777 



lation on the administrative capabilities and political behaA'ior of the 

 LDCs also need further exploration. Finally, there is a need for data 

 on the impact of population ^^rowth on the natural environment and 

 the quality of life in the LDCs. This information must come from 

 many different fields of knowledge and research. 



Knowledge of the determinants of population growth, according to 

 a summary of a panel discussion at a recent Symposium on the Food- 

 People Balance, held under the sponsorship of the National Academy 

 of Engineering, is "scanty" and lacking in hard evidence to support 

 the various hypotheses. The summary declared that there was an — 



* * * incomplete iinderstanding of those causal factors which affect parents' 

 desires and motivations for additional children. It is clear that, in a general way, 

 the birth rate is negatively correlated with such indices as income, education, 

 and perhaps nutrition. Beyond these general correlations we know very little 

 about the effects of more specific variables on the birth rate." 



These comments seem to suggest that both the ISIalthusians and the 

 critics of the Malthusian hypothesis lack substantial evidence to sup- 

 port their views. 



Technical arid Cultural Barriers to Birth Control 



Although there was some recognition within the U.S. Government, 

 virtually from the outset of its development assistance programs, that 

 modem sanitation and health techniques would lower the death rate 

 and lead to rapid population increase in the third world,^^ little if any 

 emphasis was placed on the possible consequence. Instead, public policy 

 was geared to the improvement of agricultural tecliniques — ^to increas- 

 ing the quantity and enhancing the quality of agricultural products. 

 This country was prepared to teach the less developed countries the 

 newest agricultural methods (appropriate in the United States), and 

 to help provide them with adequate facilities for food processing and 

 distribution. But it was not psychologically and morally prepared to 

 discuss with them the delicate question of limiting their population 

 growth. 



Since it is only in the past few years that the consequences of un- 

 checked population growth have generated substantial public concern, 

 the unwillingness of political leaders in the United States to consider 

 programs of population growth mitigation abroad probably accorded 

 with domestic political realities. President Eisenhower at one point 

 explicitly rejected dissemination of birth control information to other 

 countries as being an inappropriate activity for the U.S. Government. 

 In response to a question from the press as to whether the Draper 

 Committee, then studying foreign aid policy, had recommended the 

 inclusion of birth control aid, he declared that he could not "imagine 

 anything more emj)hatically a subject that is not a proper political or 

 governmental activity or function or responsibility." 



We do not intend [the President went on"! to interfere with the internal affairs 

 of any other government, and if they want to do something about what is ad- 

 mittedly a very diflBcult question, almost an explosive question, that is their 

 business. If they want to go to someone for help, they will go unquestionably to 



^"National Academy of Englneerins, "Symposium on the Food-People Balance. Panel on 

 Interactions between World Food and World Population. Summary Report" (Washington, 

 D.C. April 29, 1970)^age8 1. 10. 



"U.S. Congress. House, Committee on Foreign Affairs. "Point Four. Background and 

 Program." 81st Congress, 1st session (Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949), 

 pages 3, 5. 



