Reducing Fertility Rates Coercion or Reward? Laura Dininni Stutee Khandelwal

Global Population Growth

Fertility rates TFR-Total Fertility Rate

Indicators associated with higher fertility high rates of female illiteracy low female status a high percentage of illegal marriages under age 18 modest level of contraceptive use and high rates of infant mortality

Population control policy Incentives Positive Incentives rewards or penalties, tangible or intangible, to induce specific fertility behavior by altering parental choice Serve to enlarge option. Individual has a right to deny. Negative Incentive/Disincentives Withdrawal/suspension of the rewards or penalties

Direct Incentives Cash payments- to women for not having pregnancy to men for undergoing Voluntary Surgical Contraception Employee Benefit Package Non Cash- Priority to housing Educational placement of children Tax advantages Rewards to Community- Improved infrastructure

Indirect Incentives Increased Educational opportunities for women Increased labor force opportunities Social pressure campaigns Lowering infant and childhood mortality Disadvantages: must be supplemented by direct incentives slower than direct

Disincentives Negative Incentives Withdrawal of maternity benefits Limitation of services provided Debarred from contesting local elections

Effectiveness Never used alone. Not much success in India. Lack of funding Lack of government support Success in China and Indonesia where disincentives and coercion as well The focus on much broader issues- education (Kerela), good leadership (Indonesia), socio-economic development (Japan), decline in mortality (China) etc.

Coercion definition Incentive and disincentive programs raise ethical and practical questions Is it ethical Will it work

Incentives disincentives reward and coercion Are incentives inherently coercive Critical factors such as socioeconomic status Gender Type of incentive Means by which they are enforced Can turn incentives into compulsory measures

Generally, pop pol is most effective when public opinion supports the policy goals Singapore Balance between rights of people and national goals for population stabilization Collective vs individual rights “Governments are justified in employing measures that seek to curb population growth and in directing their residents to comply with such objectives”

Gender inequality Implications in coercive population policy Compromises necessary to attain such population goals are often borne by women who must modify their reproductive behavior or have it modified for them Leads to serious infractions of human rights Internationally and domestically Political inequality

Effectiveness of coercion

Conclusion

Solutions-laura Incentive and disincentive policies must: Take into account shifts in population trends What is goal What is timeline Urban vs rural focus Gentrification of society China example Assess impact of Gender in/equality programs may..projecting the image of the gfirl child as an asset to the family rather than a liability Have correct target Involve choice and empowerment Increase women’s economic security

Solutions-Stutee Cultural factors - gender, religion, societal customs Comprehensive reproductive health care- holistic approach, socio-cultural taboos, access Strong government/leadership Socio-cultural climate Women’s rights

Education Delay in exposure to intercourse Alternatives in life to early marriage Changes people’s thinking Problem based learning, Skits, T.V, Radio

Bibliography Minnesotans for Sustainibility. The Cairo Conference on Population and Development. August, op_and_development.htm#Non-Coercive%20Incentives Weeks, John R. How To Influence Fertility: The Experience So Far (1990). November 16, The Wall Street Journal. Fertility “Revolution” Lowers Birth Rates. January 24, Fertilty_Revolution.htm Fertilty_Revolution.htm Laigen, L. The Greatest Modern Threat to Reproductive Freedom. November 16, 2004.

Questions???