by Jacob Maichel
In my first blog post I discussed
why growing populations are something to celebrate, but fertility rates
are showing that people across the globe are opting for smaller
families. Productive citizens are the linchpin of a functional society.
Cities are now cleaner and more prosperous than ever before.
Post-industrial cities around the world, London, New York, Dubai, etc.
are symbols of human progress in part because they have grown in size.
Before modern sanitation, cities were often breeding grounds of disease
and despair.
The explosion in population made possible by this sanitation revolution
did not make cities worse off, as they are now leaps and bounds ahead of
their dark, dirty pasts. People did not start breeding like rabbits,
but rather stopped dying like flies, and this is what allowed
populations to expand.
It is important to distinguish here the differences between birth rates
and fertility rates. The birth rate is the number of live births per
1,000 women in the population. The fertility rate is the average number
of births women have during their productive years. Fertility rates are
increasingly important as they help forecast regional resource needs. We
saw a need for this forecasting in the United States when we
experienced the baby boom after WW2 peaking our fertility rate at 3.8.
This high fertility rate put a strain on resources at the time. On the
other hand, a low fertility rate indicates an aging population that can
put economic strains on social services and health care.
Given that the fertility rate can be too high or too low, what fertility
rate achieves a balance between the two? The answer is right about 2.1.
A rate higher than this will expand the population and a lower rate can
cause a shrinking population. Fertility rates under 2.1 can sometimes
be masked by population growth via an influx of immigrants, or by
improvements in healthcare (especially in developing nations).
The increase in the average lifespan has improved fertility rates in
developing countries. Western and Eastern Africa are the only two places
that have not seen a decline in total fertility. From 1960-2010, the
world's total fertility dropped by more than half. We have seen advanced
countries begin to suffer from dropping fertility at an alarming rate,
with the United States dropping to a fertility rate of 1.8. In 1950
Luxembourg had the lowest fertility rate in the world at 2.0, but in
late 2010 Hong Kong reported a fertility rate of 0.9. This means that in
Hong Kong, each generation will be half the size of the previous
generation!
In many developed places depopulation is a reality. There are two main
factors that appear to be causing this. First and foremost is that
families are choosing not to have as many kids, even in rural areas
where we typically see larger families. Next is that marriage seems to
be declining in value to the majority of people. Fortunately in Kansas
that is not the case, with only 2.6 divorces per 1000 people. This is
the lowest it has been in a half a century and is the opposite of the
worldwide trend. Nevertheless, we are seeing decreasing birth rates,
with 2013 being the lowest since records began.
The fertility rate is an important indicator of countries' futures. Here
in the United States, only time will tell if we will have to rely on
immigration from abroad to continue to be innovative and competitive.
References
Eberstadt, Nicholas. Population, Poverty, Policy. American Enterprise Institute, 2016.
Ryan, Kelsey. “Kansas Birth Rate Lowest in Recorded History.”
Kansas.com, The Wichita Eagle, 2013,
www.kansas.com/news/local/article5926425.html.
Smoak, Natalie. “Fertility Rate.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia
Britannica, Inc., 12 May 2016, www.britannica.com/topic/fertility-rate.
Wenzl, Roy. “Divorce Rate Declines to All-Time Low in Kansas.” Kansas,
The Wichita Eagle, 2017,
www.kansas.com/living/family/article158199169.html.
Jacob C. Maichel is a Graduate Assistant at the Gwartney Institute and an MBA student at Ottawa University
No comments:
Post a Comment