Reiner Klingholz
Editor's Note:
The world's 7 billionth citizen will be born on October 31, probably in sub-Saharan Africa or Asia. New estimates from the UN Population Fund suggest that the global population may not peak until 2100, revising earlier estimates of 2050, and may reach as many as 12 billion people. Can the world survive the burden? Will an aging population doom some nations? Global Times (GT) reporter Yu Jincui talked to Reiner Klingholz (Klingholz), director of the Berlin Institute for Population and Development, on these issues.
GT: According to the UN Population Fund, the global population will reach 7 billion by the end of this month. What's the significance of this number?
Klingholz: What is significant is not the absolute number of 7 billion, but the dynamics of population growth. The last step from 6 to 7 billion was accomplished in the record time of only 12 years, and the next billion will follow within 14 years. As the world population is still very young, even sinking fertility rates will not stop mankind from growing.
By mid-century, there might be 9.5 billion people on earth. According to resource consumption, especially of fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions, the earth is definitely over-populated even today. We have two different kinds of over-population: One is based on the over-consumption in the rich countries, the other one on fast population growth in the poor countries.
Population growth rates are highest in the poorest states. In some countries, living conditions deteriorate because the financial and natural resources cannot keep up with the population growth. These countries face a shortage of everything from doctors, to teachers, to food.
GT: Some worry that limited global resources cannot feed the increasingly growing population and call for population control. Is this necessary?
Klingholz: All countries with considerable economic development over the last years have seen sinking fertility rates. That shows that population growth can be reduced on a voluntary basis by a combination of women's empowerment, availability of family planning services, education, and job opportunities. These interventions improve opportunities for personal development, and these in turn lead to lower fertility rates.
Under these conditions, the number of children becomes less important to parents. Instead they invest more into the capacities of their offspring, for example, in their health and education.
In poor countries, children are often needed as a cheap work force, whereas in emerging economies they become a financial burden to their parents. It is important to invest in education and family planning programs to create more opportunities for economic development.
According to resource consumption, especially of fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions, the earth is definitely over-populated even today.
Reiner Klingholz
GT: People are worrying about the blooming world population. But others claim humans will finally disappear due to low fertility rate. Why these two extremes?
Klingholz: Some nations have not seen any substantial reduction of their fertility rates in the past. They can cause political instability, distributional conflicts and unwanted migration flows. On the other hand, all developed and more and more emerging nations have rather low fertility rates between 2.1 and 1.2. At the same time, they have a rising life expectancy. These countries will see a stagnant or even shrinking population in the near future. Countries like Japan, Germany or Russia have already entered this stage of demographic development.
As all countries in the world show at least some kind of development, global birth rates will further decline and sometime by the end of the 21st century, population growth will cease.
GT: Some suggest the most severe problem is demographic imbalance, including the aging problem, gender imbalance and so on. In your opinion, what's the biggest challenge?
Klingholz: In order to keep the demographic structure of a nation stable, we would need a constantly growing population. This is definitely not an option on a limited planet. So aging society is a normal result of economic development. Aging causes problems when large generations of older people are replaced by much smaller generations of younger people.
Old and retired people need functioning social security and healthcare systems, which have to be financed by a shrinking number of productive young people.
All nations with a big baby boom generations will have to solve this problem. This is an enormous challenge for all countries that industrialized early like Germany or the US.
But the challenge is even bigger for economic late-starters like South Korea or China .A transition phase with strong aging is thus unavoidable and has to be encountered by improved productivity.
GT: Can the aging situation be changed in the future?
Klingholz: As long as our living conditions improve and most people benefit from the increased life expectancy, there is no way to stop the aging of our societies. This should not just be seen negatively. Aging is a result of better living conditions. Additionally, the societies of the future will not only be older, but also better educated, more peaceful and better prepared to cope with man-made changes such as climate change.
GT: What should we do to optimize the demographic structure and solve the aging problem?
Klingholz: A good family-policy that ensures gender equality in all fields like employment and education can raise low fertility levels to some extent, as shown in a number of studies. But this will not stop the aging trend. As long as people grow older in good health, there is no real aging problem, because healthy and educated elder people can be a viable part of the workforce and certainly a vital part of society.