrates the changing structure and composition of a particular human population.
Population characters form the basis for human activities such as pattern of employment and
economic development, housing, basic amenities such as water, liquid and solid waste disposal,
social facilities- schools, colleges, shops, utilities, traffic and transportation and others.
Uniqueness of the population character is its quantitative nature. Population projection forms the
spine any comprehensive urban and regional plan and the future vision for the pattern of land
uses. In this Chapter, various elements of population character, past and the present are analysed,
inferences drawn, projected for the future and assigned for various urban and rural settlements in
conformity with the proposed hierarchy of settlements.

4.2 CMR at a Glance: Existing Situation analysis

4.2.1 Existing Population Distribution
As per census 2011, the population in Chennai Metropolitan Region (CMR) is 1.28 crore
which contributes 17.7% of population in Tamilnadu. Chennai district contributes about 37% of
population in the region. The population is highly concentrated in and around the core of the
region (i.e. Chennai city). The population was sparsely distributed in peripheral areas of the
region which are located far from the Chennai city. The population around the Chennai
Metropolitan Area (CMA) was moderate when compared to other taluks in the region. The
population distribution among the taluks in CMR is shown in Map. 4.1

3
4
4.2.2 Population Growth rate

Fig 4. 1 Trend of inter-decennial Growth Rate of Population: A comparison

Both CMR and CMA show a steady decline in growth rate from 1971-2001. But in 2001-
11, CMR shows a sudden increase in growth rate of nearly 6% whereas it is 5% increase in
CMA. The Chennai city shows a drastic reduction in growth rate from 33% to 7% over a period
of four decades. This shows that there is an increase in population in the rural areas in CMR as
well as CMA which shows a same pattern of change.

The growth rate of Tamilnadu as well as CMR shows a similar pattern of change for a
period of 1971-2011 implies that the proportion of change in the population including urban and
rural population is being same (Refer Fig 4.1).

5
 Fig 4. 2 Trend of inter-decennial Growth Rate of Population: A comparison of CMR with other
Regions

The growth rate of population in NCR has declined from 37.6% in 1981-91 to 24.1% in
2001-11 and it’s also declining trend in BMR from 45.2% in 1981-91 to 43.5% in 1991-2001
whereas in CMR it’s an increasing trend of growth rate from 1991-2001 to 2001-11 (Refer Fig
4.2).

The decadal growth rate (2001-11) for the taluks (Ambattur and Tambaram) adjacent to
that of Chennai city is much lesser compared to that of other taluks in Kancheepuram and
Thiruvallur districts. This reduction in growth rate shows that these taluks follows the same
declining growth rate pattern as that of Chennai. The higher growth rate was observed in
successive taluks southern and south-west to Chennai city such as Poonamallee, Sriperumbudur
and Chengalpattu. But only the moderate growth rate was observed in successive taluks in
Northern and North-west to that of Chennai city. The other taluks shows a lower growth rate
except Pallipattu Taluk (Refer Map 4.2).

6
7
4.2.3 Trend of Population Share

Fig 4. 3 Trend of Population share among the City, CMA outside the City and CMR outside the
CMA

The population share for CMR by Chennai city is decreased from 1981 to 2011 because
of decrease in its growth rate whereas the population contribution by Rest of CMR (Excluding
CMA) is reduced between 1971 and 199, then the trend is increased because of small growth rate
in Chennai city as well as urban areas in CMA compared to other towns and villages in the
region (Refer Fig 4.3).

8
 Fig 4. 4 Share between core and rest of the region – A comparison of BMR and CMR

But the population share between BMA and Rest of BMR is steadily increased from
48:52 in 1991 to 73:27 in 2001, which indicates that the growing primacy of Bangalore over the
region in attracting population which is vice-versa in CMR from the year 1991 (Refer Fig 4.4).

4.2.4 Population Density

Fig 4. 5 Population Density for CMR in 2011

The population density of Chennai city is three times more than that of CMA, whereas
CMA is five times more when compared to CMR. The urban population density for CMA is
twice than that of CMR but in case of rural, it is found to be four times. This variation is due to
the more concentration of people around the Chennai city compared to other towns in
Kancheepuram and Thiruvallur districts (Refer Fig 4.5).

9
 Fig 4. 6 Population Density of Population: A comparison of CMR with other Regions

The population density of CMR increased from 1004 persons per Sq.km in 1991 to 1451
persons per Sq.km in 2011.But it is three times below par when comparing with the MMR (4254
Persons per Sq.km) which had increased substantially from 3,421 persons per Sq.km in 1991 to
5,361 persons per Sq.km in 2011.

The population density of CMR in 2001 is 1176 persons per Sq.km which is in par with
BMR (1052 persons per Sq.km) having the total area of 8005 Sq.km whereas it is 1349 persons
per sq.km in NCR (Refer Fig 4.6).

The highest population density was observed in the Ambattur, Madhavaran, Tambaram,
Alandur and Sholinganallur taluks whereas the moderate population density in Poonamalle,
Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram, Chengalpattu and Pallipattu Taluk. The lower population density
in Ponneri, Thiruvallur, Tiruttani, Arakonam and Thirukalukundram taluks. But,
Gummidipoondi, Uthukkotai, Uthiramerur, Maduranthakam and Cheyyur taluks shows very low
population density in the CMR region (Refer Map 4.3).

10
11
4.2.5 Level of Urbanisation

Fig 4. 7 Comparison of Level of Urbanisation of the CMR & CMA with that at National & State
level.

The level of urbanization for CMR (75%) is one and half times more when compared to
that of Tamilnadu (48%), which is being more urbanized state in India when compared to other
states. This is due to the urban sprawl from the capital city of Tamilnadu to the adjoining
Kancheepuram and Thiruvallur districts (Refer Fig 4.7).

Fig 4. 8 Comparison of Level of Urbanisation – Regional Level

12
 The level of urbanization as per census 2011 in MMR is 93.5% which is higher compared
to that of CMA (86.2%) whereas it is 62.5% in NCR. But in BMR, it is 73% in 2001 which is in
par with CMR (72%) (Refer Fig 4.8).

4.2.6 Demographic Characteristics

4.2.6.1 Sex Ratio

Fig 4. 9 Comparison of Sex Ratio of the CMA & CMR with that for Tamil Nadu & India -2011

The diagram reveals that the incidence of female In-migration is high in the CMA,
apparently for economic and social causes. The average sex ratio of CMR is 988 which is much
higher than the national average of 942 but lower than that of Tamilnadu (996) as well as CMA
(1014). The sex ratio of urban CMR in 2011 is 987 whereas it is 993 in rural CMR (Refer Fig
4.9). The sex ratio of CMR is increased in the year 2011 when compared to that in 2001 (968).
But it is decreased in urban CMR (991) whereas it is increased in rural CMR (959)

13
 Fig 4. 10 Comparison of Sex Ratio – Regional Level in 2011

The sex ratio CMR is high when compared to the BMR, NCR, MMR because of the sex
ratio of Tamilnadu is high.

4.2.6.2 Literacy Rate

Fig 4. 11 Literacy rate of the CMA & CMR with that for the State & the Nation, 2011

14
 The literacy rate of CMR stands at 77.13% which is higher than that of Tamilnadu
(71.85%) as well as India (63.07%). But the literacy rate of CMA almost matches with that of
CMR (Refer Fig 4.11).

Fig 4. 12 Literacy rate – A comparison of CMR with Other Regions in 2011

The literacy rate of CMR stands at 77.13% which is lower than that of NCR, MMR. But
CMR is higher than that of NCR (Refer Fig 4.12).
4.2.6.3 Workforce Participation Rate

Fig 4. 13 Workforce Participation rate in 2011

15
 Why is it lesser in CMA & CMR? Tamil Nadu may be more due to rural female
participation in agricultural sector – cultivators & agri-labourers. The workforce participation
rate of CMR (40.8%) is increased in the year 2011 when compared with that of 2001(37.03%).
But it is much lesser than that of Tamilnadu (45.58%) but slightly greater than that of India
(39.79%).
The workforce participation rate for urban CMR is increased from 34.28% in 2001 to
38.92% in 2011 whereas it is vice versa in rural CMR in which it is decreased to 46.79% in 2011
from 58.89% in 2001.

Fig 4. 14 Workforce Participation rate in 2011- Comparison of CMR with BMR

The workforce Participation rate CMR is higher than that of BMR due to rural female
participation in agricultural sector – cultivators & agri-labourers.

16
4.2.6.4 Household Size

Fig 4. 15 Trend of declining Household Sizes

The average household size of CMR is decreased in 2011 when compared to that
in the year 2001. But smaller reduction pattern is followed in household sizes in CMA,
Tamilnadu and India. This is attributed mostly due to the preference of nuclear families
compared to that of joint family culture which is more common in the older days. The general
declining trend may be due to awareness on small family norms.

Fig 4. 16 Household Sizes: A comparison of various Region

The Above Figure shows the Household size of MMR and CMR will be nearly equal.

17
4.2.6.5 Age - Sex Structure
Census 2011 data was available only at the District level for different age groups
differentiated by gender. This was analyzed through age-sex pyramids across the decades for
CMR Districts in 2011. This data reveals that there is a significant increase in the share of the
working population aged 25-59 as also the population over 60 years. There is also a decline in
the share of children below 14 over the years and in population aged 15-24. (Refer Fig 4.16)

Fig 4. 17 Population by gender by age cohort

4.3 Regional Disparities in Levels of Demographic Development (LDD)

The levels of demographic development is analysed based on nine indicators using the
census data for the year 2011. The different indicators chosen are:
Based on Urbanisation:
 Urban population as percent of total population
 Population in 20000+ towns as percent of total population
Based on Literacy:
 Literates as percent of total population
 Female literates as percent of total female population
 Rural literates as percent of total rural population
Based on Diversification of Rural Economy:
 Rural non-agricultural workers as percent of total workers

18
  Rural male non-agricultural workers as percent of total male workers
 Rural female non-agricultural workers as percent of total female workers
Based on Sex-Ratio:
 Females per thousand males
4.3.1 Methodology Adopted
Principal Component Analysis (PCA) Method has been used to assess the relative levels
of development. The data regarding all the selected indicators is subjected to this
method to derive ‘composite scores’ of individual taluks in Kancheepuram and Thiruvallur
District and Arakkonam Taluk in Vellore District in terms of the levels of development. The
technique involves transformation of the original data set into a new set consisting of general
components, the number of which equals to the number of variables in the original data set.
The Eigen values corresponding to each of the components indicates the explanatory
power of the respective components. It is generally seen that the first few components explain a
greater part of the total variance in the original data set. Further, the correlation coefficient of
each of the component with the variables in the original data
set – i.e., the component loadings can be meaningful interpreted only in the case of first
few components. Generally, the components having Eigen value less than 1 are usually skipped
over in the analysis. The loadings of the selected components (correlation coefficient between
the component and the original values and interpreted very much in a similar way) are used as
weights of the standardized values of the given variables for working out component scores
corresponding to each of the observation. It may be expressed in the following way (Johnston,
1978).
Sik = ∑DijLjk (j varies from 1 to n)
where, Dij is the standardized values of observation ‘i’ on the variable ‘j’; Ljk is the loading of
variable ‘j’ on the component ‘k’; Sik is the score of observation ‘i’ on component k; and
summation is overall ‘n’ variables. A high and positive score indicate that a particular district is
more developed than others with lower scores.

4.3.2 Analysis

19
 Regarding demographic development only 2 components have been extracted. In all, both
of these components explain 88.90% of total variance collectively.

Table 4. 1 Factor loading based on PCA Analysis

Table 4.1 presents the loadings of each of the two components on the selected variables in
the original data sets. It is observed that except variable 2, 5 and variable 9, the first component
is highly positively correlated with all the selected indicators of development. On the whole, the
first component represents that diversification of rural Economy, urbanization and literacy are
the leading factors affecting demographic development.
Variable 5 has a moderate correlation and variables 2 and 9 are negatively correlated with
component 1. Component 2 reveals the importance of literacy, rural literacy in particular. It had a
moderate correlation with C1 also. It can be concluded that being affected by literacy and
urbanization the state’s rural economy is diversified in developed areas.

Table 4. 2 Overall Score based on PCA analysis

20
 Table 4.2 reveals the scores of each component with overall scores for the 20
observations. The scores of individual components indicate the direction and extent to which an
observation is associated with the respective components. The aggregate scores indicate the
relative position of each of the observation. In some cases, the scores work out to be positive,
while in the remaining others they are negative. A high and positive score indicate that a
particular district is more developed than others with lower scores.
To indicate the comparative levels of development, the overall scores have been
categorized into following four categories as given in the table below. (Refer Map 4.3).

Table 4. 3 Different Levels of Demographic Development in CMR

Category No. of Taluks Names of Taluks

21
(Overall Score)

Poonamalle

Ambattur

Madhavaram
High 6
Tambaram

Alandur

Sholinganallur

Sriperumbadur
Moderate 2
Chengalpattu

Ponneri

Pallipattu

Thiruvallur

Low 7 Kancheepuram

Uttiramerur

Arakkonam

Thirukkalukundram

Gummidipoondi

Uthukkottai

Very Low 5 Thiruttani

Maduranthakam

Cheyyur

22
23
4.3.3 Inference: Proximity to the City & the CMA gives a fill-up to the LDD.
Accordingly the CMR has been regionalized into four regions:

(1) Areas having high level of development (Above 5)

(2) Areas having moderate level of development (0 to 5).

(3) Areas having low level of development (-5 to 0)

(4) Areas having very low level of development (Below -5)

1. Areas having high level of development (Above 5) –

Demographically, the highly developed taluks all are located just to the periphery of the
Chennai city. Poonamalle, Ambattur, Madhavaram, Tambaram, Alandur and Sholinganallur are
the six Taluks have been included in this region. The overall score value under this category is
above 5. Almost all the indicators are favourable and responsible for high level of development
in these Taluks.

2. Areas having moderate level of development (0 to 5)

Moderately developed areas in CMR is comprised of two Taluks. i.e. Sriperumbudur and
Chengalpattu. Sriperumbudur is having higher concentration of industries and Chengalpattu
which is well connected in terms of major modes of transportation and located immediately to
the Southern side of Chennai city. The overall score value under this region lies between 0 – 5.

3. Areas having low level of development (-5 to 0)

Ponneri, Pallipattu, Thiruvallur, Kancheepuram, Uthiramerur, Arakkonam and

Thirukalukundram are the seven Taluks having low level of development. These areas are nearby
areas of region having high and moderate level of development. The overall score values under
these area ranges between -5 to 0.

4. Areas having very low level of development (Below -5)

Gummidipoondi, Uthukkotai, Thiruttani, Maduranthakam and Cheyyur Taluks are

included in this category. The overall score value under this category is below 5. The very low
developed taluks are located far from the Chennai city. Gummidipoondi and Uthukkotai taluks

24
didn’t have the single town which is having the population more than 20,000. Maduranthakam
and Thiruttani taluks are located farther assuming Chennai as nucleus in outermost southern and
western part of the CMR region.

4.3.4 Causes for variation in the Levels of Demographic Development

The demographic levels of development is more prominent in the taluks with higher area
of urban areas (No. of towns) when compared to that with rural areas. The demographic
development is high in the urbanized areas because of natural increase in population as well as
migration from rural to urban areas for their economic activities mainly in Chennai Metropolitan
Area. The development is highly concentrated when moving towards the core of the Chennai city
because of the urban sprawl from city nucleus and the attracting nature of capital city due to the
provision of higher order of services.

4.4 Population Projection

4.4.1 Population Projection Methods
A number of methods are adopted for general population projections. These include
arithmetical increase method, geometrical increase method, incremental increase method, simple
graphical or graphical extension method, graphical comparison method and the ratio method or
apportionment method.

Fig 4. 18 CMR Projected Population for 2038

25
 In the context of CMR, the exponential method seems more appropriate to arrive at
regional population projections and thereafter the mathematical projections can be used to arrive
at the population projections for each of the taluks of CMR for greater accuracy.

Fig 4. 19 Estimation of Error for Projected Method for 2011

For validating this exponential method, the population for both forward and backward
forecasting over the known population is made. The error occurred in CMR region for the year
2011 is found out to be 1.57%.
For rural as well as urban areas, the population is projected for both forward and
backward forecasting over the known period of population from 1971 to 2011. From the Linear
Trend Projection, the error occurred in rural areas of CMR region for the year 2011 is 0.91%.
From the Geometric projection method, the error occurred in urban areas of CMR region
for the year 2011 is 1.79%. Like this, both the methods used for projection of rural and urban
areas are validated by considering each taluks of CMR region.

26
 Fig 4. 20 CMR Rural Projected Population for 2038

Fig 4. 21 CMR Urban Projected Population for 2038

It is observed that the Linear Trend Projection gives suitable estimates for Rural Areas of
each taluks in CMR. Whereas in urban areas, geometric method gives suitable estimates for each
taluks in CMR.

27
 Fig 4. 22 Combined Analysis of Population Projection for 2038
From this analysis, the projected population for CMR region for the year 2038 is found to
be 2.57 Crores. The Projected Population values for the plan year 2038 for each Taluk is given in
the Annex 1.

4.5 Population Distribution

4.5.1 Policy Adopted
 Freezing the development of Chennai city and the six highly developed taluks to make
the balance development of the region.
 Maintaining 60% Population share in the core region (Chennai city and highly developed
Taluks).
 The addition 7% and 8% of population for the year 2028 and 2038 is distributed to other
Taluks based on the higher order of proposed hierarchy of settlements in the year 2038.

4.5.2 Procedure
The Chennai core city and highly developed taluks are restricted from increase in their
share to the Metropolitan region to balance the development of entire the region.

28
 The population increase trend in other areas remains unchanged.

Further, because of increase in the proposed hierarchy the population which is freezed in
the core urban area is to be distributed based on increased hierarchy in that particular Taluk by
considering the order of hierarchy with more weightage to the proposed higher order of
settlements.

The final population in different taluks in the Chennai Metropolitan Region is given in
the following Table below.

Table 4. 4 Distribution of population based on hierarchy

Projected Population (Year)

NAME OF THE
2018 2028 2038
TALUK
Gummidipoondi 229920 429291 730407
Ponneri 478407 745577 1023880
Uthukkottai 158809 254039 305692
Tiruttani 192642 300970 353885
Pallipattu 243775 356840 459942
Thiruvallur 496503 798778 1069469
Sriperumbudur 679846 941247 1320235
Poonamallee 878004 1085554 1503860
Tambaram 4088597 5449496 8067107
Chengalpattu 924778 1460578 2008546
Kancheepuram 554039 753841 900697
Uthiramerur 156413 235567 278914
Maduranthakam 514674 784857 939557
Arakonam 574325 776467 925648
Chennai 5108039 5222029 5904341
CMR 15278772 19595132 25792179

The percentage of talukwise population distribution for the year 2028 and 2038 for the
Chennai metropolitan region is shown in the Sheet No. 4.4.

4.6 Migration
According to the census 2001, total in migrants constitutes about 25% of the total
population in Tamilnadu. In the Chennai Metropolitan Region, total in migrants contributes to

29
about 30% of the total population. Chennai Metropolitan Region alone contributes to 30% of the
total migrants in Tamilnadu.

Migration from outside India is negligible and is not considered for the analysis. From
the graph below, it is understood that Chennai has more migrants from outside Tamilnadu and
migrants in Thiruvallur is greater than Kanchipuram which is due to the presence of Andhra
Pradesh. Considering the migrants from inside Tamilnadu but outside the district, it is due to the
development of industries in the late 1990’s along the periphery of the Chennai.

Fig 4. 23 Percentage of Migrants from Outside Taminadu and from Tamilnadu but Outside
District
The migration of people within the Kanchipuram is higher than the people migrating
from outside the district as shown in the graph below. This is due to the Urbanisation of the
Taluks like Tambaram, Sholinganallur, Sriperumbudur and the attraction of the people in the
nearby areas. In Thiruvallur, the intra district migration is almost equal to the inter district
migration.

30
 Fig 4. 24 Percentage of Migrants from inside the District
While analyzing the migration of people from rural and urban, people migrated to urban
areas are natural whether it is from rural or urban areas. The 15% of people migrated from rural
and urban to rural areas are due to the establishment of industries in the early 1990’s along the
periphery of the Chennai district in villages.

Fig 4. 25 Region Level Migration

31
4.6.1 Inference
The main reason for the migration of the people is the availability of opportunities and
better lifestyle. While the migration of people is towards the mother city which provides
facilities, there is a need to develop the region away from Chennai which will create the balanced
environment and the migration of the people will be fairly distributed in the Region

32