The Human Population:The Human Population:Patterns, Processes, and ProblematicsPatterns, Processes, and Problematics

Lecture #18: Lecture #18: Ch13: Population PolicyCh13: Population Policy

Paul SuttonPaul Sutton

psutton@du.edupsutton@du.edu

Department of GeographyDepartment of Geography

University of DenverUniversity of Denver

John Weeks’ Intro to Population Policy“In the 1960s and 1970s it was relatively easy to see that the

population of the world was growing too rapidly and that something needed to be done about it. Things were done about it, through direct and indirect policies, and so now, in the twenty-first century, we find that the rate of population growth is slowing down. But the tremendous momentum built into the world’s age structure means that a huge number of people are still being added to the world’s total each day – and this will probably continue for the rest of your life. In the process, the implications of population growth and change have grown increasingly complex, requiring new policies and new approaches to policy implementation. In this chapter your demographic perspective will be put to work looking at how people and nations have tried, and continue to try, to influence demograpic events. This is an important use to which a demographic perspective can be put – employing your understanding of the causes and consequences of population growth to improve the human condition, including your own.”

Does the world agree on Population Policy?

• Well……NO.

• Some want growth maintained

• Some want growth curbed

• Some want growth increased

• Many see a Population-Environment connection

What is a Policy?• In General: A policy is a formalized set of

procedures designed to guide (change?) behavior. It’s purpose is either to maintain consistency in behavior or to alter behavior in order to achieve a specified goal.

• Population Policy: represents a strategy for achieving a particular pattern of population or demographic change.

Policy Approach

• Direct (specific):

Reduce Fertility to replacement level.

• Indirect (general):

Increase status of women via education, empowerment, and access to contraception.

Assessing the Future• SWAG (Scientific Wild Ass Guess)• How will fertility change:

– In the United States?– Globally?

• How will mortality change:– In the United States?– In Kenya?– Globally?

• How will migration change?• None of these questions are easy to answer

accurately

Establishing a goal• Demography is usually an intermediate goal

which is believed to influence more idealistic goals like:– Improved standard of living– Reducing economic inequalities– Promoting gender equality– Eliminating hunger or racial/ethnic tension– Curbing environmental degradation– Preserving international peace– Increasing personal freedom

The Cairo (1994) International Conference on Population &

Development (ICPD)

• 15 principles of population related goals aimed at improving economic, cultural, and social development to improve quality of life for all people.

Basics of Goal Setting

• Is expected future good or bad?

• If good, how to maintain status quo

• If bad, what and how to change– Will growth curbe economic development?– Will age/sex structure undermine economy?

• Policies must be continually evaluated Re their effectiveness– Did desired demographic effect occur?– If demographic effect did occure did desired

ancillary effects occur?

Population Policy in the 21st Century• Fig 13.1 assumes a country or people are aware of

the future, anticipate change, and try to deal with it.

• Some countries assume tomorrow will be like today (“traditional”) often they are Pro-Natalist

• Pro-Natalist Policies– Forbid/outlaw divorce and/or abortion– Impede progress of women

• Big Problem: Gender inequality– Are attempts to improve the legal, social, and economic

status of women just more cultural imperialism

The Nations of the World ignore Demography at their own Peril

• The United Nations Population Division regularly queries the nations of the world about their attitude about their population growth.

• More and more governments representing a growing fraction of the world population are trying to slow population growth.

• Middle countries (happy with current growth rate) are most interesting (some happy with low fertility: U.S. some happy with high fertility: Saudi Arabia)

Government’s view of their country’s birth rate

Retarding Growth

• Why?– Must stabilize population eventually– Benefits Economic Development– Natural Resource limits are looming

• How?– Increase mortality– Decrease Fertility– Influence Migration

Influencing Mortality

• Increasing Mortality– The lifeboat ethic– Triage

• Decreasing Mortality– Usually in tandem with decreasing fertility

The Life Boat Ethic(often attributed to Garret Hardin)

“The lifeboat ethic is based on the premise that since a lifeboat holds only so many people and any more than that will cause the whole boat to sink, only those with a reasonable chance to survive (those with low fertility) should be allowed into the lifeboat. Withholding food and medical supplies could drastically raise the death rates in less developed nations and thus provide a longer voyage for those wealthier nations already riding in the lifeboat.

………..Bon voyage”

Triage“Triage is the French word for sorting or picking, and

refers to an anrmy hospital practice of sorting the wounded into three groups – those who are in sufficiently good shape that they can survive without immediate treatment, those who will survive if they are treated without delay, and those ‘basket cases’ who will die regardless of what treatment might be applied. As with the lifeboat ethic , it translates into selectivity in providing food and economic aid should the day come when supplies of seach are far less than demand. It means sending aid only to those countries that show promise of being able to bring their rates of population growth under control and abandoning those nations that are not likely to improve.”

Decreasing Mortality(why would anyone want to do that it increases population growth )

“Most people probably share the opinion that raising mortality is better grist for science fiction than for population policy.”

1) How linked are dropping mortality and fertility?

2) Often they are administratively linked via health care provision in the less developed countries.

3) Infant mortality link with fertility is weak (there are examples of causation every which way)

Data for Guatemala suggest that it may take at least 2 generations for reductions in infant mortality to have any influence on fertility.

Influencing Migration

• Should be easy right?

• Easier than promoting Death.

• Easier than preventing Birth.

• Still, migration is tough to control.

“Immigration may be the sincerest form of flattery but few countries encourage it.”

• Causes racial, ethnic, and cultural conflict• Has been dramatically facilitated by

improvements in global transporation and communication infrastructure

• Immigration to U.S. and Canada a major fraction of global flow today

• Outmigration from Mexico is a mixed blessing: Remittances good, Loss of working population bad.

Immigration History of the U.S.(this will go on for the next 12 slides)

• Prior to the Civil War immigration was unrestricted.– Encouraged by European Death Rate drop– Free Migration from Europe to North and South

America and Oceania one of the most significant migration of people across international boundaries in human history

After the Civil War we started to get our panties in a bunch about immigration

Immigration of Act of 1882

• Opening of new lands in U.S. plus European economic woes caused increased migration after the Civil War

• This law levied a head tax of 50 cents on each immigrant and blocked the entry of “… idiots, lunatics, convicts, and people likely to become public charges.”

Ethnic Exclusion• 1849 Gold Rush in California created demand for

labor• Much labor supplied by Chinese immigration• Chinese worked on Railroad and as

strikebreakers (scabs) at east coast strikes• U.S. broke a treaty with China and excluded them

from entry to the U.S.• Chinese exclusion acts lasted from 1882-1943• Japanese filled gap for some bime but were

specifically excluded in 1924

European Migration• Mostly Northern and Western Europeans migrated to

U.S. in early stages (98% in 1890)• Shifted to Southern and Eastern Europeans in about

1890• Ellis Island formed in 1892• 1891 law prevented people with diseases, criminals, the

insane (1903), TB (1907)• In 1917 a literacy requirement was instated which

required that anyone over 16 must be able to read.• Turn of the century (1900) migrations was astronomical

in numbers and comparable to rates of migration to U.S. in late 1980’s and early 1990’s

Post World War I(“Not too tired, not too poor, not too many.”

Oh, and by the way, preferably white europeans)

• 1921 Congress passed “The Quota Law” (this was the first act to set numerical limits on immigration)

• “limited the number of aliens of any nationality to 3% of foreign born persons of that nationality who lived in the U.S. in 1910”

• Example: In 1910 there were 11,498 Bulgarians in the U.S. Therefore only (.03)*(11,498)= 345 Bulgarians could migrate to U.S. in 1921

1924 “The Immigration Quota Act”• Racist ideas of Eugenics were becoming

increasingly popular

• “Nordics {people from northwestern Europe] were genetically superior to others.”

• Result: Dramatic and increased restrictions to immigration.

1929 The National Origins Quota• Attempt to deflect criticism about discriminating nature

of 1924 law.• Based on ethnic proportions of U.S. population in 1790

(no data existed so they guessed)

• Fixed total of 150,000 immigrants allowed per year• If 1790 U.S. population was 50% English then 75,000 of

the new immigrants would be English• All countries allowed a minimum of 100• Congress could and did overrride the Quotas to allow

European refugees to U.S. in prelude to WWII

(Einstein came, not a bad deal )

1952 The McCarran-Walter Act(The Immigration and Naturalization act of 1952)

• Spurred on by Anti-Communist McCarthy era

• Migrant candidates assessed for their “compatibility” to American Society

• Preferences for needed skills, and relatives of American citizens.

• Canada Mirrored U.S. immigration policy pretty closely. Why? If they didn’t they would have been inundated with immigrants.

Contemporary U.S. Immigration Policy

• Ethnic discrimination ended in early 1960’s

• Immigration Act of 1965 ended national origins Quota method

• Restrictions on total #’s remain, as well as on restrictions based on Hemisphere of origin.

• Preference system: – Relatives of American Citizens– Parents of U.S. citizens are unrestricted– Labor Dept. Certification for Labor Skills a priority– 1976: Parents of American child (kid must be 21)

U.S. Immigration Policy created massive numbers of illegal (undocumented) aliens

• Rapid Population growth in Mexico

• Mexico’s Economy could not absorb growth

• 1950’s and 1960’s ‘Bracero’ program

• 1965 ‘Bracero’ Program ended by Cesar Chavez and other Mexican-Americans along with an attempt at curbing illegal immigration to U.S. from Mexico.

1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)

• U.S. Perception was that our border was “Out Of Control”.

• Illegal aliens were taking jobs from Americans• Illegals wee sapping the U.S. Welfare system• Illegals were Granted “amnesty” and a shot at citizenship

for those living continuously in the U.S. since before January 1st, 1982

• Made it illegal to hire illegal aliens with fines and enforcement

• Law aimed at curtailing illegal immigration but had no (ZERO) impact

1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act

• Shifted focus away from busting employers

• Shifted focus toward Border Security

• Big walls outside Tiajuana

• More Border Patrol agents

• 2000 illegal immigrants apprehended every day

• Effectiveness…………(ZERO)

• Catch and release Gate Keeping

• Brain Drain (who wins ?)

Immigration Policy & Other Countries

• Labor is migrating worldwide• Germany ‘receives’ many Turks & Eastern Euros• England receives ~50,000/year from India & Pakistan• Italy (historically outmigration) enacted policy in 1986

to curb immigration• Denmark gets 15,000 from family re-unification alone

(created laws to prevent this)• Malaysia ‘received 65,000 Indonesians in 1st 6 months

of the year 2000• Afghans flood into Pakistan

Policy to control Immigration is basically an absolute failure

Massey’s “Perverse Laws of International Immigration”:

– 1) Immigration is easier to start than stop.– 2) Actions taken to restrict immigration often have the

opposite effect– 3) Fundamental causes of immigration maybe outside control

of policy makers– 4) Immigrants understand Immigration better than policy

makers and academics– 5) Because immigrants are smarter about immigration they

are better able to circumvent policies aimed at stopping them.

Segway to Fertility(Why does U.S. withdraw family planning funding?)

“In the final analysis most attempts to limit immigration are motivated less by a desire to limit population growth in general, and more to limit the entrance of certain kinds of people into the country (no matter what country we are talking about). The greater the social and cultural differences between sending and receiving societies, the more likely it is that attempts will be made to slow down the pace of immigration. It is easy to conclude, then, that the most effective means by which you can retard growth is to nip it in the bud – to limit fertility.”

Limiting Fertility• Definitely the best way to slow growth

• Definitely the most complex problem

• 3 Preconditions to fertility decline (Ansley Coale)– 1) Acceptance of calculated choice as a valid element in

fertilty (secularism ?)– 2) Perception of advantages to reduced fertility on an

individual basis (desire for lower fertility)– 3) Availability, knowledge, and mastery of techniques of

fertility control (filling the unmet need gap)

• (Note: most policies focus on #3)

Family Planning• Provide each woman with the technological

ability to have only as many children as she wants by providing information, services, and appliances (including abortion and sterilization)

• Often provided today in tandem with HIV/AIDS prevention info etc.

• Key Assumption was: ‘Give them access to birth control and they will use it.’ (Not always true)

• Sex and reproduction are politically and socially sensitive issues. Selling family planning as part of Health care was a good Public Relations Practice

Spread of Family Planning“In the mid-1960’s, developing countries began to adopt policies to support family

planning as a means of slowing population growth. By the late 1960’s, family planning had become a worldwide social movement that involved international organizations such as the the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA), government agencies such as the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), nonprofit organizations such as the affiliates of the International Planned Parenthood Federation, and a host of individuals, many with backgrounds in medicine and public health.”

• 1965 21 countries supported family planning• 1974 86 countries supported family planning• 1989 123 countries supported family planning (91% of world’s

population)

• NOTE: Family Planning Programs goal was to eliminate “Unmet Need”; coercion was never, ever, part of their program.