In a previous edition, we touched on why systems problems cannot be solved by rational reasoning alone.
Let’s explore with examples.
In 1967, Romania decided to reverse its population decline by making abortions illegal. It seemed to have the desired effect: the birth rate tripled. Yet, the birth rate not just crawled back to its previous level, it caused a huge collateral damage on its way back.
People resorted to illegal, often dangerous abortions that tripled the maternal mortality rate. Many unwanted children were abandoned to orphanages.
The dictator that brought this law was later executed. And guess the first thing the new government did: repeal the abortion ban.
Let’s check how China fared at the opposite: to control the population. In 1980, China imposed a near-universal one-child policy.
Fast forward to 2015, China suffered from a skewed sex ratio: it had about 32 – 36 million more men who will find it hard to find brides. According to a forecast, China could lose 67 million working-age people by 2030, doubling the number of elderly. Imagine the strain on the economy and resources!
To overcome these self-inflicted problems, a new policy was announced in 2015 allowing Chinese couples to have two children.
As these examples show, extreme measures result in explosive consequences.
Sometimes, it pays to tinker the system with tiny changes and observe how things unfold.
Around the time Romania banned abortions, Hungary, facing a similar challenge, did something far modest. Upon learning that cramped housing led to smaller families, it decided to reward more living space for larger families. The results were modest too. But, importantly, it avoided the disaster Romania brought upon itself.
How Sweden faced a similar problem is illuminating. It decided to prioritize the quality of child care over the more pressing issue of low birth rates. Therefore, it facilitated high quality education and healthcare to every child. Sidestepping intense focus on birth rates, it found a middle ground between the government’s and people’s goals.
Sometimes, the best solution is to act in a way that avoids dire consequences. Because the problem itself may refuse to submit to reason and rational analysis.
PS: Donella Meadows’ “Thinking in Systems: A Primer” is a great beginner’s guide for anyone interested in delving deeper into the subject.
Musings by Madhav 
Leave a comment