Fifteen years ago this September, 20,000 people gathered in Cairo, Egypt at the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) to tackle issues poverty and clarify the relationship between population growth and underdevelopment. But clarity and consensus on the relationship between population growth and underdevelopment are still elusive, as recent statements made by Archbishop Celestino Migliore, the Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the United Nations illustrate.
Speaking on April 1st at the 42nd session of the Commission on Population and Development, he denounced what he called the anti-life attitude in the preparatory documents for the U.N. summit for the ICPD (known as Cairo +15). The Papal Nuncio was also critical of the “population reduction” mentality expressed by Secretary Hilary Clinton as she accepted the Margaret Sanger award from the Planned Parenthood Federation of America days earlier.
Archbishop Migliore and Secretary Clinton represent recent iterations from public voices of the two sides of a critical, though often ignored, debate on the relationship between population and development. It is a matter that deserves careful attention from advocates of a stable population. If our goals are not integral to the goals of human dignity, equality, economic justice, and opportunity to live a full and meaningful life in any society across the globe, now and in future generations, then there is no justification for our work. We are advocates for population sustainability precisely because we are convinced that achieving these goals of justice, especially in underdeveloped regions of the world, will not be possible without simultaneously stabilizing human population. We affirm that the widespread availability of family planning, along with investment in education, local sustainable development, gender equality, health care, participatory governance, and environmental conservation, are all necessary components of just development.
Yet inclusion of this family planning component of our vision for just development is a matter of deep contention for many people. Archbishop Migliore in his statement argued that the presence of a large young workforce in proportion to elder dependents is a key developmental advantage for African nations with high fertility rates. Over the years, advocates for population stability have often been accused of racist and nationalistic fear that drives them to oppress disadvantaged people by depriving them of their younger generations and the full potential of their human capital.
In his book Population Control: Real Costs, Illusory Benefits, Steven Mosher also argues that since the rate of population growth is falling (taken as a global average), we should create public policy to enhance rather than diminish birth rates. Mosher notes that population growth is associated with economic growth, concluding therefore that those who would limit birth rates among the poor would, again, see them deprived of their capital.
So, are high birth rates an advantage or disadvantage for poor families in developing nations? We can assume that intelligent and caring people on both sides of the issue all have the best interests of poor people and future generations at heart. But who better understands the complex dynamics between population and development, economics and politics, and the capacities of the ecosystems underpinning it all?
As good observers of the natural sciences, we can begin by recognizing and sizing up the limiting factors that are placed on us by our ecological systems. Sadly, ecosystem science is often left at the sidelines of our political discourse, but it makes a critical difference. If we could be certain that our only limiting factor was the size of the earth, then we might look upon population growth with much less urgency. In the real world, though, the human community lives embedded in a complex ecosystem which must be able to sustain itself in order to continue to support us. We are already placing such strains on that system that we must shift our way of living on the planet into a more harmonious balance with the living systems that support us.
Archbishop Magliore and others point out that the greatest amount of abuse on those systems is coming from those nations that have low birth rates. This is true, and must be addressed, not only for the sake of justice toward underdeveloped nations, but also for the sake of all of our survival. But calling for economic development with restrictions on family planning means growing that unbalanced economy farther and faster than ever, accelerating us toward a situation of critical unsustainability. Recognizing the limitations of our ecology is still a controversial move in the population/development dialogue, but it must be undertaken to address the full reality of the situation.
In terms of economic development itself, however, continued population growth is not proving to benefit poor families and nations. The relationship is complex in this dynamic and globalized world where children of poor rural families often migrate and find gainful employment in cities. Our economy lends itself to high concentrations of people that would not have been possible in previous generations. Of course, this depends on increasing the intensity of demands on ecosystems to produce more food per acre and absorb more emissions into the atmosphere and oceans. Eventually the capacity of these systems to integrate these intense pressures will wane, so the continued intensification and concentration of human demands is unwise.
Therefore, large families within the global economic context may not always impoverish a family as it would have in the past when they would have had to share the resources of a small plot of land among growing numbers of descendents. Research presented by David Canning this month at the Commission on Population and Development does show that lowering fertility rates in developing nations does benefit the family and the country by decreasing the number of child dependents, therefore allowing more female participation in the work force, which results in more investment in child health and education, and increased economic development.
We would all like to live in a world where the gap between the rich and the poor is dramatically reduced, everyone has access to a healthy and fulfilling life, and the prospects for our children are bright. We want to achieve this with the greatest balance of justice and respect for people, especially in light of their own cultures and values. As advocates for a stable human population, we believe this can only be achieved in a world without growing numbers of human beings making impossible demands on our ecosystems. We agree that the lifestyles of the rich nations must be changed along with efforts to invest in underdeveloped areas. And we thoughtfully affirm that education about and provision of family planning to all who need it is a key component of our efforts to assist in the just development of poor nations.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment