It is common to hear arguments about the economic benefits of population control when discussing foreign aid and developing countries. The standard argument is that children are expensive, burden families, and outstrip resources; therefore the last thing a developing country needs to grow its economy is more dependents. It follows from this reasoning that the only way to improve the economic conditions of these low-income nations is to have a growth plan that slows down the rate of population increase. However, is this even a coherent line of reasoning that has borne itself out in history? Looking at the development of the United States would suggest the opposite is true.
When coming up with a growth strategy for a developing country it is wise to look assess the situation correctly. For example, the economic situation in China is different in nature than the economic situation in America because of institutions, comparative advantage, etc. Trying to use the current strategies of growth for highly developed economies like the United States for the less developed economies like Sudan are foolish. The Population Reference Bureau declares in its 2013 “World Population Data Sheet” that declining birth rates are associated with economic growth. This claim is an illusory correlation masquerading as precisely the opposite of what it may actually mean. Could it not be the case that an increase in economic development allows for a lower birth rate rather than the other way around?
To answer this question I will answer another question that was already posited, “What did the U.S. do and experience during its early development?” According to historians and primary source authors (including Benjamin Franklin) the increase in the American birth rate coincided with a vast increase in economic growth. Only as America began industrializing did the fertility rate (and not the birth rate) decline. It would seem the less industrialized a country is the more it depends on human capital, if it can support it, to grow its economy. So why are we trying to decrease human capital through family planning initiatives rather than make available necessities for human life? It is because ideology and arrogance often trump experience and logic.
About The Contributor
