is there a need to manage population growth?

The debate on whether to control population growth or not stems not just from the conflict between the church and the state but more on whether rapid population growth is a hindrance to sustainable economic development or a factor promoting such. Sustainable economic development implies new concept of development jumping from mere figures to a wider concept of fairness and opportunity for all the people with regard to world’s finite natural resources and carrying capacity. One of the values of sustainability is life sustenance- the ability to provide needs. In this regard, several literatures about population management point to negative macro and micro implications of rapid population growth.

Macro Level Implications

Although population growth could be beneficial for developed countries with a population age structure which is almost rectangular (e.g. Sweden), rapid population growth negatively affects development of developing countries (NEDA, 1993). Rapid population growth has effects on natural resources, environment, capital- both physical and human, and income inequality.

On Natural Resources. Natural resources are viewed as inputs to production. More inputs will be needed to produce goods and services needed by the rapidly growing population. Although it might not be a problem if addressed adequately and timely, more labor applied to fixed land, for example, might lead to diminishing returns. According to some studies, if population grows rapidly and responses are not adapted on time, the population might not be able to avert declining labor productivity as a result of rapid growth (NEDA, 1993).

On environment. It has been viewed by many studies that rapid population growth worsens the degradation of the environment- destruction of forests, pollution, and exhaustion of resources among others. A slower population growth not only slows down environmental degradation but also gives more time to lay out mitigating measures (NEDA, 1993).

On capital. Population growth increases the dependency burden, that is, the age/sex structure of the population changes such that a larger population of the total population now belongs to the younger age group, implying that the greater the number of dependents, the greater the consumption out of a given income (NEDA, 1993). This leads to lesser savings, which are main sources of domestic investments, affecting the capacity of the population for investing in productive activities, thus resulting in a slower growth.

The negative effects of rapid population growth on physical capital formation are not so much as compared to the development of human capital. Less savings leads to lesser expenditures for health, education, and nutrition of the populace among others. For instance, countries with high population growth rate, such as the Philippines, have lower school expenditures per child (NEDA, 1993). In the supply side, the supply of educational services is determined by the capacity of the government to save and invest in educational services (Herrin, 1996).

On income inequality. Effects of population growth are apparent on wages and employment. Very rapid population growth rate leads to increase in the labor force. This could be a problem if the country’s economy could not absorb the rapid increase in the labor force. The more rapid increase in potential labor supply relative to increase in demand for labor would tend to depress the wage rates (Herrin, 1996).

Micro Level Implications

At the level of households, effects of population growth are felt on financial resource dilution. The dilution effect affects expenditures on education, employment of family members, and on savings.

On education. Pertinent to the investments to human capital, the capacity of households to support educational needs of their children is impeded as their size increases. Findings in the Philippines show that the presence of additional young children in the household reduces the probability that older siblings will be enrolled in school. These adverse effects might arise either because of financial resource dilution or increased demand for time spent in household production (Bauer, et al., 1992). The dilution effect explains that the decline in per capita income is a result among others of additional child (of either sex) in the family (Mason, 1989).

Estimates suggest that the impact of younger children on the enrolment status of older siblings operates mainly through resource dilution in the case of older brothers and through increased household duties in the case of older sisters (Bauer, et al., 1992). Probably due to rigid gender roles in the Philippines, “siblings nudge young men out of school and into the labor force and into the market and draw young women into the home” (Bauer, et al., 1992). In a comparative study conducted in Thailand and Korea, households with fewer children use the increased availability of resources to invest more in the schooling of their children (Mason, 1989).

On employment. The more common effect of additional children in the household is to inhibit women from entering the labor market. According to a study, on the average, female participation declines by 60% in household with no income to 52% in those with one. This analysis suggested that an important cost of children is the earnings women forego because of childrearing responsibilities (Bauer, 1992). The presence of children were found to significantly reduce the chances that women will be an earner. This would lead to lesser income for the family to support the needs of its members. A slack in the supply of employment is also created when the labor force grows rapidly.

On savings. Childrearing also depresses the rate household savings as is the case in the Philippines. A study shows that at the peak of the childrearing years, parents with only 2 children are, on the average, saving 7.4% of their disposable income, nearly 30% more than parents with more than 4 children” (Bauer, 1992). The calculated decline in average household size from 5.5 members in 1990 to 3.6 members in 2025 is calculated to produce an 18% increase in aggregate saving over the same period (Bauer, 1992).

Epilogue

Population growth, according to Herrin (1996), has positive effects on promotion of economies of scale and on technological change. As population grows, the market increase in size to a point where economies of scale are possible and more efficient in provision of goods and services. As is the case with economies of scale, population growth also enhances technological change in the light of the need to adopt a more intensive system which increase outputs in order to address the need to growing requirements of the population.

However, in spite of the fact that population growth could be of advantage to developed countries, it might have adverse effects on developing countries especially to those whose resources and production could not adapt to the rapid population growth as shown in the discussions above on macro and micro-level implications of rapid population growth. Population size and structure have effects both on human and natural resources- the main components of sustainable economic development. In the Philippine setting where development is constrained by the inability of the government to finance development and serve even the minimum basic needs of the populace, rapid population growth would mean slower development.

The government is constrained by its resources to serve goods and services to the people such as education, health, and nutrition. The present fiscal situation of the Philippines is not in favor of serving a larger population. The government at present cannot focus on development financing because the bulk of resources are targeted towards provision of basic social services. Unless the government could adequately support the growing population, economic development will be relatively difficult to attain more so, sustain. At present, the Philippine population is growing faster than the rate the economy is growing. If only production and resources are adequate to support the population, population growth would not be a problem.

At the level of households, the inability of the family to meet basic needs as the number of children increases poses a major problem in human development. More often than not, larger family hampers the investment of family on education and nutrition due to dispersion of income to more members. These sacrifice the quality of future generation’s quality would not be favorable for the economy.

Population growth per se is not a problem. It would even be advantageous if the same level of resources and production growth accompanies it. The problem is the ability to support the needs of the growing population. Only when the government could support adequately the needs of the population and households could meet their basic needs that economic development could be sustained. In this light, it is of necessity that population be managed and planned. After all, the subject and object of planning and of development are the people.

(15 August 2003) 

References: 

Bauer, J., Canlas, D., Fernandez, M.T. and A. Mason. "Family Size and Family Welfare in the Philippines." Honolulu: East-West Center, Working Papers Population Series No. 87. 

Herrin, A.N. and M.P. Costello, 1996. "Sources of Future Population Growth and Implications for Public Policy." 

Mason, A.W. (1989). "Demographic Change, Household Resources and Schooling Decisions." Paper presented at the International Symposium for Sources of Economic Dynamism in the Asia and Pacific Region: A Human Resource Approach, November 20-23, Nihondaigaku, Kaikan, Tokyo, Japan. 

NEDA (1993). Training Module on Integrated Population and Development Planning. Pasig: NEDA-Integrated Population and Development Project and Raya Media Services, Inc.