Breaking news: China's fertility rate (avg # of live births per woman in the childbearing years) just hit its lowest level since 1949- the year of the Communist revolution. It is now about 1.0. Since 2.1 is replacement level, in a half dozen countries including China, Ukraine (0.98), and South Korea (0.72!) the next generation will be one-half the size of the current one. In total, about one-third of all countries have fertility rates below 2.1, so we are in the midst of a global population decline, (This These figures are via the World Bank Several orgs estimate fertility rates, using slightly different sources/methodologies).
On the other end of the spectrum some countries that still have almost pre-modern fertility levels above 4.0, or even above 6.0! They may be worse off or at least have a vastly different set of future problems than shrinking nations. At least right now, many of them seem to be the least likely to be able to absorb the growth, e.g., Somalia, the DK Congo, Niger, Afghanistan, Mozambique, and other very poor, often politically unstable countries. At one recent point I think the Gaza Strip had the world's highest fertility rate, but surely not now.
Demography IS destiny, as they say. And the consequences of this massive "birth dearth" and the fertility imbalance between nations (and regions) are hard to overstate. As the later readings will explain, fertility rates are resistant to public policy efforts. And trends will play havoc with economies, through savings and consumption levels, labor shortages, and other channels. Migration patterns will change, and attitudes towards immigrants might get worse, not better. Social insurance systems (like Social Security/Medicare) could go bankrupt, and/or the tax burden to care for all of the old people could weigh down young workers. Older societies are less productive, and productivity and innovative drive economic growth and dynamism. Care industries will become more vital, and automation might or might not help much. the list is almost endless.
Of course, fewer people might have some global benefits. Climate change and some other environmental problems might grow more manageable. Anti-immigrant sentiment might reverse (or get worse as the foreign born replace smaller and smaller native-born cohorts). Housing costs could go down! Democracy could...go either way, IMO.
"Pro-natalist" policies have sprung up to try to get birth rates back up. Europe has tried them but, to my knowledge, they have not worked. In politics, the Right now openly calls for women to do their duty and have more babies - often more White babies, depending on who's doing the exhorting. U.S. birth rates are slightly below replacement levels, I think, but so far immigration has kept us from suffering the effects of declining population. Who in the world thinks that will continue in the face President Trump's ethnic cleansing (I mean, criminal illegal immigrant deportations)?
Thanks to, um, Scott, I think for raising this as a topic idea. Check back here the week before our 2/8 mtg for some optional background readings on the global birth dearth, its causes and consequences (some not as obvious as you might think), and the hope, if any, of pro-natalist, pro-immigration, or other policy solutions.
Maybe February will give us a respite from the ongoing horrors of U.S. foreign policy (YMMV).
Optional Backgrounders –
· TBD.
