Boosting Babies Article

In this article, we will discuss the case of Singapore’s baby crisis. For many, this may seem like a rather odd topic to discuss a case on. Afterall, it’s understandable that one looks at this as a public policy issue. I would agree with you if you were to take that line of argument. However, in this particular course, we are not limiting ourselves to simply the general definition of marketing. We are interested in understanding Consumer Behavior – and the public policy people have made strong inroads in this department. There is much we can learn from them, and that’s the reason why I picked up this particular case. So, let’s begin!
To begin with, let me update the case to more recent figures. For this purpose, I refer to a recent article on Channel News Asia.

According to the article, Singapore faces a significant demographic challenge as its total fertility rate (TFR) has fallen below 1 for the first time, reaching 0.97 in 2023, placing the country among those with the lowest birth rates globally. This is in fact extremely alarming. This means that every woman in Singapore has on average about 1 baby during the course of her reproductive life. Recall that the replacement rate is about 2.1. The number used to be 1.04 in 2022, implying that there was a ~7% fall in just one year.
Coupled with an aging population and lowering fertility rate, this could only mean trouble. Singapore is not all alone here. The issue is something that is also experienced by in South Korea, Italy, and Spain. Many more developed economies are also bordering on similar figures. One line of argument is that factors such as COVID-19 pandemic, financial concerns, parenting pressures, work-life balance difficulties, and a generational shift in priorities have resulted in this change in consumer behavior. However, these are very recent factors, and the issue seems to have been building up for many years now. In the case of Singapore, it could be tied to their efforts to reduce their population earlier on in their formative years.
And Singapore has crossed over a critical point where consumer behavior has changed.
What Singapore Did in the Early Years
In the early years of Singapore’s independence, the government took several measures to control population growth. These included:
Stop at Two Campaign: In the 1970s, the Singapore Family Planning and Population Board (SFPPB) launched the “Stop at Two” campaign. This campaign encouraged families to have no more than two children and used various strategies to promote smaller families.
Legalized Abortion and Sterilization: The government provided legal abortion services in both government and private clinics. They also offered incentives such as reimbursement of delivery fees and priority registration in primary schools for families who opted for voluntary sterilization after having two children.
Increased Delivery Fees: Disincentives for having more than two children included increased delivery fees and the removal of paid maternity leave for women having their third or subsequent child. Hospital delivery charges were raised significantly to discourage lower-income parents from having more children.
Public Campaigns and Education: The campaign used public messaging in various media, including TV, print ads, and posters in government offices, to spread the message of family planning.
While these were not exactly initiatives championed by the other countries in Europe who suffer from the issue now, it looks like the initiatives worked. And Singapore has crossed over a critical point where consumer behavior has changed.
One of the ways in which we can understand this change in behavior is through the lens of the Theory of Planned behavior. Let’s quickly review the theory now:

Theory of planned behavior
The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is a psychological theory that links beliefs and behavior. It helps predict how likely people are to engage in a certain behavior based on their attitudes, social influences, and perceived control over the behavior.
Attitudes: How favorable or unfavorable individuals feel about performing the behavior.
Subjective Norms: The social pressure individuals feel to perform or not perform the behavior, influenced by the opinions of significant others.
Behavioral Control: The degree to which individuals feel capable of performing the behavior, considering internal and external factors.
Understanding this behavior change using TPB
The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) posits that an individual’s behavior is driven by their intentions, which are influenced by their attitudes toward the behavior, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control.
Applying TPB to Singapore’s early initiatives to control population growth helps us understand how these measures impacted consumer behavior regarding family planning.
Attitudes Toward the Behavior
The government’s “Stop at Two” campaign aimed to change attitudes toward having large families by highlighting the benefits of smaller families. The campaigns emphasized economic and social advantages, such as better educational opportunities and improved living standards for fewer children. This shift in attitude was crucial as it redefined the idea of a successful family from one with many children to one with fewer, better-provided-for children.
Positive Reinforcement: Incentives like reimbursed delivery fees and priority school registration for families with two children created a positive attitude toward having smaller families.
Negative Reinforcement: Increased delivery fees and the absence of paid maternity leave for third or subsequent children discouraged larger families, shifting attitudes further.
Subjective Norms
Subjective norms involve the perceived social pressure to perform or not perform a behavior. In Singapore, the government’s active role in promoting family planning through widespread public campaigns and policies significantly influenced societal norms.
Government Influence: The government’s strong stance and consistent messaging created a societal expectation to conform to the two-child norm.
Media Campaigns: The pervasive presence of family planning messages in media and public spaces reinforced the perception that smaller families were the socially accepted and responsible choice.
Perceived Behavioral Control
Perceived behavioral control refers to an individual’s perception of their ability to perform a behavior. Singapore’s policies were designed to enhance perceived control over family size through accessible family planning services.
Access to Family Planning Services: Legalized abortion and sterilization services provided practical means for families to control their size, increasing their perceived control over family planning.
Economic Incentives: Financial incentives for stopping at two children and disincentives for larger families made it economically feasible for families to adhere to the desired family size.
These initiatives showcase a strategic application of behavioral theory to achieve public policy goals.
Now, let’s have a closer look at the impact on behavior.
By leveraging the components of the Theory of Planned Behavior, Singapore’s initiatives successfully altered consumer behavior towards family planning. Here’s how:
Change in Attitudes: The campaign’s economic and social messages reshaped how individuals viewed large families. The benefits of smaller families became more apparent, and attitudes shifted towards preferring fewer children.
Shift in Subjective Norms: With the government’s backing, the norm shifted to favor smaller families. The societal expectation became one of limiting family size to two children, making it a widely accepted standard.
Increased Perceived Behavioral Control: Access to family planning services and economic incentives empowered families to make informed decisions about their family size, leading to a significant drop in birth rates.
Each of the three aspects also create a feedback loop. This needs to be emphasized. Hence, we can understand Singapore’s early family planning initiatives through the lens of the Theory of Planned Behavior. By influencing attitudes, reinforcing new societal norms, and enhancing perceived behavioral control, the government successfully changed citizen consumer behavior regarding family planning, resulting in a significant reduction in birth rates. These initiatives showcase a strategic application of behavioral theory to achieve public policy goals.
Now, the behavior change is no longer in line with the government’s objectives. They want to architect yet another change, and are trying really hard to make things work. This is something that is detailed in various news paper articles, journal entries, and documentaries.
For instance, the following initiatives were pioneered.
Economic Incentives
· Baby Bonus Scheme
· Parenthood Tax Rebate
· Enhanced Parental Leave
Supportive Services
· Childcare Subsidies
· Housing Benefits
Social and Cultural Initiatives
· National Family Council (NFC)
· Social Development Network (SDN)
Education and Information
· Public Awareness Campaigns
It’s useful to think about this once again through the lens of TPB.
Theory of Planned Behavior to understand the more behavior changes

Singapore’s recent initiatives aim to create a more supportive environment for families and encourage higher birth rates. Let’s try to understand them as a changes in Attitude, Norms, and behavioral control.
Attitudes: Economic incentives, supportive services, and public awareness campaigns work to create positive attitudes towards having more children by reducing perceived financial and social costs.
Subjective Norms: Campaigns by the NFC and SDN help shift societal expectations, making larger families more socially acceptable and desirable.
Perceived Behavioral Control: Enhanced financial support, childcare subsidies, and housing benefits empower parents with the means to have and support more children, thus increasing their perceived control over their ability to expand their families.
The intent here is that a change in behavior occurs in line with the government’s objectives. However, that does not seem to be working out, and the situation appears to keep getting worse with time, as shown in the channel news asia article.
Why exactly is the behavior not changing? Why is it not showing any signs of change even?
Possible explanations
One possible explanation for the lack of change in behavior despite the recent initiatives is that the initial shift in behavior was primarily driven by changes in attitudes and aligned with consumer objectives of economic stability and smaller family sizes. Now, societal norms and individual expectations have evolved, and the current initiatives, while beneficial, may be perceived as conflicting with contemporary consumer desires for greater personal freedom, career focus, and work-life balance. Essentially, the new measures may not be as effective because they are trying to reverse deeply ingrained attitudes and norms that have been established over decades.
Another explanation could be the structural and societal changes that have occurred over the past few decades. For a change to occur in the opposite direction, it is going to take time, especially considering that norms are intended to be changed in the process.