 |
| -Image generated by Bing AI |
According to the UN, every reduction in family size improves prospects for children, their families and the future. Every second family having just one child less means one billion fewer people by 2050 and 3.5 billion fewer people on the planet by the end of the century which will considerably reduce the impact on our already strained environment, though this also depends on how much they consume. An African child for example, has been estimated to consume twenty times less than a European or American child given differences in consumption, energy use and overall lifestyle.
Although the negative stories about India and China’s efforts to stem population growth have dominated the headlines, many countries have quietly reduced theirs without trauma or coercion. They include Thailand, Costa Rica, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Colombia and South Korea. South Korea for example, which had a had a birthrate of 5.99 children per mother [called Total Fertility Rate (TFR) ] -in 1960 , now has a TFR of 0 .78. Sri Lanka’s went from 5.35 in 1960 to 1.95 at present. Thailand’s went from 6.33 in 1960 to 1.2 today. Some of these success stories follow.
When we look at these we see that even very poor regions have been able to make this transition to their great advantage, proving that lack of funds is not necessarily a barrier to taking action. Failure to do so is a sign of a more or less dysfunctional government, lack of capacity, or lack of political will. Note also that even when governments have been unsupportive, considerable progress has been achieved by individuals and civil society groups as we've already seen for example with respect to abortion rights and Women's Reproductive Rights in many Latin American countries.
Kerala, India
In the 1970s Kerala’s population was growing faster than any other state and yet by 1987 it became the first state to achieve replacement level fertility rates of around two children per couple. One of the most decisive factors in this achievement was the investment in education. By 1961, Kerala had the highest literacy rate in the country – 45.6% compared to 15.3% elsewhere. Today more than three quarters of its women go school until Year 10 which also contributes to later marriage and hence fewer children.
Its family planning program consisted in making modern contraceptives available, promoting the benefits of smaller families and conducting community family planning education. Once couples had completed their families, they were offered the choice of sterilisation, with compensation for lost wages granted to those who decided to proceed. Thanks to widely accessible healthcare, it has also had the lowest infant mortality rates for several decades.
In 1978, when the program was well under way, Kerala’s per capita income was $80 per person, far less than the Indian average. By 2000 per Capita GDP was 20% higher than in the rest of India and it became one of the richest states. Today it holds first place in the Human Development Index.
Costa Rica
Costa Rica is another interesting example because its family planning program was initially started by two civilians. In the 1960s, Costa Rican Forestry Professor, Henry Tschinkel noticed that deforestation and environmental degradation were linked to the country’s rapid population growth. At the time it had a TFR of 7 children per woman and an annual population growth rate of 3.8%, one of the highest in the world. With a partner, Alberto Gonzalez, he founded the Costa Rican Demographic Association.
The government eventually made contraception more widely available, especially in low -income rural communities. It conducted mass communication campaigns through home visits, social workers and nurses and local churches helped where other avenues were lacking. This is especially surprising given that Costa Rica is a predominantly Catholic country. One religious leader, Pardre Carlo also challenged taboos about discussing sex and reproduction on a regular radio program. Between 1969 – and 1976, condom use in rural areas increased from 24 – 64%.
Although the government lost interest after that, birthrates continued to decline, albeit more slowly. However, by this time GDP had grown from $380 per capita to $12,000. TFR went from almost 7 children per woman to 2.2 and life expectancy increased from 60 to 80.
Without the crushing weight of a runaway population growth which fell to 0.9% a year, Costa Ricans now enjoy far higher standards of healthcare and education and nature is flourishing too. It also happens to be one of the first countries to run on 100% renewable energy and was recently ranked as the world’s 16th Happiest Country.
Thailand
Thailand’s Family Planning journey has to be one of my favourites, not the least because it managed to introduce a bit of humour into an otherwise serious topic, but included a truly colourful character.
When Thailand began its family planning program in the 1970s, it was a poor, largely agricultural country with women having an average of six children. Then its government began to provide family planning at the local level in all health centres and hospitals. Pharmacies, local shops and even hairdressers were enlisted to make sure that contraceptive products were available even in remote rural areas.
This was accompanied by mass media campaigns to spread the word about the benefits of having smaller families. Like Iran it also used its religious leaders – Buddhists in this case, to spread the word. In the background it also focused on general health and education and greatly reduced its infant mortality rate which is often used as an indicator of a society’s general wellbeing.
In all this Thailand also had a secret weapon in the form of Mechai Viravaidya* - Mr Condom as he became known -a charismatic and imaginative politician, administrator and activist, who garnered a great deal of publicity for the issue by going around the countryside and conducting stunts such as condom inflating contests or playing “Cops and Rubbers” in which Police handed out condoms in the street.
By 1997, Thailand was beginning to reap the benefits of lower birthrates. Its economic growth rate had risen to 8% and it is now regarded as an upper middle income country with a per capita GDP three times that of its neighbours. This is a far cry from two decades ago when many women were forced to earn a living through Sex Tourism.
*Mr Condom is still going at the age of 82
What these examples can teach teach us
There are several common threads. [Most of this section comes from Population Matters].
Population growth slows in the presence of the following:-
1. When women have the right to choose if, when and how many children they have, birth rates fall
2.
However, they do need ready
access to information about reproduction, family planning and reliable
contraception, including safe abortion where necessary. Even deeply Catholic countries
such as Portugal and Italy whose government has legalised contraception and
abortion, are now enjoying the benefits of falling populations
Education gives women the opportunity to gain economic independence. Education itself delays marriage and child bearing, but it also means exposure to career options and different ways of life. A study of African women found that those with no education continued to have an average of 5.4 children, whereas those educated to year 10 had only 2.7. The birthrate for those who finished college was 2.2 children.
4.
Improving child and
maternal health. This is especially important in countries which have no retirement
schemes, leaving the older generation dependent on surviving children. Having
greater spacing between children not only contributes to both maternal health and
that of children, but promotes greater life expectancy over time. Another
aspect of improving infant and maternal health is banning child marriage, which
ensures children are born to healthy fully developed mothers and also slows
down the birthrate.
5. Ensuring a livelihood and a basic income means less need for growth -dependent economic activity and environmental destruction. I would suggest that those countries which have stabilised their own populations and resent having to accommodate large numbers of migrants from countries which have not, should help their neighbours in achieving all of the above and without coercion if they do not want to be overwhelmed.
If we want avoid large numbers of Climate Change refugees then, not only population growth must be reduced but consumption too, especially by those who have already appropriated most of the world's resources and continue to contribute most to emissions. This means means investing in International Aid and Fair Trade and wealthier countries paying their fair share towards the Global Development Fund. Read more about the importance of this and how to help here.
Future Challenges
Many countries which have previously pursued smaller populations are now experiencing a new problem -that of ageing populations with fewer young people to support them. In consequence, some have abandoned their population policies and others are not only turning their backs on earlier gains but returning to regressive and repressive pronatal policies which infringe on the Human Rights of women. In the next post we’ll look at some other ways in which various countries are managing this issue.
To find out more or support International Non Profit Organisations such as UK based Population Matters
Or US based MSI both of which give women around the world access to family planning, contraception and safe abortion to enable more women to choose their future.
Comments