Population growth is rising.
Gaps between the rich and poor are widening. Depletion of natural resources is rapid. Something has to give. In order to increase
education and development in poor, third world areas, fertility rates must
decline providing women with the time and money needed to improve their lives
as traditional rural families adapt to an urban lifestyle causing tremendous
economic change.
My academic career revolves around business and
economics. As an accounting major
numbers come easy to me as I naturally observe patterns and trends. Recent issues regarding fertility rates and
population growth provide an intriguing issue inline with my interests. My father does business in developing areas
known for these issues and I hear secondhand from him about their severity.
Looking specifically toward third world areas in India and
Africa, the population is growing out of control. India’s population is on pace to pass China’s
within the next forty to fifty years.
Living standards will drastically decrease as the poor face increased
economic hardships. That is, unless
something is done to reduce fertility rates.
In an article from the Economist, families have begun to move from the middle of nowhere,
farming lifestyles into a town or village with schools, markets and factories
nearby. This process is referred to as
“The Abandoned Hamlet.” In the old
lifestyle families were poor and could not afford to hire labor in the
fields. Children were born in order to
provide labor at low cost and provide social security for parents. Once their village changes or they move into
a more civilized area, the cost of children rises due to education and
taxes. The state may even provide a
pension, and families no longer need children as the primary form of social
security. In this scenario, the cost per
child may outweigh the benefits, thus reproduction will slow down.
Where will population rise most rapidly? In places that can’t handle the growth:
developing nations stricken with hunger, political instability and environmental
degradation. These places have no family
planning institutions in place and contraceptives are extremely rare. In America family planning programs pop up
everywhere at all times to prevent rapid population growth as seen in places
like India and Africa. According to Gopi Gopalakrishnan, the
President of World Health Partners, women in India “are desperate for family
planning services, to take control of their lives.” The demand is there, the supply is not.
Of course there are benefits to high fertility rates and
population growth. Many ethnicities and
religions call for large families and at least one son. Governments view high growth rates as a
positive due to an increase in labor force and a larger military recruiting
pool. As mentioned previously, more
children for extremely rural families provide social security as the parents
become older.
The economic benefits are much more promising and
imperative. With lower fertility and
growth rates women will enjoy more free time and the opportunity to enter the
workforce, earn an income and buy goods and services in the market. More income per family will equate to more
savings, which will turn into more investment to boost production and overall
GDP. Increased investment will also
allow for more capital expenditures such as schools, roads and hospitals. Overall if you want higher standards of living
then reduce fertility.
Driven by the desire to improve her life and future, Malala
was determined to attend school and escape the typical role of a Pakistani woman.
Why did these Talibani militants
attack? For the fear of altering the
status quo and dealing with the changes that educated females would bring. These changes need to happen in order to
preserve living standards in areas of high fertility rates. Malala may not realize this now but her
bravery might just spur activity leading to positive economic shocks in the
future.
I'm taking a class right now on world poverty and we have talked at length about the importance of educating women in order to decrease poverty rates across the world. As you said, higher levels of education are linked to lower fertility rates. This is both because they are more educated about various birth control options as well as the fact that they are more qualified for jobs and are therefore not spending as much time at home, etc. It's really upsetting that governments and cultures around the world are revolting against the education of females. It's disappointing because it's an equality issue but also because it's a fairly simply way to improve quality of living and lower poverty rates around the world.
ReplyDeleteThis blog touches on a very important topic. Reducing fertility rates is important for increasing quality of life, reducing poverty, and also reducing overpopulation and overconsumption of resources. Educating women has proven to be a very successful way to achieve all of these things and it is very upsetting that governments are striving to prevent this. Aside from the lack of respect for women their equality, it is disappointing because this kind of change benefits the society as a whole.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting how fertility and population growth can change views on effective government models. In my opinion, as populations rise there is a certain limit by which democracy is no longer a feasible and effective system. Take India vs. China. Both have exploding populations, but China is much more able to control it. India, the world's largest democracy, is run a mock with poverty and disorganization. It's a matter of freedoms vs. a state of living, I suppose, a decision future Americans may have to make decades from now, when our population reaches the same size. Ballots by then would take three days to count.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to economic increases by allowing education and indireclty reducing fertility. I think it is important to high light the other side. In China for example, the economic growth is based on a booming population filling in all the voids and creating a massive, cheap labor force. With it's population contracting under the one-child policies, the next several decades will see a heavy economic downfall. You can't grow an economy to a certain size and then suddenly remove the numbers that are supporting it. It is cause for an artificial economic crash. Or so some say.
I think educating women is great and so is population control. I just thought it was interesting to see how some economists warn against drastic population measures, as they may cause future recessions.