The Idea of Demographic Transition and the Study of Fertility Change: A Critical Intellectual History

The position is argued that progress in the further study of fertility change rests on a reappraisal of the recent intellectual history of demography. Principally recognition needs to be given to the policy influences which were apparent even before the 1950s. The notion of demographic transition as merely a descriptive term is unproductive and impedes a wider range of approaches to the field. The discussion was an examination of the methodological constraints and the reasons for the continuing reliance on descriptive notions of demographic The theory of demographic transition in 1944-45 and the contrasts between Thompsons 1929 notions and the 1945 notions in the United States were discussed as influenced by the changing institutional context important new intellectual developments and the impact of political events. Notesteins ideas were a primary reference point for discussion as reflecting the distinct change in thinking between 1947 and 1949. Democratic stability and long-term prosperity were hinged on the whole process of modernization and widespread economic development; fertility non-regulation was related to lack of motivation. Notestein and Kingsley Davis were thus at the helm of advocating government sponsored policies on family planning for pretransitional countries. Peasants were not stupid they were economically rational and the notion of awkward nonrational institutions and social mores was ignored. The impact of the fall of China and Chiang Kai-sheks nationalist regime and the change in foreign affairs on the Princeton Office and demographic intellectual life was discussed in some detail. The ideological competition of the 1960s and 1970s thwarted self reflection on the inadequacies and flaws in the supply centered activism of the international family planning industry and the overly dogmatic commitment and rigidity to demographic transition. The historical model (Talcott Parsons variations in classifications) was too fluid and general as a causal explanation for change but it became an irrefutable theory. Modernization became the dominant theory in the 1950s and 1970s even though it could not generate unambiguous testable hypotheses about the specific causes of fertility change. Hodgson and Demeny recognized these inadequacies. Demographic transition theory was both a product of a conception in social science and a means for examining predicting and guiding social change. Current schools of thought are the deductivist the contextualist or interpretative and various realist approaches which interact with the aims of control understanding and intervention. There is a need for historical reconstruction in specific contexts of fertility and perceived costs of childrearing.