September 04, 2006	Monday	Sha'aban 10, 1427

SO far, economic and some socio-economic variables have been identified as factors behind population growth. It has been established that population reduction is positively correlated with inclusive economic growth, poverty eradication, and provision of education, health, and infrastructural facilities.

Non-economic variables or quasi-economic variables, that may appear non-economic but betray economic logic, remain outside the realm of consideration, however significant they may actually be.

Unless these variables too are factored in to seek active and quick public response, population growth rates will not fall fast to the desired levels. These non- or quasi-economic factors revolve around half the population that is female and, therefore, considered secondary in realms of public and private decision-making.

The secondary status of women is age old and has not improved despite the “impressive” GDP growth rates, vast women enrolment in universities, appointments of some women to the highest echelons, and the demonstrated ability of some women to even fly fighter jets in the skies.

The paradox is that these few women are not representative of the multitude who face physical and psychological abuse and lack effective recourse to the legal system where the scale is tipped against them. The fact that the Hudood Ordinance is so difficult to amend in favour of women shows the second-class status that women have in the country.

This second-class status of women speaks volumes about their ability to influence decisions even at home such as the microeconomic decision pertaining to family size. Population growth rate is, therefore, negatively correlated to the status of women. The lower their status, the higher would the population growth rate be.

Bulk of population growth is contributed by the poor low-income, less educated or uneducated households where women of productive age groups are totally subservient to men and elder women alike. So, a GDP growth and educational system that bypass the poor low-income segments will not be able to influence the population growth rates for the better any time soon. Here real population growth rates are meant and not the ones massaged for a favourable evaluation by the powers that be.

Even poverty reduction that raises people only to subsistence and slightly above will not impact population growth significantly for a very long time until people are integrated in the mainstream and are not just literate but are educated enough to become enlightened. That is, the male-female equation within their households stands transformed from one of extreme inequality to one of equity.

So, shall we wait until the asset and income distributive justice comes to prevail in our country as a precursor for male-female intra-household parity before population growth rate is brought down meaningfully? Or, shall we try on war footing to reduce intra-household gender disparities in parallel with macro level efforts towards reduction of income and education disparities?

The policy outlook thus far has been that focus should be on income and education and the rest will take care of itself by default. This too has not been happening. Persecution of women in educated affluent households also makes headlines.

In many cases, women are educated and in one case a woman computer engineer was gagged to death by a family comprising many male lawyers. So, in our country even education and professional training may not change traditional attitudes and behaviour.

And, the tradition is based on perverse economic logic. Girls were regarded as financial liabilities and boys as financial assets in pre-Islamic times. They still are viewed as such. Girls are then psyched into considering their own selves as secondary through their initiation and socialisation process. Women students may excel in education but not many view themselves at par with other members of the society.

Many will tend to take a backseat when it comes time to take crucial decisions related to various facets of personal and professional lives. And, when it will come time to start a family, many will hold their head high at the birth of a male child regarded as superior birth in a patriarchal society that relegates women to secondary status.

The desire for sons filters down to the low-income segments from the educated classes as well and they try to catch up even more on this score. These are significant quasi-economic factors that keep feeding into population growth rate, PTV ads notwithstanding that fall mostly on deaf ears. That is, desire for sons and secondary status of women who cannot influence family size are quasi-economic factors that need a frontal attack to control population growth.

What the policy makers assume will happen by default through GDP growth and education is not happening. So, a grand design is required to bring about gender parity in parallel and to shoot for its quick materialisation irrespective of when parity in incomes/assets and education is achieved.

First, equality before law is of paramount importance. All gender parity arguments will ring hollow for as long as the same is not upheld by the law of the land.

The Hudood Ordinance must be amended as desired by women and enlightened men who know religion just as well. Second, there is a need to drastically change the subservient, pleasing, and fatalistic images of women portrayed by electronic and print media in plays and ads alike.

Third, gender parity should begin to be inculcated from the primary school level in both the genders as girls need to understand, appreciate, and assert their status in society and boys must begin to come to terms with it.

Fourth, as for the bypassed vast population segments, mass campaigns by government and NGOs together can help change attitudes in addition to the electronic media that has a broad outreach too.

Fifth, women will need to stand up and take charge not just collectively but in their individual capacities also. This is a tall order but the first steps must be taken to influence quasi-economic factors of women’s status and supremacy of the son both of which influence population growth unfavourably for the country.

With unbridled population growth, the issue of income inequities and poverty are compounded and so are the issues of illiteracy, malnutrition, infant and maternal mortality, disease, pressure on scare resources, rural-urban migration, poor urban management, pollution, and environmental degradation.

All of these feed back into income disparities and poverty and the vicious circle goes on with half the country’s population of women unable to influence individual and collective socio-economic outcomes for the better. It is this 50 per cent of the country’s human potential that must be unleashed for what is called human development that alone can lead to national economic development. It must be understood that human development is not just the development of men but of both male and female population alike.