Economic Security, Culture and Fertility: A Reply to Cleland

Abstract

In this comment, John Cleland's rejection of the importance of economic security to fertility is challenged on the grounds that he gives insufficient attention to the components of Mead Cain's theory. Superficial regard for the full meaning of insurance, and almost total neglect of the environment of risk, lead to misinterpretation of economic and demographic data. Thus, historical trends in fertility and security in Taiwan and South Korea fail to support Cleland's view. Likewise recent fertility decline in Bangladesh is easily accommodated within the economic security-fertility theory. Cleland's use of data on fertility differentials by occupation in Bangladesh is criticised on both statistical and theoretical grounds. The innovation and diffusion of family planning as an explanation of fertility decline is seen as entirely inadequate. Instead, as in the theories of Caldwell and Cain, economic processes must be understood in cultural contexts which reflect the complexity of the real world.