Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Thirty Years Later and Still Standing

When you give them an inch, they think they can take a mile. China on the other hand does not believe in this policy. According to Tini Tran of the Associated Press, believes “China will not consider changing its one-child policy for at least a decade for fear that a population surge could spark social and economic instability” (Tran 2008). This policy was put in place 30 years ago in order to aid the overpopulation, economic and environmental issues facing the country. With the 30th anniversary approaching the country in contemplating uplifting the one child policy, causing debates worldwide. If the government decides to up lift the child policy and Tran’s prediction are correct then the Chinese society would be devastated, with an incredibly dense population. There are two ways to look at the situation, they can up lift the policy and offer economic to their people, or continue with regulatory control.

Regulatory control otherwise known as command and control is when the person or group in control, puts in place a rule/law that a person under that power must obey and follow. There are three type of command and control “mechanisms that regulators can choose to implement: ambient, emissions, or technology standards” (Anderson 2008). The one child policy would fall under the ambient category which revolves around the environment and pollution. As stated early the Chinese government put in effect the policy/law that each woman in china was only permitted to give birth to one child in their life time. The policy was put in place to combat the ridiculously high population, and its effects on the economy and the environment. The policy has been proven successful as the policy “has prevented an additional 400 million births. China's population currently stands at 1.3 billion, growing 16 to 17 million annually” (Tran 2008). The only down fall to a regulatory control policy is that it has expensive costs of enforcing the rules. There is no reason to uplift the policy if it is proven to be successful in Tran’s mind.

The other position that could be taken when approaching China’s fast growing population is to offer an economic incentive. Economic incentives are normally cash incentive given by the government or a company, to try and entice a person or persons to follow a given principle. A common example of economic incentives would be the government offering home owners, cash rebates to replace aspects of their home like lights, or toilets to be more energy efficient. In the situation of China’s population problem, the government could offer cash incentives to limiting the amount of children a family decides to have. The one problem that could arise with this way of action is that a family may decide they want two children instead of the past one, already the annual birth rate has doubled to 34 million babies annually and that is only one extra child per family, imagine the numbers if families start having 2-4 children the numbers would be unbelievable.

I personally agree with Tini Tran’s argument of keeping the one child policy. I think the one child policy should stay in effect for the sake of the environment, their country, as well as our country. The policy has been proven effective, with the numbers to back it up, why remove something that still works. The consequences to the environment would be terrible, our resources would be consumed much quicker, and the pollution being produced would be unthinkable. China is already the most densely populated country in the world; imagine if there were even more people living there, the country would become unlivable with so many people. Also if you think our highways and big cities are busy now, if the policy was dropped there could potentially be millions more people immigrating to Canada increasing our population, using our resources and destroying our environment. Regulatory control is doing its job in China, so why risk having to face the consequences if it is removed.

Anderson, D. (2008, July 29). Regulatory Policy vs Economic Incentives. Retrieved November 18, 2009, from Environmental Literacy Council:

Tran, T. (2008, March 28). China One-Child Policy to Stay in Place. Retrieved November 18, 2009, from Fox News:,4675,ChinaOneChildPolicy,00.html


  1. I really liked your entire introduction, especially your first sentence since it was very attention grabbing. I thought that your aurgument was very clear and easy to read, good job. Cash incentives would be a possible way to have economic incentives in China, although you made good aurguments for keeping the policy. Overall, it seems very well thought out, good work Pat.

  2. patrick,

    well i agree with the other rachel that your opening sentence was catchy...i liked it.

    your article had some really good points and it was easy to read.
    unfortunately i wrote my own blog on this exact thing so i am a little bias to what i am partial too... (which happens to be the opposite of what you think...thehehe) but i am going to try and not let that get in the way of much.

    in all serious, you made some really good points and made me think twice about what i had written down. i think that as a writer that is the best thing you could do because it makes people believe in what you have written so much, that they start to question themselves. you know?

    i kept to my own opinions by the end, but it doesn't take away from the fact that you did write a really good blog.
    make sure to go over it and edit through your writing though, there were a few grammatical errors, but nothing to serious. just a head up. good job patrick!