No Easy Answer

Whenever I think my blog isn't being read very widely I have a tendency to use it as a tool to rant. These days the Blog is definitely very lonely—even Mr. Mouse Potato doesn't read it—in fact, I doubt he even knows this site exists. Therefore, be forewarned that there is a bit of ranting coming up.

I've blogged about China's one-child policy before and continue to be very interested in it. However, I often don't like discussing it with people from outside of China. Most of the time Westerners tend to pop their eyes big and exclaim what a horrible, inhumane policy it is. As such, these conversations rarely turn out to be interesting or intellectually satisfying as that view point simplifies such a complicated issue. Furthermore, I am the product of that policy and I've always had the impression that while my parents' and later generations may have, from time to time, preferred to have additional children (at least I think my parents did), they for the most part complied with it without too much complaint because they thought it was for the good of the country. Perhaps the Chinese government did a really good job brainwashing all of us, but if we, the people who had to live with the policy, didn't judge it too harshly, why should outsiders? We thought we made a sacrifice for the good of society, and for someone to come and make unflattering comments undermines what we consider our contributions to society.

Yes, I've read propaganda-ish articles about women who have gone through pretty horrible ordeals because they didn't comply with the policy. I can understand why the Western world would sympathize with them, and I personally also find some of the stories pretty heart wrenching. But the Western world also emphasizes the importance of rules and abiding by the laws of society. If other people have abided by the law, why should a few individuals be exempt?

I guess in the end, the fundamental question here is the merit of that policy. It may be difficult to accept a quota on reproduction, but at the rate China's population was growing, the government's concerns were not unjustified. The explosion in population could have been detrimental to China's development and what good is it when you can reproduce as you please but you must live in squalor and lead a miserable life? Many people in my parents’ generation had more than three siblings and education wasn't exactly a priority or a possibility in many cases.

Lately, however, I've been pondering on the issue some more and playing the devil's advocate. Was the policy truly beneficial? How do you judge or calculate its benefits? I thought about projecting population growth absent the policy, and then measuring per capita GDP, but GDP likely would have been different any way. Absence of the policy will likely result in lower per capita GDP, but what about other factors? The fact that the Chinese prefer boys over girls will mean that girls will probably outnumber boys (as a result of keep having children until you get a boy), and maybe as society progressed, birth rate will lower naturally anyway with the advancement of birth control techniques and pursuit for quality of life (c'mon, let's admit it—kids are fun but not when there are more than three or whatever is your limit). Perhaps things would have been fine without the policy, and China wouldn't have had the extra burden of having to deal with criticisms from other countries. I am surprised that there hasn't been a flurry of studies on this very fascinating topic.

I am also surprised that the citizens of China hasn't required a government study to show that they haven't sacrificed for nothing. Just a show in decrease of population growth itself isn't enough—there must be data, analyses and conclusions on what are the exact (or even approximate) social and economic benefits of the policy.

Any interesting thoughts on how you would set up a study to measure the benefits of the policy?