|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
Want to support Global Action on Aging? Click below:
Thanks! |
 |
Will
declining birthrate hurt Japan? Interviewed by Yosuke Sakurai Daily Yomiuri, August 19, 2003 Will the continuing decline in the birthrate bring the nation to its knees? Or will it transform this country into a more relaxed, affluent and mature society? An increasing number of people are seeing the bright side of the hitherto pessimistic dispute over the declining birthrate. The decision over whether to have children is a personal choice. Nevertheless, everyone's freedom to choose could combine to put society at a disadvantage. The fifth installment in the "Matters of Opinion" series asks the question: "Will Japan's declining birthrate hurt or benefit the country?" The issue was debated by Makoto Ato, director general of the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, and Iwao Fujimasa, a professor of biomedical engineering at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies. === Bone of contention Ato argued that the nation's shrinking population and the increasing average age of the people as a result of the declining birthrate would reduce economic growth and hamper the adaptability and creativity of the labor force. Fujimasa, however, insisted that the decreasing population was an inevitable development arising from fewer births and fewer deaths--not a decline in the birthrate. He also asserted that a drop in the population of a mountainous nation, such as Japan, would help ease environmental and other burdens on society. === Pro (Makoto Ato): 'Smaller population will hinder economic growth' The Daily Yomiuri: What will be the greatest loss to result from the nation's declining birthrate? Ato: First of all, the drop in the birthrate will most certainly contribute to an anticipated negative growth in the population and the accelerated aging of the Japanese. The shrinking and graying population is bound to adversely affect the nation's economy. First, the aging of the population will make it difficult to ensure that a sufficient number of young people enter the labor force to maintain its adaptability and creativity. Second, a decline in the population means that the domestic market will continue to shrink. This will serve to curtail investment opportunities, thus depleting a primary source of economic growth. Third, the graying of the population amounts, effectively, to a lower savings ratio. All this hampers efforts to achieve economic growth, granting that other key factors for growth, including per capita productivity, remain unchanged. What are other adverse effects of the declining birthrate? The lower birthrate will undermine the social security systems, including pension plans and medical insurance services. It forces the generations still in the workforce to shoulder even greater financial burdens in the form of premium payments. The reduced birthrate will also make it difficult for close-knit traditional communities in this country--especially in rural areas--to remain as they used to be. Rural villages in forests and mountains would be deserted, for example. What has given rise to the declining birthrate? An increasing number of contemporary Japanese women choose to marry late, meaning that they have babies late. In fact, there is little data regarding the social conditions underlying the drop in the birthrate, despite the different lines of argument developed by various experts. Still, the lower birthrate can be attributed, first and foremost, to a growing number of women who have taken up important positions in various sectors of society today. Their advancement in society poses a dilemma for them. Such women find it difficult to have it both ways--to focus on career and on child-rearing. This is a situation commonly seen in advanced industrial nations. Are higher child-rearing costs another reason behind the falling birthrate? There was a time when children were seen as investment assets by their parents, who expected to receive more than they had paid in raising their offspring. However, it has become less necessary for parents to depend on their children financially during their last years due to improvements in social security systems. On the other hand, contemporary parents must assume greater education expenses in sending their children to school. All this has left parents more selective about whether they have children. How do you assess government efforts to tackle the problem? Japan's birthrate was relatively high compared with those of other advanced nations until the end of the 1980s. In 1989, however, the figure reached an all-time low in what amounted to the so-called 1.57 shock, (a development the media sensationally reported in focusing on a continued decline in the birthrate after statistics had marked a significant drop below two in 1975.) Given the continued fall in the rate since then, it can be argued that the government has not done enough to deal with the situation. Among other problems in its approach, the government has been extremely tight-fisted about financing programs aimed at supporting working couples with children. The government should more than double its financial aid to men and women in raising their children. No society has a future if it does not cherish children. Some argue that a decrease in the population due to a low birthrate has its own advantages. Do you agree? Admittedly, a drop in the population entails such advantages as reduction in energy consumption. These positive aspects of the matter should be welcomed. With the current birthrate of about 1.3 taken as a given, however, there are predictions that the nation's population would fall to 10 million in 200 years and 3 million in 300 years. There is no reason to be concerned if the Japanese are convinced they can live with such situations. However, such a drastic demographic change would inevitably encourage a massive number of people from overseas to live in Japan. The question is whether the Japanese the people will be able to accept their presence as a natural part of their community. How will Japan's declining population affect the rest of the world? Japan is among the key players in the world economy, including the United States and European nations. The global economy would suffer a great deal if the Japanese economy shrank. Japan's shrinking economy would also mean smaller official development assistance. This is bound to negatively affect developing nations. Japan is still more populous than many other nations. It should be noted, however, that once its population starts to decline, Japan's position in the world will also decline--politically, economically and otherwise. --Interviewed by Daily YomiuriStaff Writer Rieko Mohara === Con (Iwao Fujimasa): 'An overpopulated Japan should shrink' The Daily Yomiuri: Do you subscribe to the view that Japan's declining birthrate poses a serious problem? Fujimasa: Not at all. Simply put, it is all up to you whether you have children or not. "Shoshika"--which literally means a tendency to have fewer children--is a politically correct but deceptive coinage. This term is favored by politicians and others who believe every woman should be fertile. The tendency should be more correctly described as "shosan, shoshi" (fewer births, fewer deaths). Many people regard the shoshika tendency as a key factor behind the rapid aging of society and a projected decline in the population. Many people have a mistaken notion about the relationship between a decline in the birthrate and the population. According to my estimate, the Japanese population will peak at 128.14 million in 2006, after which the figure will fall to about 110 million in 2030. First of all, a decrease in the population during the next 30 years or so must be seen as an inevitable development. However, the drop is not due to the declining birthrate. The decline must be attributed to the large number of aging people who are projected to die during the period. Members of the post-World War II baby-boom generation who are predicted to die in the next 30 years outnumber children to be born during the same period. Therefore, the shoshika syndrome has nothing to do with the reduced birthrate. To put it another way, the population will never fail to shrink in the period even if the birthrate rebounds to two. Women who are predicted to have babies in the next 30 years constitute a smaller portion of the population. All this means that Japan will become similar to some aging European nations in terms of demographic structure during the three decades to come. Does that mean that Japan's declining population represents a disadvantage for the nation after all? No. I don't see why the shrinking population will hurt this country. No industrial nation may be so mountainous as Japan. A good portion of our territory is uninhabitable. In fact, the population density in Japan's inhabitable land is four to five times greater than in Germany and eight times higher than in France. It is easy to see that Japan's environmental disruption has been a result of excessive industrial production and waste discharge in its overpopulated land. In Britain, France and other European nations, they enjoy living in more relaxed and spacious settings. That's the way people should be living. An overpopulated Japan should shrink. What is the acceptable extent to which the country's population can be curtailed? Preferably, the population should decline to about 40 million, the level comparable to that in the late Edo period (1603-1868). That size may well be regarded as appropriate if the nation's current food self-sufficiency rate of 40 percent is taken into consideration. If that scenario sounds too draconian to transpire, I would say that the population could decline to at least 78 million, which nearly equals the level recorded immediately after the end of World War II. There are concerns that a drop in the working population may hamper economic growth. The working population may shrink. But I don't see why that should not happen. A small working population means lower production. Does Japan have anything to lose if it is reduced to a smaller economy? Is economic expansion the sole goal we should pursue? It has been pointed out that the shoshika tendency and the graying of the population will mar the country's social security system--the public pension scheme, to be specific. The state-run pension plan is bound to collapse, whether the population declines or not. The collapse has long been a foregone conclusion in that subscribers to the pension scheme are entitled to benefits many times larger than the total amount of premiums they have paid. The declining birthrate is serving to leave some rural areas even more underpopulated. Is this problem negligible? Undoubtedly, an increasing number of farmers are having difficulties in finding successors. They must leave a greater expanse of farm land to lie barren. However, this is contributing to a decline in land prices. The shortage of new farmers due to the shoshika syndrome provides opportunities to promote intensive and large-scale farming, a method largely unknown to domestic farmers. Large-scale farming helps take advantage of deserted farm land and remarkably improves the nation's agricultural productivity. What is important is to employ a "scrap- and-rebuild" approach in reforming things. This is true with the troubled pension scheme, too. As a doctor, what do you suggest to cope with the shoshika tendency? To have children or not is a matter of individual choice. The government has no reason to intervene in this. A primary task facing this country is to learn how to manage the economy at a time when its long uninterrupted growth has taken a negative turn. This is important in that all government policies implemented in the past were based on the assumption that the economy will always grow. If Japan is a more comfortable society to live in 30 years later, women will naturally choose to have children. --Interviewed by Daily YomiuriStaff Writer Yosuke Sakurai
Copyright © 2002 Global
Action on Aging |
