Abstract

PIP: This article considers the aftermath of the 1994 Cairo Conference on Population and Development and the later Laxon, Sweden meeting of about 40 academic geographers, who addressed the implications of the Plan of Action for national policy. A recent International Union for the Scientific Study of Population (IUSSP) member synthesized conference impact on member nations. Martens from IUSSP offered the critique that the 381 recommendations were philosophically incoherent and poorly integrated and did not distinguish between government as a "doer of things" from government as "organizer and guarantor of a legal-institutional framework for allowing individuals and voluntary groups to seek improvements." This article discusses the apparent gulf between the views of population researchers and that of policy makers. It is reasoned that population policies do matter. The Club of Rome world model confirmed rapid population growth during 1972-90. Population policies in the past emphasized a societal perspective rather than an individual one. Policies impact on individual decision making. Most population geographers emphasize four features of social change. 1) Policy must address suitable measures for easing social, economic, and political tensions that arise in the temporary experience of high population growth. 2) More sensitive models of demographic behavior need to be developed, in order to account for the highly uneven patterns of fertility and mortality. Policy should not focus exclusively on family planning and should take into account the cultural and socioeconomic context. 3) Migration pressures from poor to rich countries have increased. Policy should address international migration. 4) People adapt quickly to new policy measures and apply policies effectively in their own life. Policies fail when the top-down approach does not include adequate research into values and behavior of the persons most affected by policy. These four points were discussed throughout this issue of "Applied Geography."