The economies of both Japan and Germany went into recovery around the time their populations began to decline. In other words, both the total and per capita GDP in both countries grew more rapidly than before. Russia’s economy also began to grow rapidly, even though its population had been shrinking. Many Eastern European countries have been experiencing similar effects to Russia. Such renewed growth calls into question the conventional wisdom that economic growth requires population growth, or that economic growth is impossible during a population decline.
A focus on productivity growth that leads to an increase in both per capita GDP and total GDP can bring other benefits to:
- the workforce through higher wages, benefits and better working conditions
- customers through lower prices
- owners and shareholders through higher profits
- the environment through more money for investment in more stringent environmental protection
- governments through higher tax proceeds to fund government activities
Another approach to possible positive effects of population decline is to consider Earth’s carrying capacity. The human carrying capacity of the Earth has been estimated to be 500 million, 1 billion or up to 12 billion. According to these studies, the human carrying capacity has already been exceeded or would be exceeded by the year 2100, therefore a global population decline would counteract the negative effects of human overpopulation.
Population decline
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_decline
A population decline (also sometimes called underpopulation, depopulation, or population collapse) in humans is a reduction in a human population size. Over the long term, stretching from prehistory to the present, Earth’s total human population has continued to grow; however, current projections suggest that this long-term trend of steady population growth may be coming to an end.
Until the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, global population grew very slowly. After about 1800, the growth rate accelerated to a peak of 2.09% annually during the 1967–1969 period, but since then, due to the worldwide collapse of the total fertility rate, it has declined to 1.05% as of 2020. The global growth rate in absolute numbers accelerated to a peak of 92.9 million in 1988, but has declined to 81.3 million in 2020. Long-term projections indicate that the growth rate of the human population of this planet will continue to decline and that by the end of the 21st century, it will reach zero. Examples of this emerging trend are Japan, whose population is currently (2015–2020) declining at the rate of 0.2% per year, and China, whose population could start declining in 2027 or sooner. By 2050, Europe’s population is projected to be declining at the rate of 0.3% per year.
Population growth has declined mainly due to the abrupt decline in the global total fertility rate, from 5.0 in 1960 to 2.3 in 2020. The decline in the total fertility rate has occurred in every region of the world and is a result of a process known as demographic transition. In order to maintain its population, ignoring migration, a country requires a minimum fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman (the number is slightly greater than 2 because not all children live to adulthood). However, almost all societies experience a drastic drop in fertility to well below 2 as they grow more wealthy (see income and fertility). The tendency of women in wealthier countries to have fewer children is attributed to a variety of reasons, such as lower infant mortality and a reduced need for children as a source of family labor or retirement welfare, both of which reduce the incentive to have many children. Better access to education for young women, which broadens their job prospects, is also often cited.
Possible consequences of long-term national population decline can be net positive or negative. If a country can increase its workforce productivity faster than its population is declining, the results, in terms of its economy, the quality of life of its citizens, and the environment, can be net positive. If it cannot increase workforce productivity faster than its population’s decline, the results can be negative.
National efforts to confront a declining population to date have been focused on the possible negative economic consequences and have been centered on increasing the size and productivity of the workforce.
Possible consequences
Predictions of the net economic (and other) effects from a slow and continuous population decline (e.g. due to low fertility rates) are mainly theoretical since such a phenomenon is a relatively new and unprecedented one. The results of many of these studies show that the estimated impact of population growth on economic growth is generally small and can be positive, negative, or nonexistent. A recent meta-study found no relationship between population growth and economic growth.
Possible positive effects
The effects of a declining population can be positive. The single best gauge of economic success is the growth of GDP per person, not total GDP. GDP per person (also known as GDP per capita or per capita GDP) is a rough proxy for average living standards. A country can both increase its average living standard and grow total GDP even though its population growth is low or even negative. The economies of both Japan and Germany went into recovery around the time their populations began to decline (2003–2006). In other words, both the total and per capita GDP in both countries grew more rapidly after 2005 than before. Russia’s economy also began to grow rapidly from 1999 onward, even though its population had been shrinking since 1992–93. Many Eastern European countries have been experiencing similar effects to Russia. Such renewed growth calls into question the conventional wisdom that economic growth requires population growth, or that economic growth is impossible during a population decline.
More recently (2009–2017) Japan has experienced a higher growth of GDP per capita than the United States, even though its population declined over that period. In the United States, the relationship between population growth and growth of GDP per capita has been found to be empirically insignificant. All of this is further proof that individual prosperity can grow during periods of population decline.
Attempting to better understand the economic impact of these pluses and minuses, Lee et al. analyzed data from 40 countries. They found that typically fertility well above replacement and population growth would be most beneficial for government budgets. Fertility near replacement and population stability, however, would be most beneficial for standards of living when the analysis includes the effects of age structure on families as well as governments. Fertility moderately below replacement and population decline would maximize per capita consumption when the cost of providing capital for a growing labor force is taken into account.
A focus on productivity growth that leads to an increase in both per capita GDP and total GDP can bring other benefits to:
Another approach to possible positive effects of population decline is to consider Earth’s carrying capacity. The human carrying capacity of the Earth has been estimated to be 500 million, 1 billion or up to 12 billion. According to these studies, the human carrying capacity has already been exceeded or would be exceeded by the year 2100, therefore a global population decline would counteract the negative effects of human overpopulation.
Possible negative effects
The effects of a declining population can also be negative. As a country’s population declines, GDP growth may grow even more slowly or may even decline. If the decline in total population is not matched by an equal or greater increase in productivity (GDP/capita), and if that condition continues from one calendar quarter to the next, it follows that a country would experience a decline in GDP, known as an economic recession. If these conditions become permanent, the country could find itself in a permanent recession.
Other possible negative impacts of a declining population are:
All these negative effects could be summarized under the heading of “Underpopulation”. Underpopulation is usually defined as a state in which a country’s population has declined too much to support its current economic system.
Population decline can cause internal population pressures that then lead to secondary effects such as ethnic conflict, forced refugee flows, and hyper-nationalism. This is particularly true in regions where different ethnic or racial groups have different growth rates. An example of this is white nationalism. White nationalists seek to ensure the survival of the white race, and the cultures of historically white nations. Many white nationalists believe that white people should therefore maintain a demographic majority and that mass immigration of non-whites and low birth rates among whites are threatening the white race. Low fertility rates that cause long-term population decline can also lead to population ageing, an imbalance in the population age structure. Population ageing in Europe due to low fertility rates has given rise to concerns about its impact on social cohesion.
A smaller national population can also have geo-strategic effects, but the correlation between population and power is a tenuous one. Technology and resources often play more significant roles. Since World War II, the “static” theory saw a population’s absolute size as being one of the components of a country’s national power. More recently, the “human capital” theory has emerged. This view holds that the quality and skill level of a labor force and the technology and resources available to it are more important than simply a nation’s population size. While there were in the past advantages to high fertility rates, that “demographic dividend” has now largely disappeared.
(sk)
人口が減ると、これだけいいことがあって、これだけ悪いことがある。そういうことを整理しておくことで、変化にうまく対応できる。
人口減少は人類にとってはいいことだ。もっとも、既得権益のおかげでいい暮らしを謳歌している人たちにとっては人口減少は絶対悪で、自民党の議員たちはなにがなんでも人口減少を食い止めたいはずだ。
どんなことにもいい面と悪い面がある。人口減少も例外ではない。