Advertisement

Population Research and Policy Review

, Volume 18, Issue 6, pp 563–577 | Cite as

Do incentives matter? – Evaluation of a family planning program in India

  • T. S. Sunil
  • V. K. Pillai
  • A. Pandey
Article

Abstract

Indian Family Planning programs in the past haveintroduced a number of approaches such as providingmonetary benefits, and motivational programs toimprove contraceptive use among rural illiteratewomen. Under the Ammanpettai family welfare program,the Melatur PHC administered three program typesinvolving a combination of monetary and motivationalapproaches to improve contraceptive use in threetreatment areas. The program was introduced duringJanuary 1989 and was simultaneously discontinued aftera period of two years. The present evaluation wasconducted in 1994. Data from a random sample of 933non-sterilized women at the time of social surveyusing a questionnaire approach is used in this study. The implementation of incentive programs in asocio-economically homogenous population has resultedin an increase in the likelihood of current ofcontraceptive use. The results of this study suggestthat motivational programs are more likely to improvelong term use of temporary family planning methodsthan cash incentive programs. One implication of ourfinding is that motivational programs should provide peer based family planning education and training incommunity work to contact persons who make door todoor visits to promote family planning programs.

Contraceptive use Family planning programs India 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aldrich, J. H. & Forrest, N. (1984). Linear probability, logit and probit models. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. AFWP, Ammanpettai Family Welfare Program Progress Report (1992). Child spacing and child survival program. Mumbai, India: International Institute for Population Sciences (mimeo).Google Scholar
  3. Bhat, T. N. & Dinesh, B. M. (1988). Incentives for adoption of family planning views of acceptors and motivators, Journal of Family Welfare 34(4): 23–35.Google Scholar
  4. Bishop, Y., Stephen, M. M., Fienberg, F. & Holland, P. W. (1975). Discrete multivariate analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cleland, J. & Mauldin, W. P. (1991). The promotion of family planning by financial payments: the case of Bangladesh, Studies in Family Planning 22(1): 1–18.Google Scholar
  6. Cleland, J. & Robinson, W.. (1992). The use of payments and benefits to influence reproductive behavior, in J. F. Phillips & J. A. Ross (eds.), Family planning programs and fertility. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  7. David, H. P. (1982). Incentives, reproductive behavior and integrated community development in Asia, Studies in Family Planning 13(5): 159–173.Google Scholar
  8. Freedman, R. & Freedman, D. (1992). The role of family planning programs as a fertility determinant, in J. F. Phillips & J. A. Ross (eds.), Family planning programs and fertility. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  9. Government of India (1994). Economic survey 1993–94. New Delhi: Ministry of Finance, Economic Division.Google Scholar
  10. Hanushek, E. & Jackson, J. E. (1977). Statistical methods for social scientists. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  11. Isaacs, S. L. (1995). Incentives, population policy, and reproductive rights: ethical issues, Studies in Family Planning 26(6): 363–367.Google Scholar
  12. Khan, M. E. (1980). Determinants of sterilization in India, in A. I. Hermalin & B. Entwisle (eds.), The role of surveys in the analysis of family planning programs. Liège, Belgium: Ordina Editions.Google Scholar
  13. Population Research Center, The Gandhigram Institute of Rural Health and Family Welfare Trust, Tamil Nadu, International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) (1995). National Family Health Survey (MCH and Family Planning), Tamil Nadu, 1992. PRC, Gandhigram and IIPS, Mumbai.Google Scholar
  14. Satia, J. K. & Maru, R. M. (1986). Incentives and disincentives in the Indian family welfare program, Studies in Family Planning 17(3): 136–145.Google Scholar
  15. Stevens, J. R. & Stevens, C. M. (1992). Introductory small cash incentives to promote child spacing in India, Studies in Family Planning 23(3): 171–186.Google Scholar
  16. United Nations (1993). The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. Report on the World Conference on Human Rights. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  17. United Nations (1994). Programme of Action of the United Nations International Conference on Population and Development. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. S. Sunil
    • 1
  • V. K. Pillai
    • 2
  • A. Pandey
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of North TexasDentonU.S.A
  2. 2.School of Social WorkUniversity of Texas at ArlingtonArlingtonU.S.A
  3. 3.International Institute for Population SciencesDeonarIndia

Personalised recommendations