PIP: Some 40 countries use some form of incentives and disincentives in support of population policies, about half with the aim of reducing fertility and half with the aim of increasing it. These schemes range from limitations on tax and family allowances or maternity benefits after a given family size has been reached to payments to acceptors of fertility control methods. Some schemes aim to eliminate or reduce the cost and inconvenience people may face in achieving their fertility preferences, whereas others contain an element of deterrence. It is difficult to isolate and measure the impact of incentives on fertility from the effects of other factors such as family planning service availability or modernization. Studies in pronatalist countries suggest that incentive schemes produce short-term fertility increases without a change in average family size. Monetary incentives must be constantly increased to keep pace with inflation, placing a heavy burden on government budgets. Administrative capacity to operate the scheme is critical in terms of both manpower and efficient systems for record keeping, monitoring, and close supervision to prevent abuse. There is also considerable debate on the moral and ethical implications of incentives and disincentives as policy tools. Incentives offered for the acceptance of a particular fertility control method potentially contravene the principle of voluntary and informed consent. In addition, the relative value of the reward is greater for those in the lower income groups. The discriminatory nature of certain types of incentives and disincentives is illustrated by measures introduced in Singapore that give highest priority in school enrollment to the children of highly educated mothers with 2-3 children. This ruling is expected to further intensify the controversy surrounding incentive and disincentive schemes.