World fertility rates in decline
The Economist reports on the worldwide decrease in fertility rates. Not to be confused with overall population growth which continues to increase, the “replacement level of fertility” is the statistical number that causes “a country’s population to slow down and eventually to stabilize.” As the article shows, because of inertia, populations can rise while fertility declines.
You cannot talk about these stats without entering into worldview discussion, as even the title and subtitle of the article indicates: “Go forth and multiply a lot less: Lower fertility is changing the world for the better.”
Did you catch that last phrase, “for the better,” carrying the weight of the author’s worldview and values?
Sometime in the next few years (if it hasn’t happened already) the world will reach a milestone: half of humanity will be having only enough children to replace itself. That is, the fertility rate of half the world will be 2.1 or below. This is the “replacement level of fertility”, the magic number that causes a country’s population to slow down and eventually to stabilise.
The article explains the various reasons for the decline in fertility (desire for a better standard of living, more widespread educational opportunities for females), and includes the “special case” of China:
Lastly, a special case: China’s one-child policy, which began nationwide in the early 1970s. China’s population is probably 300m-400m lower now than it would have been without it. The policy (which is one of population control, not birth control) has had dreadful costs, including widespread female infanticide, a lopsided sex ratio and horrors such as mass sterilisation and forced abortions. But in its own terms, it has worked—20m people enter the workforce each year, instead of 40m—and, to the extent that China is polluting less than it would have done, it has benefited the rest of the world.
The article deserves a close reading and analysis, but for now I’ve got five kids waiting for me to get home to eat dinner with them. That’s part of my worldview and I’m sticking to it.
Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord,
the fruit of the womb a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior
are the children of one’s youth.
Blessed is the man
who fills his quiver with them!
He shall not be put to shame
when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.(Psalm 127:3-5 ESV)














Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top15 Comments to “World fertility rates in decline”
!!!!!!!!!
Report comment to moderator
TJS Catlover — what?
You really gotta love that kind of reasoning!
Report comment to moderator
Wow, this is really sloppy reasoning. Why is it better for fewer people to enter the work force? Less work getting done is better somehow? Also, the imbalance between males and females, due to female infanticide and sex-selective abortions, is a huge problem for Asia. When 100 million plus Indian and Chinese men have no hope of ever finding a wife, the social problems that will cause are beyond our present ability to comprehend. Some symptoms, such as theft of and sex trafficking of young girls, are now starting to be seen. Perhaps China will find that it has little alternative but to put its millions of excess males into an army and start a war.
Report comment to moderator
I realize people ignore my comments as much as they can, but a few of them are probably correct whether you like them or not, and for that matter are not disrespectful of Christianity.
As I’ve said: if birth rates are too high or if birth rates are too low, it makes the world a worse off place.
Duh. Duh. Duh.
Report comment to moderator
Care to define “too high” and “too low”?
Report comment to moderator
I have already said, “No, I cannot, about five or more times.”
I presume you consider this to be such a devastating answer to the issue, that it does not need to be considered.
The other possible answer seems to be There can never be enough human beings born. Even if people are living in squalor and starvation; even if a child is born into a terrible slum in Nairobi, say, will never be healthy; will never have enough to eat; will never live to see the age of twenty; we should strive to see that it lives long enough to reproduce; and perhaps to say, “I am a Christian; I worship Jesus and God.”
What is the purpose of Christians on Earth?
Report comment to moderator
Random – I don’t know why you’re getting so emotional. The reason I asked for a definition is that, if you think about your statement for a minute, it has no content. Your statement was, “if birth rates are too high or if birth rates are too low, it makes the world a worse off place.” The concept of “too high,” as far as we can tell from the statement, is a birth rate that is high enough to make the world worse off. Similarly, “too low” appears to mean “low enough to make the world worse off.” Therefore, your statement amounts to saying that if birth rates are high or low enough to make the world worse off, then the world will be worse off. This is a mere tautology, it lacks any real substance on its face. However, I assumed you had something more substantive in mind, and I was trying to draw that from you. You then responded with what appears to be another logical fallacy, a straw man. This does not lend much credence to the idea that you are able to think things through in a reasonable manner.
Report comment to moderator
…and by the way, I think your response is a good indication of why “people ignore [your] comments as much as they can.”
Report comment to moderator
Thank you, Buzzy. That is very helpful.
I don’t know how to calculate how many people are “enough.”
We can talk about how many calories it takes to sustain life, and how many people are not getting enough calories. We can talk about how much violence there is in the world, and to what extent over-crowding contributes to more violence and war.
We can talk about shortages of raw materials, such as petroleum, and the problem that will be much worse than petroleum, water.
We can talk about the spread of pandemics, such as HIV-AIDS and flu.
We can talk about financial problems where generations are out of balance and there are not enough young people to support the older people who are retiring, such as Japan.
These are difficult and complicated and technical problems. This is a web site that mostly functions on slogans, Bible verses, and insults, and above all, on over-simplifications.
Report comment to moderator
Well, we will soon to be thanking health care for our wayward overpopulation problem, if it passes. Grandma will probably need to pick out her casket before she is 65 just to be on the safe side. . .. .
Remembering history; wasn’t the cure for over population and being out of work, the driving force behind WW2? We can thank old FDR for that one. Now-a-days, it seems the prisons are getting so over-crowded that BHO might get his civilian army from it’s ranks. Whatcha think?
Report comment to moderator
This is a web site that mostly functions on slogans, Bible verses, and insults, and above all, on over-simplifications.
Is that an oversimplification?
Report comment to moderator
Excellent. Also tell me about how awful it is when I write long comments.
Report comment to moderator
#11 – Yes.
Report comment to moderator
FDR can be blamed for many horrible things – many of which Obama is reenacting – but I think that starting WW2 is quite a stretch. His record on WW2 is holding back and allowing the attack on Pearl Harbor to be such a disaster before entering the war.
Report comment to moderator
Poor economy = fewer babies.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!