Thailand: A Family
Planning Success Story
Cooperative partnerships, innovative marketing, and a sense
of fun have helped Thailand defuse the population bomb
by Edorah Frazer
One of the articles in Birth, Sex & Death (IC#31) Spring 1992, Page 44
Copyright (c)1992, 1996 by Context Institute
| To order this issue ...
Those of us who easily become discouraged by population issues will do
well to focus on the extraordinary gains of Thailand's family planning program.
With 54 million people living in an area slightly larger than California,
Thailand once faced a population growth rate as daunting as that of other
developing countries. But as a result of a far-reaching family planning
effort - officially launched in 1971 with the adoption of a national population
policy - Thailand has gained impressive control over its growth rate. Use
of contraceptives among married couples has increased from 15 to 70 percent,
and in 15 years Thailand's population growth rate has been cut in half,
from 3.2 percent to 1.6 percent.
Thailand has lowered its birth rate quickly - and substantially - thanks
to the creativity of family planning approaches, the openness of
the Thai people to new ideas, and the willingness of the gov- ernment to
work with the Population and Community Development Association (PDA), a
private non-profit organization and the largest nongovernmental agency in
Thailand.
Primary to the effort is the character of the Thai people and their culture.
Relationships between men and women in Thailand are more egalitarian than
in most of the developing world. Thai spouses share equally in decisions
regarding children, family life, and contraception. And the prevalence of
Buddhism (95 percent of Thais are Buddhist) has also supported the family
planning effort in Thailand. Buddhist scripture preaches that "many
children make you poor."
A second reason for Thailand's success is the charisma and creativity
of its family planning leadership. Mechai Viravaidya, a former government
economist and public relations genius, launched the PDA with great fanfare.
His imagination fueled the family planning effort in its early stages, raising
it from a progressive program to an inspired celebration of contraceptive
information. Mechai established a high profile public education campaign,
staging such events as a condom balloon-blowing contest featuring village
headmen competing for condom-inflating glory. Mechai and other PDA workers
could be found handing out condoms at movie theaters and traffic jams -
anywhere where there was a crowd. Even the traffic police were given boxes
of condoms to distribute on New Year's Eve in a program known affectionately
as "cops and rubbers."
Although condoms - now commonly called "mechais" in Thailand
- became the natural trademark of his publicity campaign, Mechai used a
variety of other family planning tools as well. Under his direction, birth-control
carts sporting pills, IUDs, spermicidal foam, and condoms sprouted up at
bus stations and public events.
The Thai government has supported Mechai's efforts by making a wide range
of new contraceptive technologies available to the public. Thailand was
among the first countries to allow the use of the intravenous, injectable
contraceptive DMPA, and remains one of its largest users. Thai physicians
have also developed simplified methods of female sterilization, and now
operating room nurses are trained to perform the procedures. Non-scalpel
vasectomies are available at festivals and other public events, and in a
characteristically celebratory manner, PDA offers free vasectomies on the
King's birthday. Sterilization has now become the most widely used form
of contraception in the country.
While creative publicity techniques drew public attention to family planning
issues, many attribute the Thai people's commitment to participate to the
fusion of economic development with family planning education. PDA offers
loans that are linked to people's use of contraception. American Sara Newhall,
who works with Mechai at PDA in Bangkok, described in a recent interview
with IN CONTEXT how Mechai arrived at his economic program of family
planning incentives:
"Mechai was an economist, coming at it from a resource management
angle. He's not a doctor or a social worker. PDA's message is that family
planning is not enough; it does not put food on the table. So if you're
going to convince an agrarian society to change its attitude from 'we need
more field hands' to one of family planning, you have to introduce alternatives
for income generation.
"PDA moved from contraceptive distribution to the issue of water,
introducing a revolving loan scheme to build, with German funding, thousands
of water jars, squat toilets, and rain water cachement jars for drinking
water. Then they moved to agriculture-oriented income generation. Pig banks,
rice banks, buffalo - at the beginning of the season, people would [borrow]
three pigs. No money, but monetary value - a loan in the form of animals.
Then they would pay back the loan and have a profit to keep. It broke the
cycle of the middleman: 80 percent of the population was rice farming, and
the problem was that (as usual with the poor) there were moneylenders in
the poor communities who would tide them through, but at 3 percent per month
(36 percent per year), continuing the cycle of indebtedness and poverty.
The PDA rate is 1 percent per month, to be repaid in 3-6 months. Many of
these programs use revolving loans. We link family planning participation
to acceptance for the loan. We use incentives."
Under a similar but separate government program, monetary loan funds
were also set up in several villages. Jodi Jacobson of the Worldwatch Institute
further explains the loan system:
"Initially, loans to individuals were based on character, credit-worthiness,
and the project to be carried out. After the program became established,
preference was given to applicants who were practicing family planning.
Members of the loan fund received shares and dividends on the basis of the
contraceptive method used; more effective methods had higher values. As
the level of contraceptive prevalence within a village increased, so did
the total amount of the loan fund.
"The Thai program was designed to prevent coercion. Money was not
subtracted from a loan fund if contraceptive prevalence fell; shares in
the loan fund and the right to borrow were not taken away from those who
chose not to continue using contraceptives. And interest rates were similar
to those prevailing in the Thai government's rural credit program"
(Worldwatch Paper #80, "Planning the Global Family," 1987).
When it became clear that the Thai program was working, international
workers in family planning development came to take a look. PDA developed
a 3-week training course for people from other countries. Newhall describes
the training: "The course included proposal writing, innovative planning,
and field trips to observe the community-based family planning system. It
was fertile learning ground for other countries to think about how they
might be doing this. We brought in Catholic countries, like the Philippines,
and places where women would find this most inappropriate, like Bangladesh.
We're trying to push them and jar them to adjust their thinking."
The Thai government's support of family planning through education and
economic development has given the Thai people the message that family planning
is a way of improving quality of life. Since the official population policy
was announced in 1971, per capita income in Thailand has nearly doubled.
Not only has the new revenue allowed the government to continue to expand
health and family planning services, but the economic security within individual
Thai families has allowed them a greater variety of choices.
As Sara Newhall explains, "[The poor village women] know that birth
destroys their health, that their babies are starving. The issue is, can
you sustain the family? How many children can you have and still be a sustainable
family unit, from a health, economic, and livability standpoint?" Thanks
to the efforts of the PDA, the Thai government, and especially the Thai
people, millions of couples are now able to answer that question for themselves.
Please support
this web site ... and thanks if you already are!
All contents copyright (c)1992,
1996 by Context Institute
Please send comments to webmaster
Last Updated 29 June 2000.
URL: http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC31/Frazer.htm
Home | Search
| Index of Issues | Table
of Contents
|