The population of Brazil increased tenfold, from 10 to over 100 million, between 1880 and 1980, nearly half of this increase occurring since the end of World War II. The Politics of Population in Brazil examines the attitudes toward population planning of Brazilian government officials and other elites—bishops, politicians, labor leaders, and business owners—in comparison with mass public opinion. The authors' findings that elites seriously underestimate the desire for family planning services, while the public views birth control as a basic issue, represent an important contribution on a timely issue. A major reason for this disparity is that the elites tend to define the issue as a matter of national power and collective growth, and the public sees it as a bread-and-butter question affecting the daily lives of families. McDonough and DeSouza document not only the real gulf between elite and mass opinion but also the propensity of the elites to exaggerate this gap through their stereotyping of public opinion as conservative and disinterested in family planning. Despite these differences, the authors demonstrate that population planning is less conflict ridden than many other controversies in Brazilian politics and probably more amenable to piecemeal bargaining than some earlier studies suggest. In part, this is because attitudes on the issue are not closely identified with opinions regarding left-versus-right disputes. In addition, for the public in general, religious sentiment affects attitudes toward family planning only indirectly. This separation, which reflects the historical lack of penetration of Brazilian society on the part of the church, further attenuates the issue's potential for galvanizing deep-seated antagonisms. As the authors note, this situation stands in contrast to the fierce debates that moral issues have generated in Spain and Ireland. The study is noteworthy not only for its original approach—the incorporation of mass and elite data and the departure from the standard concerns with fertility determinants in population—but also for its sophisticated methodology and lucid presentation.

When it comes to government's role in personal matters such as family planning, most bristle at any interference from the State on how to exercise their reproductive rights. China's infamous "one child" policy is a well-known example of reproductive politics, but history is filled with other examples of governmental population control to advance its interests. Reproductive States is the first volume of a collection of case studies that explores when and how some of the most populous countries in the world invented and implemented state population policies in the 20th century. The authors, scholars specializing in reproductive politics, survey population policies from key countries on five continents to provide a global perspective. Regardless of the type of government or its cultural history, many of these countries have developed similar policies to control their populations and attempt to combat social problems such as poverty and hunger. However, the common denominator is that states have used women's bodies as a political resource. Far from being just an overseas problem, this volume illustrates how other countries have developed their strategies in response to goals and tactics driven by the United Nations and the United States. Due to fears of a post-World War II "population bomb" and uncertainty of how to deal with the world's poor after the Cold War, the U.S. and the Soviet Union led the charge among nations to devise strategies to control their populations, but in different ways. The U.S. and some European countries pressed the poor and ethnic minorities to limit reproduction. China's "one child" policy targeted all ranks of society, while Soviet women (who already had few rights) were under surveillance through state-planned services such as medical care and commodity distribution to detect pregnancy. Interweaving biopolitics, gender studies, statecraft, and world systems, Reproductive States offer reflections on the outcome of such policies and their legacies in our day.