‘Jaw-dropping’ global crash in birth rate

The world is ill-prepared for the global crash in children being born which is set to have a “jaw-dropping” impact on societies, say researchers.

Falling fertility rates mean nearly every country could have shrinking populations by the end of the century. And 23 nations – including Spain and Japan – are expected to see their populations halve by 2100.

Countries will also age dramatically, with as many people turning 80 as there are being born.

What is going on?

The fertility rate – the average number of children a woman gives birth to – is falling. If the number falls below approximately 2.1, then the size of the population starts to fall. In 1950, women were having an average of 4.7 children in their lifetime.

Researchers at the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation showed the global fertility rate nearly halved to 2.4 in 2017 – and their study, published in the Lancet, projects it will fall below 1.7 by 2100.

Graph of number of children women have

As a result, the researchers expect the number of people on the planet to peak at 9.7 billion around 2064, before falling down to 8.8 billion by the end of the century.

“That’s a pretty big thing; most of the world is transitioning into natural population decline,” researcher Prof Christopher Murray told the BBC.

“I think it’s incredibly hard to think this through and recognise how big a thing this is; it’s extraordinary, we’ll have to reorganise societies.”

Why are fertility rates falling?

It has nothing to do with sperm counts or the usual things that come to mind when discussing fertility.

Instead it is being driven by more women in education and work, as well as greater access to contraception, leading to women choosing to have fewer children. In many ways, falling fertility rates are a success story.

Which countries will be most affected?

Japan’s population is projected to fall from a peak of 128 million in 2017 to less than 53 million by the end of the century.

Italy is expected to see an equally dramatic population crash from 61 million to 28 million over the same timeframe.

They are two of 23 countries – which also include Spain, Portugal, Thailand and South Korea – expected to see their population more than halve.

“That is jaw-dropping,” Prof Christopher Murray told me.

China, currently the most populous nation in the world, is expected to peak at 1.4 billion in four years time before nearly halving to 732 million by 2100. India will take its place.

The UK is predicted to peak at 75 million in 2063, and fall to 71 million by 2100.

Graph of population sizesImage copyrightBBC SPORT

However, this will be a truly global issue, with 183 out of 195 countries having a fertility rate below the replacement level.

Why is this a problem?

You might think this is great for the environment. A smaller population would reduce carbon emissions as well as deforestation for farmland.

“That would be true except for the inverted age structure (more old people than young people) and all the uniformly negative consequences of an inverted age structure,” says Prof Murray.

Baby and granddadImage copyright GETTY IMAGES
Image caption The world faces a shift from young to old

The study projects:

  • The number of under-fives will fall from 681 million in 2017 to 401 million in 2100.
  • The number of over 80-year-olds will soar from 141 million in 2017 to 866 million in 2100.

Prof Murray adds: “It will create enormous social change. It makes me worried because I have an eight-year-old daughter and I wonder what the world will be like.”

Who pays tax in a massively aged world? Who pays for healthcare for the elderly? Who looks after the elderly? Will people still be able to retire from work?

“We need a soft landing,” argues Prof Murray.

Are there any solutions?

Countries, including the UK, have used migration to boost their population and compensate for falling fertility rates.

However, this stops being the answer once nearly every country’s population is shrinking.

“We will go from the period where it’s a choice to open borders, or not, to frank competition for migrants, as there won’t be enough,” argues Prof Murray.

Some countries have tried policies such as enhanced maternity and paternity leave, free childcare, financial incentives and extra employment rights, but there is no clear answer.

Sweden has dragged its fertility rate up from 1.7 to 1.9, but other countries that have put significant effort into tackling the “baby bust” have struggled. Singapore still has a fertility rate of around 1.3.

Prof Murray says: “I find people laugh it off; they can’t imagine it could be true, they think women will just decide to have more kids.

“If you can’t [find a solution] then eventually the species disappears, but that’s a few centuries away.”

The researchers warn against undoing the progress on women’s education and access to contraception.

Prof Stein Emil Vollset said: “Responding to population decline is likely to become an overriding policy concern in many nations, but must not compromise efforts to enhance women’s reproductive health or progress on women’s rights.”

What about Africa?

The population of sub-Saharan Africa is expected to treble in size to more than three billion people by 2100. And the study says Nigeria will become the world’s second biggest country, with a population of 791 million. Prof Murray says: “We will have many more people of African descent in many more countries as we go through this.

“Global recognition of the challenges around racism are going to be all the more critical if there are large numbers of people of African descent in many countries.”

Why is 2.1 the fertility rate threshold?

You might think the number should be 2.0 – two parents have two children, so the population stays the same size.

But even with the best healthcare, not all children survive to adulthood. Also, babies are ever so slightly more likely to be male. It means the replacement figure is 2.1 in developed countries. Nations with higher childhood mortality also need a higher fertility rate.

Read more at www.bbc.co.uk


PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.

Trackback from your site.

Comments (7)

  • Avatar

    Roger Higgs

    |

    “Why Are Fertility Rates Falling? … it is being driven by more women in education and work, as well as greater access to contraception, leading to women CHOOSING to have fewer children” (my emphasis). Well, give these genius ‘researchers’ a Nobel prize.

    Western women have been indoctrinated to believe that motherhood is uncool and that it’s more exciting to have meaningful ‘careers’, to travel a lot, and to swap pictures on Instagram showing how much more ‘fun’ they are having than everyone else. Meanwhile, females of a different background continue to produce, on average, 3 to 6 children each. In other words, we are being vastly out-bred. Our ‘cool’ western women are committing voluntary cultural suicide.

    “Prof Murray adds: “It will create enormous social change. It makes me worried because I have an eight-year-old daughter and I wonder what the world will be like.”” Maybe the Professor will figure it out; though doubtless he’ll need more research funds. I pity his daughter and her entire generation. Racial war is coming.

    “The researchers warn against undoing the progress on women’s education and access to contraception.” The wise ‘researchers’ again. ‘Progress’, they call it. You couldn’t make this up.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    THOMAS W ADAMS

    |

    Any young ladies, wishing to become mothers; see me in the vestry later.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Tom O

    |

    Why are fertility rates falling?

    “It has nothing to do with sperm counts or the usual things that come to mind when discussing fertility.”

    And, of course, it has nothing to do with women deciding to have children later either, i suppose. The economic reality of the cost of raising children requires pre planning and preparation. But the fact that more and more men carry their ever present cellphones in their front pants pocket would NEVER effect childbirth! Sorry, it does take two sets of genes to propagate, and when one is missing or doesn’t work well, the other doesn’t matter. And if one set of genes is ending up in an orifice other than a vagina, it’s pretty useless as well.

    If there is a single reason to blame for falling birth rates – lets not pretend that birth rate and fertility rate is the same, they aren’t – it is the cost of having and raising a child. It is the inflated costs of the medical services since the onset of “insurance” that has crushed birth rates among groups that have responsible childbirths. Come to think of it, it has been the inflated costs of medical services that has crushed the middle class as well, since even with “insurance” you can’t afford to be sick, and heaven forbid that the child gets sick!

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Shane

    |

    Umm…. I’m confused.
    Murray is very concerned that the world population will drop and yet he is funded by Bill & Mels’ foundation that want to depopulate the world with his vaccinations? Or does he want everyone vaccinated to boost the world population so it doesn’t drop down to these`concerning’ levels.

    Is this why they are already using forced inter-country migration now rather than later on in the century?

    And on and on the bullshit flows from this nutty professor, extracting so much information from his data that justifies all the current Marxist strategies being used today for that final NWO.

    Almost sounds like a psyop..

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Robert Beatty

    |

    Birthrates falling?
    That was before lock-down. Just wait and see what next December brings.
    More storks than you could poke a stick at.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Daphne Worsham

    |

    Let’s go back to the beginning of this article…. the data and analysis are from the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. This is the same outfit that gave us all the outstandingly inaccurate covid-19 data and predictions. I don’t believe a thing that comes out of that project.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Shawn Marshall

    |

    Wonder what people would think if the Almighty took away all the children? After all – every child is a gift from God – and how many millions have been heedlessly slaughtered? Have caution people and know that He is Just.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Share via