Case 1: This case comes from Colby College, and analyzes how the government enforcement of fertility control promotes sustainability in China. China is considered a developing country. In 1970, the government of china issued three regulations regarding, late marriage, ling spaced between child births, and fewer children allowed in households. In this study they use financial theory and econometrics to figure out the measurement of fertility fluctuation in China. The fertility rate is affected by household preferences and production technology. Within the households a representative will figure out the amount of children within each home. If a household violates one of the regulations, then the household will have to pay a costly fee. This study recognizes many shocks , such as government enforcement power, technological shock to agricultural output, and a fertility preference shock. The study finds that lower fertility rate has an outcome of a conflicting shock to agricultural output and a preference shift away from fertility. In result, this study suggested that population control is not needed to an economic development or even sustainability without lasting changes in the population.

http://personal.colby.edu/personal/t/thtieten/pop-chi.html

Case 2: This is a case study on the public housing in New Zealand. It is well known that the less crowded housing and better housing conditions you have, the better your health is overall. The “Social Housing Outcomes Worth” made a study on the overcrowded public housing areas in New Zealand. Over 5% of the population lives in public housing the developed country. However, just because they are “developed” does not mean that they have stopped developing altogether, they are trying to improve the health and mortality rate of those who live in these public housing homes. They found that 100,000 of the 200,000 studied were under the age of 21. Also, they were able to find that 44% were smokers which is 10% higher than the national average. The income of this type of leaving is very low compared to the rest of the country as well. Lastly, it was found that 40% of the tenants were subject to overcrowding of the home, which is 4 times higher than the national average. After finding all this information, New Zealand may try to find better ways in developing homes that are healthier for the population in order to help the health, and the income of the individuals living here.

http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=6&sid=3122bf42-ff7d-4a1f-91c6-64bff7eb2b31%40sessionmgr4002&hid=4201

Part 3:             When looking at both studies I can find many was to link it to my hometown of Greencastle PA in positive and negative ways. My home is very rural which makes agriculture a major part of my county. Many of the farms have a large number of children to help with the output of the farm. When looking at the effects of the china fertility restriction you can see that the agriculture output greatly decreased in the developing country. Not only does it hurt the family dynamic but also, the community as a whole. I am glad we do not have such restrictions so we can have as many children as we want and small farms are not affected. Also, when I see how the poor quality of the public housing affects the health and also not assist in helping the tenants increase income, it has opened my eyes. My family owns 7 tenant houses, and although they are not public housing, some people with lower income live there. We can contribute to the development of our countries mortality rate by increasing the quality of our houses. My family can continue to keep harmful chemicals from getting into the house and hurting the tenants’ health and therefore giving them a longer life. This is not as bad as New York City but for my local area, it is our own little way to help develop my area.