Solvency of Population Control Methods
Population control is one issue that transcends borders and political and religious divides. To some extent, every country in the world faces struggles with a growing population. The 20th century witnessed the apogee of the Industrial Revolution and the Green Revolution that resulted in massive population growth, and innovation and population growth only continue to increase. Today, nearly all countries around the world have taken measures to stabilize the population growth of their respective populations.
Notoriously, China instituted a controversial “one-child policy” from 1978 to 2015. During the communist rule of Mao Zedong, China experienced a massive baby boom from 1960-1965. This baby boom was highlighted by nearly six births per woman, clearly creating an impetus for population control. Although the “one-child policy” appeared to be relatively self-explanatory, the true policy was a misnomer. In reality, amendments to the program were added such that families could have a second child if the first child was a girl. This resulted in a birth rate of approximately 1.5 births per woman from 1995 to 2004, albeit a significant decrease compared to rates from the 1960s.
The one-child policy ultimately created a predictable gender imbalance in China, since men were seen in Chinese culture to be more fit to raise a family and earn a living wage. An estimated 1.15 men were born to every woman in 2016, an extreme skew. However, a greater concern lies in the average age of the Chinese workforce. In 2015, 9.55% of the Chinese population was over the age of 65, compared to only 3.36% in 1965. The obvious implications of this increase in older people is that there are not enough young people to take jobs in the country. Since 2015, China has enforced a two-child policy in an attempt to reduce the impact of the gender imbalance and working-adult shortages in the country, a serious yet less austere approach to population control.
Similarly, India has gone to great lengths to limit population growth. Most notably, India controls population through sterilization. An estimated 37% of women are sterilized in India, and the government pays 1,400 rupees, or about 16 US dollars. This amount of money is relatively significant in poor communities, and as a result, nearly all sterilized Indians live in poverty. In terms of reducing population growth, Indian sterilization has been successful, reducing population growth from 2.3% in the 1970s to around 1.6% today. Despite the success of the policy in reducing population, the policy is ethically controversial. Since male sterilization is regarded as a taboo in India, poor women are predominantly targeted for sterilization, and often accept it as an option in order to receive the government subsidy. As a result, the policy is known to inherently negatively target women and poor communities.
In many cases, contraceptives are viewed as the most effective method of population control, since they allow people to engage in inevitable recreational sex without having children. However, India and China have neglected to implement any semblance of population control built on contraceptives, mainly because of logistical challenges. In countries with high poverty rates and large populations, like China and India, contraceptives are difficult to circulate in the population and are expensive to distribute. Even though contraceptives are effective in limiting the population in first-world countries, they have yet to be widely used in second and third-world countries.
In the case of China and India, population control has resulted in significant decreases in population, but has created many social problems that will persist for generations.
*Population control solutions can be found under "Fertility Rate Analysis" and below.
Sources:
Notoriously, China instituted a controversial “one-child policy” from 1978 to 2015. During the communist rule of Mao Zedong, China experienced a massive baby boom from 1960-1965. This baby boom was highlighted by nearly six births per woman, clearly creating an impetus for population control. Although the “one-child policy” appeared to be relatively self-explanatory, the true policy was a misnomer. In reality, amendments to the program were added such that families could have a second child if the first child was a girl. This resulted in a birth rate of approximately 1.5 births per woman from 1995 to 2004, albeit a significant decrease compared to rates from the 1960s.
The one-child policy ultimately created a predictable gender imbalance in China, since men were seen in Chinese culture to be more fit to raise a family and earn a living wage. An estimated 1.15 men were born to every woman in 2016, an extreme skew. However, a greater concern lies in the average age of the Chinese workforce. In 2015, 9.55% of the Chinese population was over the age of 65, compared to only 3.36% in 1965. The obvious implications of this increase in older people is that there are not enough young people to take jobs in the country. Since 2015, China has enforced a two-child policy in an attempt to reduce the impact of the gender imbalance and working-adult shortages in the country, a serious yet less austere approach to population control.
Similarly, India has gone to great lengths to limit population growth. Most notably, India controls population through sterilization. An estimated 37% of women are sterilized in India, and the government pays 1,400 rupees, or about 16 US dollars. This amount of money is relatively significant in poor communities, and as a result, nearly all sterilized Indians live in poverty. In terms of reducing population growth, Indian sterilization has been successful, reducing population growth from 2.3% in the 1970s to around 1.6% today. Despite the success of the policy in reducing population, the policy is ethically controversial. Since male sterilization is regarded as a taboo in India, poor women are predominantly targeted for sterilization, and often accept it as an option in order to receive the government subsidy. As a result, the policy is known to inherently negatively target women and poor communities.
In many cases, contraceptives are viewed as the most effective method of population control, since they allow people to engage in inevitable recreational sex without having children. However, India and China have neglected to implement any semblance of population control built on contraceptives, mainly because of logistical challenges. In countries with high poverty rates and large populations, like China and India, contraceptives are difficult to circulate in the population and are expensive to distribute. Even though contraceptives are effective in limiting the population in first-world countries, they have yet to be widely used in second and third-world countries.
In the case of China and India, population control has resulted in significant decreases in population, but has created many social problems that will persist for generations.
*Population control solutions can be found under "Fertility Rate Analysis" and below.
Sources:
Culture and Religion and Population, and Popular Population Control Solutions
The relationship between culture and population has long been a strained one. Since the beginnings of organized government and religion, there has always been tension over what choices one has and does not have. Religion has been central to populations because promises of divine gifts (and retributions) are often the strongest incentives on Earth, outweighing monetary concerns and even the threat of death. Within the three Abrahamic Faiths (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) the doctrine is fairly similar: “be fruitful and multiply.” In other words, “have children.”
There are distinct differences, however, in the more specific details between the faiths. Within all faiths, the Orthodox ban all contraceptives (and, by extension, abortions) in all cases that do not lead to serious danger for the woman. Mainstream Judaism, on the other hand, is much more permissive of birth control, which can be contrasted with Catholics, who generally do not allow contraceptives, even in more liberal sects, as well as Muslims, who also do not allow for (deliberate) sex without procreation. This has significantly shaped global populations, particularly in countries where religion was/is enforced by law, or in general in countries where religious observance is more common. For example, in the United Arab Emirates, abortion is illegal, as is the purchase of contraceptives outside of marriage. This creates a significant problem: although sex before marriage is also illegal, it (obviously) still happens, but unmarried couples now have no access to normal contraceptives, emergency contraceptives, or abortion. Put simply, extramarital sex in the UAE is much more likely to cause pregnancy than in more Western countries as resources for preventing pregnancy simply are not available.
Likewise, in strongly Catholic countries, such as Spain, abortion is not impossible to obtain, but it is very difficult. The current Spanish law (as of 2010) is that a woman may get an abortion within the first 14 weeks of pregnancy, but it requires parental consent for minors. This has a few immediate problems. For starters, most mothers have an ultrasound at week 20, which allows for the detection of many defects and disorders with the baby. Unfortunately, at that point, it will already be 6 weeks too late to get an abortion. This creates a serious problem because mothers have to choose to terminate the pregnancy without knowing for sure if anything is wrong with the baby. Likewise, mothers do not have the opportunity to terminate the pregnancy if they do find something wrong during the 20 week ultrasound. The policies in Brazil are even more draconian, with a blanket ban on abortions except in the case of rape or when the mother’s life is in danger. In fact, until the early 20th century, there was a blanket ban on contraceptives in general. Despite all this, Brazil has an estimated 1 million (illegal) abortions per year. Interestingly enough, the birth rate in Brazil is only 1.78 births per mother, which is lower than the America’s, despite America’s fairly liberal stance on contraception and abortion. Spain’s birthrate is also abysmally low, at just 1.32 births per woman. This is a very surprising trend, and seems fairly contradictory, considering both countries’ stance on abortion and contraception. The UAE has a birth rate of 1.77, which is significantly higher than that Spain, but still quite low. The low birth rate in the UAE is understandable, however, once you consider the fact that it is illegal for a woman to be pregnant and unmarried, punishable by deportation or imprisonment.
China is an example of more secular population policies. In China, there had long been a “one child policy” with the aims of slowing population growth that was seen as unsustainable. This policy was active between 1979 and 2015. It was highly successful, bringing birth rates down from 2.6 to about 1.5. Unfortunately, it also led to barbaric behaviors of aborting female children, and abandoning female children in hopes of a male child to continue leading the family. Interestingly enough, the population of China continued to grow rapidly, meaning that immigration must have been very common. Since the start of the one child policy, the population has increased by over 400 million people (as a point of reference, the US has 320 million people). Sweden is trying to do the opposite: enacting governmental policies that encourage childbirth, known as pro-natal policies. The effectiveness of these policies is somewhat suspect, considering the birth rate has essentially stayed the same. India is attempting to limit its population through policies such as (voluntary) female sterilization. This has largely been successful, with birth rates steadily declining by about 0.05 births per woman per year.
To sum things up, the battle of population control seems to be a tug of war where everybody is pulling in different directions at different strengths. While some countries are desperately trying to increase populations, others are going as far as paying their citizens to become sterilized. On the whole, as more of the world becomes more technologically advanced, we suspect that it will become easier to control populations, and to prevent these continuous crises all of the world.
Sources:
There are distinct differences, however, in the more specific details between the faiths. Within all faiths, the Orthodox ban all contraceptives (and, by extension, abortions) in all cases that do not lead to serious danger for the woman. Mainstream Judaism, on the other hand, is much more permissive of birth control, which can be contrasted with Catholics, who generally do not allow contraceptives, even in more liberal sects, as well as Muslims, who also do not allow for (deliberate) sex without procreation. This has significantly shaped global populations, particularly in countries where religion was/is enforced by law, or in general in countries where religious observance is more common. For example, in the United Arab Emirates, abortion is illegal, as is the purchase of contraceptives outside of marriage. This creates a significant problem: although sex before marriage is also illegal, it (obviously) still happens, but unmarried couples now have no access to normal contraceptives, emergency contraceptives, or abortion. Put simply, extramarital sex in the UAE is much more likely to cause pregnancy than in more Western countries as resources for preventing pregnancy simply are not available.
Likewise, in strongly Catholic countries, such as Spain, abortion is not impossible to obtain, but it is very difficult. The current Spanish law (as of 2010) is that a woman may get an abortion within the first 14 weeks of pregnancy, but it requires parental consent for minors. This has a few immediate problems. For starters, most mothers have an ultrasound at week 20, which allows for the detection of many defects and disorders with the baby. Unfortunately, at that point, it will already be 6 weeks too late to get an abortion. This creates a serious problem because mothers have to choose to terminate the pregnancy without knowing for sure if anything is wrong with the baby. Likewise, mothers do not have the opportunity to terminate the pregnancy if they do find something wrong during the 20 week ultrasound. The policies in Brazil are even more draconian, with a blanket ban on abortions except in the case of rape or when the mother’s life is in danger. In fact, until the early 20th century, there was a blanket ban on contraceptives in general. Despite all this, Brazil has an estimated 1 million (illegal) abortions per year. Interestingly enough, the birth rate in Brazil is only 1.78 births per mother, which is lower than the America’s, despite America’s fairly liberal stance on contraception and abortion. Spain’s birthrate is also abysmally low, at just 1.32 births per woman. This is a very surprising trend, and seems fairly contradictory, considering both countries’ stance on abortion and contraception. The UAE has a birth rate of 1.77, which is significantly higher than that Spain, but still quite low. The low birth rate in the UAE is understandable, however, once you consider the fact that it is illegal for a woman to be pregnant and unmarried, punishable by deportation or imprisonment.
China is an example of more secular population policies. In China, there had long been a “one child policy” with the aims of slowing population growth that was seen as unsustainable. This policy was active between 1979 and 2015. It was highly successful, bringing birth rates down from 2.6 to about 1.5. Unfortunately, it also led to barbaric behaviors of aborting female children, and abandoning female children in hopes of a male child to continue leading the family. Interestingly enough, the population of China continued to grow rapidly, meaning that immigration must have been very common. Since the start of the one child policy, the population has increased by over 400 million people (as a point of reference, the US has 320 million people). Sweden is trying to do the opposite: enacting governmental policies that encourage childbirth, known as pro-natal policies. The effectiveness of these policies is somewhat suspect, considering the birth rate has essentially stayed the same. India is attempting to limit its population through policies such as (voluntary) female sterilization. This has largely been successful, with birth rates steadily declining by about 0.05 births per woman per year.
To sum things up, the battle of population control seems to be a tug of war where everybody is pulling in different directions at different strengths. While some countries are desperately trying to increase populations, others are going as far as paying their citizens to become sterilized. On the whole, as more of the world becomes more technologically advanced, we suspect that it will become easier to control populations, and to prevent these continuous crises all of the world.
Sources:
- The Guardian -- India’s Population Growth Policy, Including Sterlization for Females, Beset by Problems: Link
- BBC News -- Parenthood Policies in Europe: Link
- United States Conference of Catholic Bishops -- Fact Sheet: Contraceptive Mandate: Link
- The United Nations -- UAE Abortion Policies: Link
- NCBI -- Family planning and population policies in Brazil: Link
- Rabbi Scott Glass (Ithaca)-- Thank you for taking your time to talk with me!