ArticlePopulation studies2025
Thirty years of 'strange bedmates': The ICPD and the nexus of population control, feminism, and family planning.
Article in Population studies, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contraception and unintended pregnancy: explaining the unexpected relationship in Sub-Saharan Africa using demographic and health survey data.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Locating Men in Sexual and Reproductive Health, Rights, and Justice: Past, Present, Futures.Studies in family planning · 2025Article
- Sexual and reproductive health of newly-arrived asylum-seeking women: a cross-sectional survey in Finland.Reproductive health · 2025Article
- The impact of implementing the women's reproductive rights agenda on climate change.Frontiers in global women's health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Widely credited with ending population control and ushering in a new era of reproductive rights, the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) Programme of Action also included some important compromises. The commemoration of ICPD+30 presents an opportune moment to reflect critically on those compromises and their implications for family planning programmes in the three decades since. Here, we critically examine how these compromises have enabled population control logics to flourish within global family planning programmes and the ways that neo-Malthusian concerns still motivate contraceptive programming under co-opted feminist rhetoric. We argue that rather than binary stances of 'pro' or 'anti' contraception, the post-ICPD landscape includes multiple contested positions, including: (1) concern for reproductive rights and autonomy; (2) concern over fertility or population dynamics; and (3) opposition to biomedical contraception and abortion. Setting out the intersecting and diverging tenets of these ideologies, we call for more critical reflection on these tangled histories and engagement with reproductive justice during ICPD+30.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.