I actually had a copy on my desk.
I've edited my remarks into the form of a letter to the editor. Please
consider it one. Thanks,
eban
In Message Wed, 7 Sep 1994 09:09:12 -0700,
Marc Breslow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Eban Goodstein:
I don't know whether you saw our recent article on population control, but
your comments would in fact make a good response to it, and if possible,
I would like to publish some version of them in the next issue of the magazine.
Please let me know if you might be interested.
Thanks.
Betsy Reed, editor
Dollars and Sense
**
Eban GoodsteinDepartment of Economics
518-584-5000 (2739) 811 N. Broadway
fax: 518-584-3023 Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betsy Hartmann's article "Population Fictions" maintains that
a focus on population growth distracts from the "real" issues
underlying poverty and underdevelopment-- ie neocolonialism, debt,
unequal distribution of wealth, overconsumption in rich countries.
My own view is that population growth is better seen as one of the
"real" issues in its own right.
I think it is hard to argue that rapid population growth in
this day and age does not severely aggravate attempts to reduce
poverty in poor countries. In Zambia for example, 3% growth rates
mean that just to stay even, the (bankrupt) state has to increase
investment in education by 3% per year in real terms. Obviously
Zambia's current situation has been largely determined by its
colonial and neocolonial history, but from a practical perspective,
population control has got to be part of the solution.
By the year 2050 world population is certain to double to
around 11 billion people; an optimistic view sees population
stabilizing at that level, as a result of genuine and
(sustainable?) economic development in the LDC's, the much
discussed increase in education and formal labor market
participation for women, and greatly increased funding for birth
control. But it is disturbingly easy to envision much higher
population levels by that time, and genuinely horrifying to
consider what will happen without a very serious commitment to
comprehensive family planning.
There is a silver lining to this cloud: along with global
environmental threats, the population problem has the potential to
harness Northern self-interest to address problems of poverty in
the South. Family planning, absent a commitment to alleviating
poverty and improving the status of women, will not in itself be
sufficient to control population growth. Poor people have large
families for good economic reasons. Thus focussing the attention of
the developed world on population issues must ultimately force, and
to a surprising extent already has forced, a serious discussion of
poverty and patriarchy.
While suspicion of the World Bank's motives are in order, as
well as exposure of the coercive policies followed in India and
elsewhere, it seems that we should welcome the recent initiatives
by the environmental and development organizations, and put our
energies into seeing that population control is not about control,
but instead, about choice.
