An interesting shift in population views in wealthy countries around the world is becoming more prevalent. Governments are mirroring the way of nagging parents who want to be grandparents – they are nagging fertile females to get pregnant and have more children – soon and lots of them. Why? Despite global concerns of overpopulation, in wealthier countries the trend seems to be the exact opposite. The fertility rate (the number of births per women) calculated to maintain a stable population is 2.1; this means one child for every couple. The current fertility rate in Hong Kong of 1:1 creates a decreasing future generation of roughly half of today’s measurements. Hong Kong is not alone. Japan, Italy and Germany calculate ratios of 1.4 or less. In its totality, this measurement worries governments as they wonder, what’s the future hold as our population ages and shrinks? Who will pay the taxes and assist the elderly?

In the U.S. Baby Boomers are on now Aging Boomers and in the beginning stages of the retirement cycle. We recognize that an increasing percentage of the population is retiring and this trend will grow over the next decade. In this stage of their lives, they expect their pensions, and presumably won’t be adding to the productivity but rather consuming to maintain their lifestyle.  Yes, they deserve their retirement just as much as any generation; but with fewer and fewer working citizens producing it becomes harder to sustain this age wave through taxes for the state. Governments continue to scramble to figure out the best solution. While immigration may ease the retirement pain, the primary focus to lift this burden is increasing the fertility rate and subsequently the populations in each of their respective countries.

So why are couples choosing to have fewer babies in these countries? Many point to the fact that children are an economic burden more than ever. In Europe it is believed that a single child will cost anywhere between 20-30% of a household’s income. It is simply not feasible with this statistic to have many children.

Governments are aiming to subsidize and offer incentives to couples bearing and raising children in a variety of ways. These offers and incentives look like longer maternity leaves, to television ads, to lump sums payments (Shanghai government gives the equivalent of $4450 upon birth of first child), and other unique options. Amongst them all, child care subsidizations is proving to be the best option which cut the costs of combining work and motherhood. The government creates goodwill with this option because it provides a statement that women matter both in the workforce and bearing the next generation.  Deploying practices that honor humanity from a bigger perspective is how the future will not only survive , but thrive – creating a benefit for women, parents, productivity and the general public.

Subsidized child care is not modern. It was pioneered in France after the Franco-Prussian war left their population weak. Because of the actions taken to support their people, the country today boasts one of the highest fertility rates in all of Europe. The same situation was seen in Quebec where inexpensive nurseries transformed the province from one of the lowest fertility rates to one of the highest. These timeless ideas that are win wins, considering multiple vantage points, are the most effective answer to a situation that cycles our population over many years, in many countries. Instead of seeing this as a one-time solution, we are better served by viewing population as a fluid movement of increase and decrease and dynamically changing with those movements.  Nothing really stays the same – ever.

Sources:

Baby Love Economist July 25 2015

Breaking the Baby Strike Economist July 25 2015