A review of population theoretical research since the founding of the People's Republic of China
Qu, H.
Population Research 5(1): 21-28
1988
ISSN/ISBN: 1002-6576 PMID: 12281752 Document Number: 342877
In 1949, Mao Zedong encouraged the Chinese to have many children, continuing traditional practices. Other factors that contributed to high fertility at the time (1949-1957) were 1) social and economic conditions and 2) the high demand for manual labor. During this period, China's average annual population increase rate was over 2.2%. Mao Zedong had not wished to be pronatalist, only to boost morale. In 1953, the government began to promote birth control. In 1957, Mao Zedong repeatedly stressed the necessity of birth control, spawning a short-lived period of population theoretical research. However, criticizing Ma Yinchu stifled the research. In 1958, Mao Zedong began to promote population growth again, saying it was still good to have more people. Because of Mao's change of view, Ma Yinchu's work was severely criticized. Thus scientists like Ma Yinchu were torn between upholding their scientific beliefs and keeping silent to avoid criticism. In 1962, the government began to promote family planning again. However, it was rather ineffective and the average annual population increase rate was 2.6% from 1957 to the early 1970s. In the early 1970s, the government promoted family planning sufficiently to cause a drop in the population rate of increase to below 2%, after 1974. During this time, the government focused its efforts on rural areas. The 1st national population research body was established in 1974. After the fall of 1976, population theoretical research became active. The most important contribution by the population theoretical researchers was the explanation of the dialectical relationship between population and economy. For most years from 1973-1985, the annual growth rate of population averaged 1.3%. An important lesson to learn from the struggle of China's population theoretical research is that academic views should be debated and analyzed among scholars and verified by practice, but not concluded to be right or wrong by government leaders.