Population Decline: A Map

I’ve written a few times about demographics, most specifically population decline (see here, here, here, here, and here). Some time ago I volunteered to make a map showing those countries currently experiencing (i.e. in 2013) population decline. The results of this effort is below. The map uses data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s International Data Base. In addition to current population decline, I also highlighted those countries estimated  to experience population decline in a decade (2023).

Population Decline (via U.S. Census, ME!)

Population Decline (via U.S. Census, ME!)

In one of the earlier posts I discussed the eastern European concentration of declining populations. Currently, this belt of decline stretches from Russia to Germany and the Adriatic Sea (specifically to the former Yugoslavian republics of Croatia, Slovenia, and others). By 2023, Slovakia and Austria are also experiencing population decline. Reviewing the U.S. Census data, Austria is already experiencing a natural population decrease. However, immigration numbers are high enough to ensure a growing population. By 2023, immigration inflow isn’t enough to replace elderly Austrian citizens, who are dying of natural causes. The decline belt also spreads further west (to Belgium, Finland, and Portugal) and south (to Greece).

In addition to Europe, the East Asian region of decline also begins to emerge with South Korea joining Japan in experiencing negative population growth. By 2030, the People’s Republic of China joins South Korea and Japan with a declining population.

Finally, the United States is expected to continue grow about 0.8% per year in both time periods (2013 and 2023) due to a combination of natural increase (i.e. births being more numerous than deaths) and immigration (i.e. more immigrants than emigrants). Likewise, the United Kingdom and Canada also remain in positive growth due to the same factors.

Though nationalists would undoubtedly take issue with immigration as a policy tool to reverse demographic decline, it makes economic and demographic sense. After all, one of the problems associated with demographic decline is the greater burden that the elderly place on working adults. In less developed economies that burden is comprised of an overabundance of youth, where children are often a form of social security. In the advanced economies, there is far less pressure to have children. There is (typically) a social security program for the elderly as well as retirement and pension plans. Similarly, the cost for having children is also greater. Attempting to spur citizens into having more children would (probably) take decades of consistent policy, which is unlikely to happen (at least in a democracy). Such a policy would not only have to take into account the costs of children, but citizens’ (particularly the female citizens’) preferences.

In light of these challenges, why not encourage immigration?

Advertisements

List of Countries Currently Experiencing Population Decline

In an effort to provide a quick reference for those interested in stage 5 of the demographic transition model (where the number of births fall below the number of deaths resulting in negative natural population growth), I put together a quick list of countries (map coming in an update!) based on U.S. Census projections. The countries below are experiencing population decline from 2013 to 2014. However, I based this list on growth rates (which includes migration) so some countries may have sustainable fertility rates (like South Africa) but out-migration (emigration) from the country is high enough to cause a decrease in that country’s population from 2013 to 2014. Despite this caveat, the primary reason for population decline is low birth rates. With that aside here is the list:

Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Cook Islands, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Germany, Guyana, Hungary, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Maldives, Micronesia, Moldova, Montenegro, Poland, Puerto Rico, Romania, Russia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Serbia, Slovenia, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine

South Africa is expected to experience a negative growth rate of 0.4 from 2013 to 2014. It is not due to low fertility (which is estimated at 2.2 children per woman), but due to large migrant outflows in 2013 and 2014 (over 300,000 people each year). With low number of births, the net effect on the population is decline (decreasing from 48,601,000 to 48,376,000).

A surprising addition to this list (for me) was Germany. I had assumed the country would continue to experience population growth for sometime because of its immigration. Not so, total fertility rate in Germany is 1.4 children per woman in 2013 (well below replacement level of 2.1). With an aging population, the 679,000 babies expected won’t be enough to replace the 906,000 deaths expected. These deaths aren’t due to an expectation of virulent disease or war, but simple old age. Moreover the 72,000 immigrants expected in 2013 isn’t enough to replace those German citizens that are dying.

This brings up a hidden facet to population decline, which I’ve touched on previously. These statistics treat “Germany” and “Russia” as homogeneous population groups. As I just said, 72,000 immigrants are expected (estimated) to enter Germany in 2013, many might become German citizens. Immigrants, typically, have larger number of children than the “natives” whether by bringing over their existing families when they naturalize or when they “settle down” and begin having families in their new homes (sometimes both!). When evaluating these (or any) statistics, its always important to keep in mind what’s being analyzed and to question what’s being left out. In these statistics we’re missing valuable ethnic, religious, and other important “identity” data. Like most things, concentrations develop as you narrow your focus from the countrywide to statewide level or from the nation to population groups.

Two general geographic trends are worth pointing out. The first is the prevalence of eastern and southeastern European, former Communist, Eastern Orthodox religion countries. This line stretches from the Baltic states and runs south to the Adriatic Sea. Greece, as it turns out, is expected to begin population decline by 2015. Outside the scope of the study it fits the larger regional pattern (though not “former Communist” thanks to Eisenhowerian intervention [I believe]). This isn’t really the space to speculate on the reason for the prevalence of population decline in this area but I would bet it would have something to do with the influx of “Western” medicine and technology after the Cold War prolonging lives (now leading to “larger” crude death rates) and lingering effects of the “Communist” social experiment that gave women more “freedom” (read: treated the same in regards to their labor as men) than in more “traditional” (read: not Communist) societies. The other general geographic trend is the presence of relatively small islands and island chains. These islands may actually represent the realization of a neo-Malthusian nightmare world. The “carrying capacity” of these islands are tapped, but not due to food, probably water or jobs, forcing a outflow of people. Combined with just below (St. Vincent and the Grenadines is 1.8 children per woman) or at-replacement level fertility and we have population decline in relatively small populations.

And then there’s Japan. While I’ve already discussed Japan in a previous post, its worth reiterating the multiple causes identified (or at least hypothesized) by scholars as to the reason for its population decline (really its falling fertility rates). Some point to ever-expanding educational and economic access for women, which leads to delay in having children (if having any at all). Others point to a wider trend of industrialization and modernization, breaking down traditional family structures and lifestyles – emphasizing “Western” ideals like individual gain and happiness. And of course, there’s the lack of immigration. The truth, as you probably could guess, is likely a combination of all these things (and more). In fact, one could point to the importance that “traditional Japanese culture” places on elders and the influence that longer lifespans has had in reinforcing this value. I used ironic quotes because I think every culture places high value on elders. At any rate, in a world of economic cost perhaps its more important to the individual or the state to be able to care for the elderly rather than children? Just a thought.

Geopolitical Cartoons: China under Imperialism (early 1900s)

A couple of weeks ago I discussed a geopolitical cartoon of Korea under imperial control of Japan, this week I return to the theme of imperialism with a pair of cartoons (via imperialism-by-brady) on the imperial domination of China in the closing years of the 19th century, that is the late 1800s.

Imperial powers ready to fight a sleeping China, ca. 1900 (via imperialism-by-brady)

The cartoon above is my favorite of the two, in it the imperial powers are represented by common animals associated with the country. We have the American eagle, German vulture, British lion, Austro-Hungarian double-headed eagle, Italian wolf, Japanese leopard, French rooster, and Russian bear. Each is armed, or ready to fight with tooth or claw, and ready to attack a sleeping dragon, representing China. The use of the queue hairstyle on the Chinese dragon is telling for the time period of the cartoon. According to wikipedia, the queue came to predominantly Han (an ethnic group) China via the Qing dynasty of the Jurchen/Manchus in the mid-1600s. Although resisted by most Han the queue, later became a symbol of the Qing dynasty until 1911. It is likely that this cartoon was made around the time of the Boxer Rebellion (1899-1901), as the imperial powers are getting ready to disturb and tussle with the Chinese dragon. Below is a photograph of the troops from most of the states (Russia isn’t shown) that took part in suppressing the Boxer Rebellion:

Alliance troops during Boxer Rebellion, ca. 1900 (via wikipedia)

Imperial powers divide China, ca. 1900 (via imperialism-by-brady)

The second cartoon shows the European and Japanese imperialists literally carving up a king cake representing China. The cartoon is from France, hence China is “Chine”. Rather than using animals commonly associated with the powers, the artist utilized current (at the time) rulers and human symbols. The United Kingdom is represented by Queen Victoria, Kaiser Wilhelm II represents Germany, Czar Nicholas II represents Russia, “Marianne” is the emblem of France, and a samurai represents Japan. In the background a Qing official futilely tries to get their attention. One wonders if “Marianne” is actively participating in the division of China in the artist’s eyes. According to the wikipedia article, “Marianne” is an allegory for liberty and reason; while, the French government could certainly make a “reasonable” explanation for its imperial activities at the time (safeguarding French economic interests), but the lack of liberty enjoyed by the Chinese would be harder to explain (unless they thought they were saving the Chinese from themselves).

These geopolitical cartoons capture the breadth of foreign involvement in China’s internal affairs at the beginning of last century. The major powers from Europe, the United States, and Japan all sent troops to suppress the Boxer Rebellion and to safeguard their interests in China. What the second cartoon really shows is the inability of the Qing dynasty to protect its own territory and the power of the imperialists to enforce their will, despite Qing protestations. A potent symbol of the imperial era, the second cartoon hints at the eventual collapse of the Qing dynasty and the creation of the Republic of China. The fall of the Qing signified the end of dynastic rule in China, a system of government that had been established with the Xia dynasty around 2,000 BCE.

Geopolitical Cartoons: Korea, early 1900s

This week’s geopolitical cartoon is a depiction of Japanese-Korean relations in the early 20th century. It depicts an imperial Japanese soldier (signifying Japan) stepping on a Korean man wearing traditional clothing (hanbok and gat), the latter forms a bridge over the “Yalu” and a sign on the other bank points the way to Manchuria. As the soldier crosses, the man holds a sign stating permission to use “Korean territory” to cross into Manchuria.

Imperial Japan and Korea, ca. 1900 (via Mount Holyoke College)

While I don’t have the date of the cartoon, complicating placing it on a precise timeline we can make an educated guess based on what’s happening in the cartoon. But first some background, the cartoon was published during the general historical period of imperialism, more specifically at a time when Imperial Japan began asserting itself in East Asia, of course there was already a hegemon (or “super”power in this region), Tsarist Russia. We often associate the imperial and colonial periods with Europe and often forget that Japan was also involved. China at this time was thrown into disarray with the continued presence of Europeans (and Japanese) and a weak central government. Russian and Japanese tensions led to the Russo-Japanese War from February 1904 to September 1905, ending with the Treaty of Portsmouth. In some interesting foreshadowing, the Russo-Japanese War began with an Imperial Japanese surprise attack on Russian-controlled Port Arthur, now Lushunkou (in Dalian municipality).

the Russo-Japanese War, 1904-1905 (via wikipedia)

The Treaty of Portsmouth signalled Imperial Japan’s emergence as a real world power and exposed Tsarist Russia as a state in decline. Indeed, some twelve years later Tsarist Russia would be torn apart by the Russian (Bolshevik) Revolution and a civil war. In addition, Imperial Japan also gained recognized control over unified Korea (with acknowledgement from the U.S. and UK). This control turned to formal annexation in 1910. Korea was nominally an empire from 1897 to 1910 but this may have been due to more wishful thinking than actual power. For instance, the August 1904 First Japan-Korea Convention stipulated extensive Japanese governmental involvement in Korean internal governance (specifically in the areas of foreign relations, finance).

The political cartoon could be referring to the First Japan-Korea Convention, but perhaps also to the outright annexation of Korea in 1910. The words “so obliging” hint at the author’s belief that Korea is partially responsible for Japanese actions against Manchuria. The aftermath of the Russo-Japanese war left Manchuria administratively with China but the actual influence lay with Japan, rather than Russia. Following the Mukden incident in 1931, Imperial Japan invaded Manchuria and established a puppet state, Manchukuo.

This political cartoon is an effective political geography tool. The geopolitical importance of Korea for Imperial Japan is highlighted for the reader in that Imperial Japan must cross Korea (and the Yalu river) in order to reach their political objectives in Manchuria.