Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-rnpqb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-05T06:25:17.503Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21.1 - alternative perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 May 2018

David Canning
Affiliation:
Professor of Population Sciences and Professor of Economics and International Health, School of Public Health, Harvard University, Massachusetts, USA
Bjorn Lomborg
Affiliation:
Copenhagen Business School
Get access

Summary

Summary

The chapter covers a wide range of issues, and there is a lack of detail in some of the arguments. We have to think of priorities across as well as within issues, and this chapter puts forward five thematic priorities.

There is a fundamental issue of applying benefitcost analysis to reducing fertility because this takes no account of the well-being of those potentially born. This is probably an insoluble philosophical problem, but we also have the more mundane issue that people like to have children, and this benefit is not included in the analysis. People value children, and the proper place for decision making should be at the household level. I would prefer to see targets based on access to family planning rather than contraceptive use. On the benefit of maternal and child health, much of the benefit of family planning comes from better birth spacing and timing, rather than number of births. Births before the mother is 18 or less than 36 months after the previous birth are very high risk to both mother and child.

The largest impact of family planning appears to be through rising per capita income, which I do not see as a measure of welfare. National income accounting does not, for example, include leisure time. Similarly, the value to parents of having children does not appear in the national income accounts.

When families make decisions, there is a strong case for giving more power to women, particularly in male-dominated societies, as husbands almost always want more children than their wives, but it is the wives who bear the costs of higher fertility.

Improvement in healthy life span has contributed as much as economic growth to improvements in human welfare since 1960. The problem of an aging population is that it can lead to a rise in the old age dependency ratio. But this does not have to be so. If the old save for their retirement needs, including healthcare, they are not dependent. A simple way to achieve this is to force savings out of earnings into private accounts to meet retirement needs, supplemented by a basic pension to avoid poverty. In this way, there are only minimal transfers between generations, which means the age dependency issue is not really a problem. Population aging is incompatible with the current institutions and work and pension arrangements in many countries.

Type
Chapter
Information
Prioritizing Development
A Cost Benefit Analysis of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals
, pp. 395 - 396
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • alternative perspective
    • By David Canning, Professor of Population Sciences and Professor of Economics and International Health, School of Public Health, Harvard University, Massachusetts, USA
  • Edited by Bjorn Lomborg, Copenhagen Business School
  • Book: Prioritizing Development
  • Online publication: 30 May 2018
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108233767.046
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • alternative perspective
    • By David Canning, Professor of Population Sciences and Professor of Economics and International Health, School of Public Health, Harvard University, Massachusetts, USA
  • Edited by Bjorn Lomborg, Copenhagen Business School
  • Book: Prioritizing Development
  • Online publication: 30 May 2018
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108233767.046
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • alternative perspective
    • By David Canning, Professor of Population Sciences and Professor of Economics and International Health, School of Public Health, Harvard University, Massachusetts, USA
  • Edited by Bjorn Lomborg, Copenhagen Business School
  • Book: Prioritizing Development
  • Online publication: 30 May 2018
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108233767.046
Available formats
×