 |
(JG Graphics/Josep Tri Ronggo Laksono)
|
Recently I have been contemplating populations. That is, population
as a construct, as a concept, something to count, to measure and as a
subject for policy. Population specialists, such as demographers, get
quite enthusiastic about population data. For them, trends in overall
population numbers, ageing populations, overwhelmingly young
populations, population densities, population cohorts, total fertility
rates etcetera are their daily fix. And so they should be. Few of us
realize that big-picture population changes are critical and affect
national development in so many ways, which in turn affects the benefits
that accrue to each and every one of us as citizens.
The elements of population policy are relatively straightforward;
there are two choices. Let people get on with their usual life cycle of
birth, then living as long as possible, followed by eventual death,
which allows populations to fluctuate naturally, or intervene in
targeted ways to influence this fluctuation. It came as a surprise to me
to learn that there are really only three legitimate methods to
intervene: various forms of family planning, education or a mixture of
both. Of course there are nuances to these methods, such as family
planning with incentives, education about optimum family size but in
essence the three choices seem to be it.
Asia has been at the heart of several well-known government-supported
experiments in intervention in the life cycles of their citizens. The
best known are arguably China’s one-child policy and Vietnam’s two-child
policy. A generation or two on, impacts from these interventions are
only now coming to light. Chinese men are in a desperate competition to
find eligible brides. Abortion rates are ballooning in Vietnam as people
seek to ensure at least one of their two children is a boy. Many other
populous Asian countries, notably India, Bangladesh and Indonesia, have
had their own issues with population growth.
In Indonesia’s case government intervention was so successful that it
was awarded a prize from the United Nations. In 1989 the
then-president, Suharto, was given an award for cutting fertility rates
and reducing overall population growth to levels which were more likely
to guarantee development for all. The 1980s and ’90s were both decades
in Indonesia where family planning was the background mantra to better
development. Liberally translated, the mantra espoused “Two children are
enough; boys or girls, both are the same.” But apart from the award,
what have been the long-term effects in Indonesia of this population
intervention?
Certainly there has been no “artificial skewing” of the population
ratios by sex, as there has been in China. Male and female birth ratios
are well within normal limits seemingly as Indonesians took on the
belief that male and female children were indeed equally precious.
Furthermore abortion is not legal in Indonesia so most Indonesians would
defer to nature or God on the sex of their children being born, rather
than use illegal abortion as a way to select the sex of their children.
Research has shown that in many cases, the intended positive effect
of having fewer children, combined with other economic factors such as
increasing work opportunities, has increased overall economic
development for many, if not all. Middle class Indonesians, who
internalized the idea that smaller families were good, have passed on
this ideal to their children, who in turn further contributed to
continued sustained development.
Indeed the policy of encouraging smaller families was so successful,
that having smaller numbers of children has surely become the norm in
Indonesia. Through their own education and through the experience of
their own parents, many young parents today may not even be aware there
was a family planning intervention supported by government.
But recent figures have revealed they may be in for a bit of shock:
it may be time for a new intervention. The birth rate in Indonesia is on
the rise again. At a total fertility rate of 2.6, this means that more
than five million new Indonesians per year are added to the total.
Population projections for 2010-25 show levels which will move Indonesia
into a scenario where populations may not be allowed to fluctuate
naturally anymore.
Where is the recent trend toward larger families coming from? Some
believe there is a religious element behind the trend with a growing
number of people reverting to fate or God on how many children they
have. This has in part been spurred on by some of the religious groups
actively coming out and saying that family planning is haram , or at
least that methods such as sterilization are. Others have criticized the
methods of family planning, including availability of effective
contraception, a lack of understanding of the relative benefits of
long-acting methods, a preference for short-term methods such as monthly
injections and the lack of involvement of most men in becoming users of
contraception themselves, preferring to let their wives pick
contraception of her choice.
Should Indonesia decide to ramp up a new family planning and
educational campaign, this time it needs to be nuanced. In the so-called
golden times of family planning in Indonesia, all parts of Indonesia
were targeted equally, yet population densities varied widely. The
densely populated islands of Java and Bali and Sumatra were treated in
exactly the same way as the miniscule populations of what was then named
Irian Jaya, or the sparse and widely dispersed populations of
Kalimantan. This may need to change this time around.
While nowadays the population that is on most government minds is the
voting population, as we move steadily towards the next political era
in Indonesia’s history, should we not keep in mind broader population
dynamics too?
We all share the limited resources available to us on the planet, as
more of us crush into cities at risk of succumbing to natural disasters,
as climate change increasingly affects all populations, though in
different ways, should we not be mindful that populations are made up of
not just other people, but of both you and me, too, and that each of us
is capable of making our own choices for the good of the broader
population?
By Keith Hargreaves on 08:00 pm Jul 01, 2014
Keith Hargreaves is a project manager at Strategic Asia Europe.
No comments:
Post a Comment