When Numbers Tell a Story: Decline in Child Marriages and the Work Ahead

I read the headline — “Huge decline in child marriages as state targets ‘Bal Vivah Mukt’ Raj” — and felt a mixture of relief and vigilance. The Times of India piece brought to light a trend that is as encouraging as it is fragile Huge decline in child marriages as state targets ‘Bal Vivah Mukt’ Raj (Jaipur News) — Times of India. I also revisited the Government of India releases that document state-level progress and good practices; the official reporting makes the decline measurable and, therefore, actionable (Press Information Bureau).

I want to pause on two emotions. First: humility. These are not abstract statistics. Each percentage point lower in child marriages is a child spared a life curtailed. Second: the nagging sense that progress requires relentless reinforcement — otherwise gains erode.

Why this decline matters — and why it may have happened

• Child marriage is not just a cultural relic; it is an outcome of poverty, lack of opportunity for girls, poor access to schooling, weak social protection and social norms that quantify girls by marriageability rather than potential. When a state declares a campaign such as ‘Bal Vivah Mukt Raj’ and follows it up with coordinated action — awareness drives, panchayat-level declarations, monitoring systems, school retention efforts and social protection — the ecosystem shifts.
• The data-backed approach matters. When officials publish lists of panchayats declared ‘child-marriage-free’ and pair that with measurable outcomes (school enrollment, immunisation, nutritional support), local administrations can celebrate wins and replicate practices. The Centre’s communications and state press releases make those practices visible and replicable (PIB release on related WCD activities and models).

What I’ve been saying — and why it resonates now

Years ago I wrote about dignity and basic infrastructure — notably that access to private toilets and clean sanitation is more than hygiene; it’s a necessary condition for dignity, safety and women's agency. I said, bluntly: “For me, development translates into, Toilets before Temples” and argued that improving these fundamentals is central to raising the status of women and girls (see my old post on sanitation and dignity) BJP agrees with Congress (toilets before temples).

Why is that relevant? Because when girls and their families experience safer, cleaner villages, when girls can stay in school without the fear and logistical burden of unsafe sanitation, several downstream choices change. Parents start seeing education and delayed marriage as feasible. That link — between basic public goods and social outcomes — is the small chain that pulls large social change.

What seems to be working (and should be noticed)

• Local declarations and social recognition: Panchayats publicly declaring themselves child-marriage-free creates social pressure in a positive way. When a village marks itself as ‘bal vivah mukt’, it is effectively rewriting its own social script.
• Convergence of services: School retention schemes, Anganwadi outreach, nutritional support and access to adolescent health services all create the conditions that make delay possible. I have long argued that co-locating and aligning services (for example, linking anganwadis and schools) creates multiplier effects — a principle I’ve advocated in other contexts.
• Measurement and publicity: When progress is reported — in local languages and visible forums — communities learn they are part of a larger movement. Government releases and media coverage help spread what works beyond one district or one state (see related governmental reporting).

What still worries me

• Economies of survival. In families where poverty presses hard, marriage is still seen as a risk-reduction strategy. If interventions do not address the economic calculus — through livelihoods, scholarships, conditional cash support or other incentives — the incentive to keep girls in school will struggle to outcompete the immediate pressure to marry them early.
• Enforcement gaps. Laws alone won’t be enough unless social systems (panchayats, police, schools, health workers) know how to prevent, detect and respond. That requires training, resources and local buy-in.
• Sustainability. Campaigns can produce rapid declines, but sustaining them requires embedding new norms in the next generation.

A few reflections from my prior thinking

I have argued before that incentives and infrastructure shift behaviour. My earlier proposals for citizen incentives, and my emphasis on basic infrastructure and local institutions, feel newly relevant when I read about declines in child marriage. It is striking — and validating — to see how interventions I advocated at the margins (sanitation, convergent services, local incentives) show up as part of the toolkit that states are now using to protect girls. That earlier insight now takes on renewed urgency: the small, often technical fixes (toilets, school linkages, local monitoring) are in fact levers for major social change.

Closing thought

I celebrate the decline in child marriages, and I want to remind myself and others to treat this as a long-term project, not a one-off achievement. When dignity, opportunity and targeted incentives line up in a village, families choose differently. When those choices scale, entire states change.

---

Regards,
Hemen Parekh