Premium
Could Pronatalist Policies Discourage Childbearing?
Author(s) -
Botev Nikolai
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
population and development review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.836
H-Index - 96
eISSN - 1728-4457
pISSN - 0098-7921
DOI - 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2015.00048.x
Subject(s) - incentive , intrinsic motivation , fertility , psychological intervention , relevance (law) , public economics , affect (linguistics) , population , economics , social psychology , work motivation , work (physics) , positive economics , psychology , microeconomics , political science , sociology , demography , communication , psychiatry , law , mechanical engineering , engineering
This article builds on research in psychology, economics, and other fields, suggesting that, under certain conditions, extrinsic incentives could undermine intrinsic motivation, producing results opposite to those originally intended. It explores the relevance of these findings for population policies and particularly for pronatalist measures, and argues that reproductive behavior is intrinsically motivated, thus potentially subject to having the intrinsic motivation for childbearing adversely affected by policy interventions. Specifically, it examines whether, when, and how the contingency, universe, adequacy, and other aspects of pronatalist incentives could affect childbearing motivation. For example, parity‐targeted incentives seeking to compel higher fertility could be perceived as controlling and undermine that motivation. Conversely, policies seeking to facilitate combining work and family responsibilities could strengthen the intrinsic motivation for childbearing.