Sydney - Australia, France, Russia and other rich countries reward the birth of a new citizen with a cash payment sometimes called a baby bonus. There are no similar financial incentives to procreation in poor countries like India, Nigeria and the Philippines.
Given that expanding family programmes in developing countries is one of the cheapest ways of reducing both global greenhouse gas emissions and the incidence of poverty, some argue that baby bonuses should be scrapped and the money spent on Third World contraception programmes instead.
It's an argument that should appeal to Heather D'Agnes, head of population, health and environmental programmes at the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
Speaking in Sydney recently, D'Agnes said slowing population growth was often overlooked as a relatively inexpensive and effective method of tackling climate change. She advocated initiatives to keep the global population to the low end of growth ranges - between 7 billion and 11 billion - by 2050.
In developing countries, slower growth would mean relieving the pressure on forests, farmland and fisheries. In developed countries, fewer people would mean lower emissions of the greenhouse gasses that cause global warming.
"If you look at the history of family planning, it's not expensive," D'Agnes said. "It's using our development assistance in a way that we are just not treating people's illnesses but we are giving them the ability to make decisions about family size."
