Abstracts
Résumé
Cet article propose une critique féministe approfondie des droits négociables de procréation (DNP), une mesure proposée pour contrôler la croissance démographique mondiale. L’analyse démontre que les DNP renforceraient les injustices économiques et sociales, tout en introduisant une dimension eugéniste problématique. L’article souligne la nécessité d’élaborer des politiques démographiques respectueuses de l’équité, de la justice sociale et des libertés individuelles.
Mots-clés :
- droits négociables de procréation,
- contrôle démographique,
- justice sociale,
- eugénisme,
- politiques démographiques,
- bienfaisance procréative
Abstract
This article offers an in-depth feminist critique of Tradeable Procreation Entitlements (TPE), a measure proposed to control global population growth. The analysis demonstrates that TPEs would reinforce economic and social injustices while introducing a problematic eugenic dimension. The article highlights the need to develop population policies that respect equity, social justice and individual freedoms.
Keywords:
- tradeable procreation entitlements,
- population control,
- social justice,
- eugenics,
- population policies,
- procreative beneficence
Appendices
Bibliographie
- 1. United Nations. World Population Prospects 2024. New York: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division; 2024.
- 2. Lam D. The next 2 billion: can the world support 10 billion people? Popul Dev Rev. 2024;51(1):63-102.
- 3. Zhang J. The evolution of China’s one-child policy and its effects on family outcomes. J Econ Perspect. 2017;31(1):141‑60.
- 4. Li H, Yi J, Zhang J. Estimating the effect of the one-child policy on the sex ratio imbalance in China: identification based on the difference-in-differences. Demography. 2011;48(4):1535‑57.
- 5. Zhang Y, Goza FW. Who will care for the elderly in China? J Aging Stud. 2006;20(2):151‑64.
- 6. Andersson H, Brandstedt E, Torpman O. Review article: The ethics of population policies. Crit Rev Int Soc Polit Philos. 2021;27(4):635-58.
- 7. Bhatia R, Sasser JS, Ojeda D, Hendrixson A, Nadimpally S, Foley, EE. A feminist exploration of ‘populationism’: engaging contemporary forms of population control. Gend Place Cult. 2020;27(3):333‑50.
- 8. Page EA. Justice between generations: investigating a sufficientarian approach. J Glob Ethics. 2007;3(1):3‑20.
- 9. Boulding K. The Meaning of the Twentieth Century: The Great Transition. London: Routledge; 1964.
- 10. de la Croix D, Gosseries A. Population policy through tradable procreation entitlements. Int Econ Rev. 2009;50(2):507‑42.
- 11. Bognar G. Overpopulation and procreative liberty. Ethics Policy Environ. 2019;22(3):319‑30.
- 12. Bandarage A. Women, Population and Global Crisis: A Political-Economic Analysis. London: Zed Books; 1997.
- 13. Hartmann B. Reproductive Rights and Wrongs: The Global Politics of Population Control. Chicago: Haymarket Books; 2016.
- 14. Schultz S. Reproducing the nation: the new German population policy and the concept of demographization. Distinktion J Soc Theory. 2015;16(3):337‑61.
- 15. Vasquez Del Aguila E. Precarious Lives: forced sterilisation and the struggle for reproductive justice in Peru. Glob Public Health. 2022;17(1):100‑14.
- 16. Rowlands S, Regmi PR. The use of forced sterilisation as a key component of population policy: comparative case studies of China, India, Puerto Rico and Singapore. Indian J Public Adm. 2022;68(2):271‑84.
- 17. Conly S. One child: do we have a right to more? J Popul Sustain. 2016;1(1):27-34.
- 18. Savulescu J. Procreative beneficence: why we should select the best children. Bioethics. 2001;15(5‑6):413‑26.
- 19. Stoller SE. Why we are not morally required to select the best children: a response to Savulescu. Bioethics. 2008;22(7):364‑9.
- 20. Bennett R. The fallacy of the principle of procreative beneficence. Bioethics. 2009;23(5):265‑73.
- 21. Winkler-Schor S, Brauer M. What happens when payments end? Fostering long-term behavior change with financial incentives. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2024;20(5):925-40.