Neoliberalism and the Sociology of Development: Emerging Trends and Unanticipated Facts
Alejandro Portes, Professor of Sociology and Faculty Associate, Office of Population Research, Princeton University This article reviews sociological theories of development and their predictive successes and failures. It examines changes in the global economy that led to the hegemony of a market-oriented approach to development. Limitations of this approach are examined along three lines: (1) the erratic record of results of the application of neoliberal adjustment models; (2) failures of a market-oriented trickle-down approach to social equity; and (3) responses of local groups via emigration and the rise of transnational entrepreneurial communities. The significant role of population characteristics, class structure, and the character of the state in accounting for these trends is highlighted, with particular attention to countries and communities in Latin America. An alternative set of propositions based on recent sociological theories of the economy is advanced. [23, no. 2 (Jun 97) 229-259]
Age Structure Dynamics in Asia and Dependence on Foreign Capital
Matthew Higgins, Economist, International Economics Function, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Jeffrey G. Williamson, Laird Bell Professor of Economics, Department of Economics, Harvard University Rising fertility and declining mortality have had a profound impact on Asian savings, investment, and foreign capital dependency since Coale and Hoover wrote in 1958. This article argues that much of the impressive rise in Asian savings rates since the 1960s can be explained by the equally impressive decline in youth dependency burdens. Wherever the youth dependency burden has fallen dramatically, Asian countries have relinquished their reliance on foreign capital. Aging will not diminish Japan’s capacity to export capital in the next century, but little of it will go to the rest of Asia; rather, the countries in the rest of Asia are expected to become net capital exporters. These conclusions emerge from a model that extends the conventional focus of the dependency rate literature on savings to investment and net capital flows. [23, no. 2 (Jun 97) 261-293]
Demography, Feminism, and the Science-Policy Nexus
Harriet B. Presser, Professor of Sociology and Director, Center on Population, Gender, and Social Inequality, Department of Sociology, University of Maryland This article argues that whereas gender issues have become central in the population policy arena, they remain marginal to the demographic field, and that this marginality has harmful consequences for the development of demography as a science. This predicament has arisen because of ideological, not scientific, constraints on the field of demography--constraints that have a history in how the discipline was formed and financed and in how key demographic agendas become rationalized. The rise of modern feminism, with its commitment to greater gender equality and female empowerment, presents a challenge in this context; it has limited appeal to those who control key resources for demographic research. The article argues for the incorporation of a gender systems approach that directly addresses gender differences in power, autonomy, and well-being, at both the macro and micro levels, and for an expansion of data collection that will permit such analyses. By making gender central to the field, demography will become a more relevant science for understanding social inequality and population change. [23, no. 2 (Jun 97) 295-331]
Why Do Americans Want Children?
Robert Schoen, Professor, Department of Population Dynamics, Johns Hopkins University
Young J. Kim, Professor, Department of Population Dynamics, Johns Hopkins University
Constance A. Nathanson, Professor, Department of Population Dynamics, Johns Hopkins University
Jason Fields, doctoral candidate, Department of Population Dynamics, Johns Hopkins University
Nan Marie Astone, Associate Professor, Department of Population Dynamics, Johns Hopkins University Prevailing theories of fertility behavior do not explain what sustains fertility in industrialized countries. Extending James Coleman’s concept of social capital, the authors argue that the social resource value of children is an important factor motivating childbearing. Data for the United States from the 1987-88 National Survey of Families and Households are used to test hypotheses regarding how fertility intentions are influenced by the social resource value of children, the economic costs of children, and the effect of children on parental career. The social resource value of children emerges as a powerful predictor of fertility intentions across groups stratified by race, gender, union status, and parity. Children create social capital for parents, an important and previously underappreciated reason for why Americans want children. [23, no. 2 (Jun 97) 333-358]
Notes and Commentary F. Landis MacKellar, leader of the Social Security Reform Project, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria One of the least-challenged sacred cows of international policy is that public resources should be expended to accelerate fertility decline in the third world. But why? This essay considers three arguments. The first is an efficiency argument associated with individualism; the second is a prudence argument associated with hierarchy. Neither argument is accepted by the third view, which advances egalitarian arguments. Each of these arguments reflects a view of fairness; thus, the policy debate over population is a fundamentally normative one. While superficially egalitarian, the population policy orthodoxy that emerged from the Cairo International Conference on Population and Development is fundamentally individualistic. The true loser at Cairo was hierarchy, more specifically the ecological view that rapid population growth is a problem in and of itself. [23, no. 2 (Jun 97) 359-376]
Data and Perspectives Fertility and Family Time Allocation in the Philippines
Jill Tiefenthaler, Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Colgate University While it is obvious that a birth will increase a woman’s time devoted to child care, it is less obvious where the additional time comes from. Using data from the Philippines, the author estimates the average time spent in child care, market work, housework, and leisure by mothers, fathers, and older children both before and after the birth of a child. Comparison of the effects of the birth on time allocation across households indicates that the time adjustments made after the birth of a first child are significantly greater than those made after the births of subsequent children. The results also indicate that mothers bear over 90 percent of the time costs of children in families with no older children. When older children are present, however, mothers’ percentage contribution falls considerably. [23, no. 2 (Jun 97) 377-397]
|
