Abstract

During the 1960s and 70s, reducing human numbers was embraced as integral to radical social transformation. Subsequently such neoMalthusian prescriptions became so toxic, they disappeared from the political agenda. Only recently has the issue resurfaced. This article suggests it is worthwhile revisiting the population question but recognises that the reasons for its becoming taboo need first to be understood and reassessed. This is the aim of the critical analysis undertaken here. It identifies 1974–1994 as the crucial period when hostility to population policies developed. It asks why progressive thinkers turned against policies for reducing fertility rates and how a goal of stabilising human numbers became internationally reviled. Its approach is genealogical; that is, it focuses on changing ideological and geopolitical contexts and on shifting power relations that determined whose voices and interests were heard or silenced. Specifically, the analysis examines paradigm changes associated with the three intergovernmental population and development conferences: at Bucharest (1974), Mexico City (1984) and Cairo (1994), paying particular attention to the rise of neoliberalism, the influence of the cold war, postcolonial tensions and the impact of the Women’s Movement. The article ends by asking whether the prevailing `Cairo consensus’ established in 1994 remains fit for purpose.

摘要

在 1960 年代和 70 年代，减少人口数量被认为是激进社会变革不可或缺的一部分。随后，这种新马尔萨斯的处方变得如此有毒，以至于它们从政治议程中消失了。直到最近，这个问题才重新浮出水面。本文建议重新审视人口问题是值得的，但承认首先需要了解和重新评估其成为禁忌的原因。这是这里进行的批判性分析的目的。它将 1974 年至 1994 年确定为对人口政策产生敌意的关键时期。它询问为什么进步思想家反对降低生育率的政策，以及稳定人口数量的目标如何在国际上受到谴责。它的方法是系谱的；那是，它侧重于不断变化的意识形态和地缘政治背景，以及决定谁的声音和利益被倾听或沉默的权力关系的转变。具体而言，该分析考察了与三个政府间人口与发展会议相关的范式变化：布加勒斯特（1974 年）、墨西哥城（1984 年）和开罗（1994 年），特别关注新自由主义的兴起、冷战的影响、后殖民紧张局势和妇女运动的影响。文章最后询问了 1994 年建立的普遍的“开罗共识”是否仍然适用。墨西哥城 (1984) 和开罗 (1994)，特别关注新自由主义的兴起、冷战的影响、后殖民紧张局势和妇女运动的影响。文章最后询问了 1994 年建立的普遍的“开罗共识”是否仍然适用。墨西哥城 (1984) 和开罗 (1994)，特别关注新自由主义的兴起、冷战的影响、后殖民紧张局势和妇女运动的影响。文章最后询问了 1994 年建立的普遍的“开罗共识”是否仍然适用。