Since its inception in 1978, China’s one-child policy has always been marked by controversy. While the government has claimed that the policy has prevented 400 million births, it’s an achievement paid for in blood. Over the years, the one-child policy has seen thousands and thousands of Chinese mothers undergo forced abortion, sterilization and numerous human rights abuses. In 2001, for instance, 25,000 forced abortions were carried out in the Huaiji County of Guangdong, after reports of laxity in the local family planning-program. Such a case typifies the Chinese government’s approach to its policy: uncompromising, brutally efficient, putting an emphasis on state-based goals rather than individual freedom.
Step in Mechai Viravaidya, founder and chair of Thailand’s Population and Community Development association. While family planning in China is associated with a regime of terror, Mechai’s policies have been so warmly received that he’s earned an endearing nickname for himself: “Mr. Condom”. Like China, Thailand was caught with the problem of excessively high birth rates (an average of 7 children per family) coupled with poverty. And, like China, Thailand saw the need for state-level intervention. However, unlike China, Thailand took a completely different approach. Speaking at TED about these policies, Mechai’s novel approach could best be summed in one line: “We went to the people who were seen to be the cause of the problem… [and saw them] to be the solution.”
Indeed, Mechai’s story is notable because it exemplifies social policy at its best: one that achieves results without violating individual freedoms. Thais were educated, given the appropriate resources, and then left to decide how they would plan their families. The average number of children then fell from 7 in 1974 to 1.5 in 2000, and Thailand’s population has remained stable ever since.
Nonetheless, some will be quick to point out that while the Thai story is laudable, it cannot be applied for China’s case. China has a much larger population, making public administration a thornier task. Also, there’s no telling that the Chinese will respond in the same manner, and population growth won’t spiral back to its 1970 levels.
While this fear remains present in many government officials, recent data has shown otherwise. In 2006, a study was led by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences’ Zheng Zhenzhen in Jiangsu, where 18,638 women of childbearing age were surveyed about child preferences. The results were stunning: the ideal family size was stated to be 1.46, with 55% of the women interviewed saying “one child is best”. This desire to have less children has been echoed in another study, and also in broader regional regional trends, where modernization and fertility rates are inversely related to one another.
Therefore, the burden of proof isn’t on advocacy groups but the government to show why the one-child policy still makes sense. Also, with labor shortfalls and other problems of social instability, it could be it its own interests to do so. The imperative isn’t merely moral: it’s empirical.
PHOTO CREDIT: Creative Commons
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.