Economic Approach: Textualism vs. Pragmatism

In the April edition of Global Perspectives entitled "The IMF and the Economics Profession" (https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/new-critics-economics-profession-jclaude-germain-ph-d-jytye/?trackingId=mtT5XIGEQbKnzIi7pL9NnA%3D%3D), I stated - after analysis of the topic - that it is time for mainstream economists to stop prioritizing textualism over originalism and pragmatism, this edition provides an example that elucidates the importance of keeping in mind the difference between textualism and pragmatism in implementing economic policies. The example is a reproduction of passages from Germain (2022) on family planning. But, before reproducing the passages, it is important to define the two terms as used in this article to avoid misinterpretation and confusion.

Textualism versus Pragmatism

Different meanings are attributed to these two concepts, depending on the discipline and the purpose of their use. In the context of this article, textualism is used in the sense of "strict adherence to texts and/or theories", and pragmatism as "an approach that evaluates theories in terms of the success of their practical application". That said, let us now reproduce some passages on family planning from Germain (2022).

Family Planning

The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA 2017) contends that access to contraceptive information is central to achieving gender equality [and] that family planning brings 'clear economic benefits'. For every additional dollar that is invested in contraception, the cost of pregnancy-related care will be reduced by about three dollars, and achieving universal access to quality sexual and reproductive health services is estimated to yield returns of $120 for every dollar invested (Germain 2022, pp.112-13).

Because of the potential benefits, UNFPA and many other institutions support family planning as a strategy to control the number of births in LDCs [Least Developed Countries], which would eventually reduce the level of poverty in those countries. However, despite all the enumerated benefits - which include the ability to limit the number of children, to control pregnancy timing (also known as spacing children), to reduce teenage birth rates, and to avoid unintended pregnancies - this strategy has not been successful in poor developing countries because most women in those countries do not use contraceptives (Germain 2022, p.113).

Why does family planning fail in many developing countries?

In its attempt to explain the failure of family planning in developing countries, particularly in low-income countries, UNFPA has provided several reasons, which include (1) logistical problems such as traveling to health facilities; (2) supplies running out at health clinics; (3) social barriers such as opposition by partners, families or communities; (4) lack of knowledge about the availability of contraceptives; and (5) incorrect perception about the health risks of modern methods (Germain 2022, pp.113-14).

Although the reasons enumerated by UNFPA may have played an important role in the refusal of women in poor countries to use contraceptives, the fundamental one is economical, meaning the absence of a [social] safety net for individuals in their old age. To help understand the significance of this crucial reason, the author of this study [Germain] reproduces as Box 1 some personal conversations that he had many years ago with some women in a developing country (Germain 2022, p.114).

______________________________________________________________________________________Box 1. Observation on the Use of Contraceptives

______________________________________________________________________________________

When I was living in a developing country many years ago, I personally witnessed conversations among men and women on the idea of taking contraceptive measures to limit the number of children they would have. The women (in the group) opposed the use of contraceptives for a very pragmatic reason, which is purely economic. Their rationale was as follows:

Children represent a guarantee that someone will be there to take care of them personally and financially in their old age (their safety net). As the vast majority of governments in the developing world do not provide (or are unable to) any safety net, the elders have to rely on their children. When asked why they gave birth to a lot of children (instead of one or two), their response was 'one eye is no eye', meaning that they had to have many children. Their rationale was that some of the children might die or might not be good providers. They also argued that some of the children might have limited means or do not care. They believe that if they have several children at least one of them will be a good provider. Some women had even expressed a preference for girls by saying: 'girls will always take care of mommy'. According to them, boys will be more attached to their wives after they get married (Germain 2022, p.115).

______________________________________________________________________________________

Conclusion

Based on people's reality described in Box 1, the rationale for the refusal to use contraceptives is obvious, and the decision to have many children is an economic one. It is therefore not practical nor advisable to take away something from someone (safety net in this case) without first replacing it with something else...The above observation on family planning should be viewed as an example to in part explain the importance of using policies/strategies that are applicable and appropriate to specific cases in specific countries or regions...'One size does not fit all' (Germain 2022, pp.116-17). The family planning example clearly illustrates the importance of taking into consideration the applicability of theories (or textbook recommendations) and people's real life experiences (meaning textualism versus pragmatism) in order to be effective.

REFERENCE

Germain, JC (2022). Global Inequality, Global Poverty, and Poverty Reduction in the Least Developed Countries. Columbia, SC (USA): KDP Publishing.