Selfish interests keep many from cooperating with family planning. They may want to keep their race, religion or language group numerically superior to gain or maintain political power, though they would be glad to see reduction in other’s populations. One major Latin-American nation recently restricted birth control there, hoping to double her population within the century. The desire for growing national power and fear of overpopulated neighbors were cited as reasons.

The Catholic Church has long used religious dogma to block any “artificial” form of birth control, so keeping her impoverished masses swelling in numbers. The Encyclopædia Britannica summarizes the overall outlook:

“It would be futile to deny that artificial population control is inhibited by powerful moral constraints and taboos. . . . even the most optimistic program of population control can only hope to achieve a slight reduction in the rate of increase by the end of the 20th century.”​—Vol. 18, p. 54.

Economic Development

Other efforts attempt to slow the rate of population growth, rather than trying to feed any number that are born. Wealthy industrial nations generally have low growth rates, some even approaching the widely hailed goal of “zero population growth.” Their peoples seem naturally motivated to have fewer, better cared for children. On the other hand, in the less developed countries with largely rural populations, children themselves are considered a form of wealth. Parents desire them to help with farm work and as “social security” to care for them in old age.

As a result, families in these countries average nearly twice as many children as those in industrial nations. Also, “people have six or more children because they know that two or three will die,” says a Bangladesh official. And studies show that families who lose children often overcompensate by producing more living children than those whose children all survive.

Thus many conclude that the answer to overpopulation lies in economic development and industrialization, together with adequate measures to keep children alive so parents will not overcompensate. However, says The Encyclopædia Britannica, “overrapid growth of the population brings in its train an excessive need for [economic] investments . . . just to keep pace with the extra mouths to feed and bodies to clothe and shelter.” Thus, little or nothing is left to improve living standards.​—Vol. 14, p. 823.