Six Billion People? Three Cheers!
Frank Furedi
Author of Population and Development: A Critical Introduction
The traditional argument of the population lobby, for example, was that controlling numbers was essential to economic development. For some time now, however, the population lobby has felt uncomfortable with linking its cause to that of development. Indeed, many of the leading figures in the population lobby – such as Lester Brown and Virginia Abernethy – are bitterly hostile to the idea of economic development. Today, professionals involved in population programmes are far more likely to justify their action on the grounds that it will improve women’s health or protect the environment, than because it contributes to economic development. Thus much of the UNFPA report is devoted to what the UNFPA calls reproductive health, reproductive rights and gender equality. An exploration of the old economic case for population policies is conspicuous by its absence.
International agencies which set out to study fertility practices in the developing world do not take the views of their subjects seriously. If their investigation reveals a general preference for large families, they have no hesitation in assuming responsibility for changing people’s attitudes. Studies of ‘unmet need’ for contraception are quite open about the fact that their aim is to make people aware of this need, whether they like it or not. The current UNFPA report proposes not only the provision of family planning services, but also calls for campaigns designed to alter attitudes on the issue. Throughout the report, the UNFPA stresses the need to educate this or that group of people to change their attitude towards sex and family size. The UNFPA euphemistically designates its propaganda campaign as ‘helping women and men to realise their family size desires’. What the UNFPA really means is that it will ‘help’ people to realise what it thinks is the family size they should desire.
