Which is exactly what was to expect. Small one time payments and encouraging words don‘t fix an environment that has been hostile towards families for generations. And now that encouragement and small incentives didn‘t work, we can all imagine what comes next.
this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
9 points (90.9% liked)
China
254 readers
5 users here now
Genuine news and discussion about China
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Why is China trying to boost its population after strictly controlling it for decades? Especially why now, when the earth is melting and a smaller population would go a long way towards eliminating a lot of the pressure on the environment?
This is not necessarily a crisis, China is already densely populated (excepting the arid areas) , and their big infrastructure was mostly completed during the peak of working population - as planners (NDRC) intended long ago. Korea and Japan have lower fertility levels for longer and are still nice places to live. However China will have to raise retirement ages - among the lowest in the world.
China’s demographic patterns have been largely shaped by the controversial one-child policy,
"Largely shaped" is not accurate - the data shows that the fertility rate fell dramatically some years before the one-child policy was introduced. Similar declines were observed in other countries, as diverse as Brazil, Bangladesh, S. Korea (lowest in world), Taiwan, most of East and South Europe..., etc., none of which had such a policy.
I'd say it's much more related to urbanisation and education, people moved from villages into huge tower blocks which are not friendly for kids to play, career ambition increased, and inflexible working hours force people to pay for child-care, as grandparents stayed in the villages.
For the country as a whole, statistics show that they over-constructed these blocks - there are plenty of square metres of living space per person, however the distribution is broken - many apartments are empty, the price is too high, so the bubble has to burst. The hukou residency control system is also broken. So a lot needs to change, but it's not so simple as portrayed in the west.
So a lot needs to change, but it's not so simple as portrayed in the west.
I agree that a lot needs to change in China, but the article is citing Chinese officials, and the China Project emoys Chinese nationals with deep regional knowldge complemented by other relevant expertise. So this is not simply a narrative "portrayed in the west". This comes from Chinese experts, too.
Isn't it plausible, that both chinese planners, and western critics of chinese planners, have a motivation to over-emphasise their own effectiveness ? If anything this story tells me, it's not all going to plan... (the same can apply elsewhere too). It was easier to plan infrastructure, than people's family lives.
It isn't the government's business to plan people's family lives in the first place. They should aim to create and free and democratic society where people have a say rather than planning families for them and, among others, forcing women to have (or prohibit) abortions as it has been done in China for decades.
I'd like to see democracy and open civil society in China, and hope China Project helps towards that end, but as somebody who develops a climate model I can't wait for this, it's critical to understand the concepts of the planners of the country with by far the highest emissions. As somebody who also has a demographic model, I'm aware that many countries followed a similar trajectory of fertility without coercive measures, the 'conventional wisdom' is that education and urbanisation are key factors. As somebody who learned chinese, traveled to many corners of the country, and worked in a chinese university for six months, I have some idea of the complexity and diversity of that society and it’s history. However, if nuance is not appreciated here, I could take my comments elsewhere.