A population decline (or depopulation) in humans is a reduction in a human population caused by events such as long-term demographic trends, as in sub-replacement fertility, emigration, for example as a result of economic recession, urban decay, rural flight, food resource decline or high death rates due to violence, disease, or other catastrophes. Depopulation in humans can be largely beneficial for a region, allocating more resources with less or no competition for the new population. In addition to exempting the disadvantages of overpopulation, such as increased traffic, pollution, real estate prices, environmental destruction, and fossil fuel usage, etc. Per-capita wealth may increase in depopulation scenarios, in addition to improvement of environmental quality-of-life indicators such as improved air and water quality, reforestation, return of native species such as coral reefs and mangroves, reduction of carbon emissions, etc. The accompanying benefits of depopulation have been termed shrink and prosper, with benefits being similar to the post-Civil War Gilded Age, post-World War I economic boom, and the post-World War II economic boom.
Causes
A reduction over time in a region's population can be caused by several factors including sub-replacement fertility (along with limited immigration), heavy emigration, disease, famine, and war.
History is replete with examples of large-scale depopulations. Many
wars, for example, have been accompanied by significant depopulations.
Before the 20th century, population decline was mostly due to disease,
starvation, epidemic or emigration. The Black Death in Europe, the arrival of Old World diseases to the Americas, the tsetse fly invasion of the Waterberg Massif in South Africa, and the Great Irish Famine all caused sizable population declines. In modern times, the AIDS epidemic caused declines in the population of some African countries. Less frequently, population declines are caused by genocide or mass execution; for example, in the 1970s, the population of Cambodia declined because of wide-scale executions by the Khmer Rouge.
Underpopulation
Sometimes the term underpopulation is applied to a specific economic system does not refer to carrying capacity, and is not a term in opposition to overpopulation,
which deals with the total possible population can be sustained by
available food, water, sanitation and other infrastructure.
"Underpopulation" is usually defined as a state in which a country's
population has declined too much to support its current economic system.
Thus the term has nothing to do with the biological aspects of carrying
capacity, but is an economic employed to imply that the transfer payment
schemes of some developed countries might fail once the population
declines to a certain point. An example would be if retirees were
supported through a social security
system which does not invest savings, and then a large emigration
movement occurred. In this case, the younger generation may not be able
to support the older generations.
Positive effects of a population decline
A
long-term decline in birth rates has a positive effect on the labour
market due a decreasing number of job applicants. A phenomenon of a
declining youth unemployment was observed in Germany in 2010 and 2011.
From population decline the competition for resources within the
population is reduced. Population decline also can rise the income per
capita.
Additionally, the life quality increases due to lower motorised
traffic, less environmental destruction, reduced carbon and nitrogen
emissions, reduced pollution, reforestation and better air and water quality due to industries operating for fewer hours and increased carbon sinks.
The human carrying capacity of the Earth is estimated to 500 million according to the National Strategy for a Sustainable America,
other authors estimate 1 to 12 billion. According to these studies, the
human carrying capacity is already exceeded or would be exceeded by
2100, therefore a global population decline would counteract the negative effects of human overpopulation.
Changing historic trends in world population growth
From pre-history (cir 10,000 BC) to the beginning of the Early Modern Period (generally 1500 – 1800), world population grew very slowly, around 0.04% per year. During that period, population growth was governed by conditions now labeled the “Malthusian Trap”.
After 1700, driven by increases in human productivity produced by the Industrial Revolution, population growth
accelerated to around 0.6% per year, a rate that was over ten times the
rate of population growth of the previous 12,000 years. This rapid
increase in global population caused Malthus and others to raise the
first concerns about “overpopulation”.
After World War I birth rates in the United States and many
European countries fell below replacement level. This prompted concern
about population decline.
The recovery of the birth rate in most western countries around 1940
that produced the “baby boom”, with growth rates in the 1.0 – 1.5%
range, and which peaked in 1962 at 2.1% per year, temporarily dispelled prior concerns about population decline, and the world [DJS - HOW CAN THE WORLD HAVE FEELINGS?] was once again fearful of overpopulation.
But, after 1962 the global population growth rate started a long
decline and today (the period 2015-2020) is estimated to be about 1.1%, half of its peak in 1962. Although still growing, global population is predicted to level out around the end of the 21st century, and some sources predict the start of a decline before then. The principle cause of this phenomenon is the abrupt decline in the global total fertility rate,
from 5.0 in 1960 to 2.5 in 2016. The decline in the total fertility
rate has occurred in every region of the world and has brought renewed
concern for population decline.
The era of rapid global population increase, and concomitant
concern about a population explosion, has been a relative short one
compared with the span of human history. It began roughly at the
beginning of the industrial revolution and appears to be now drawing to a
close in the Western world.
Interpretation of statistical data
Statistical
data, especially those comparing only two sets of figures, can be
misleading and may require careful interpretation. For instance a
nation's population could have been increasing, but a one-off event
could have resulted in a short-term decline; or vice versa. Nations can
acquire territory or lose territory, and groups of people can acquire or
lose citizenship, e.g. stateless
persons, indigenous people, and illegal immigrants or long-stay foreign
residents. Political instability can make it difficult to conduct a
census in certain regions. Further, a country's population could rise in
summer and decline in winter as deaths increase in winter in cold
regions; a long census interval could show a rise in population when the
population has already tipped into decline.
White nationalists use evidence of a declining birth rate in support of their extremist views and calls to violence. Lower fertility rates are generally associated with dramatic increases in population health and longevity. Increasing populations are not necessary to maintain economic growth and social vitality because of advances in automation
and workers living healthy lives much longer into old age. Declining
populations require fewer scarce resources and pollute less.
Fewer dependents mean that families, regions, and societies can achieve
more productive uses of available resources and increase their quality of life. While there were in the past advantages to high fertility rates, that "demographic dividend" has now largely disappeared.
Contemporary decline by country
The table below shows that a number of countries are declining in population, in particular Puerto Rico, Latvia, Lithuania and Venezuela.
The term population used here is based on the de facto
definition of population, which counts all residents regardless of legal
status or citizenship, except for refugees not permanently settled in
the country of asylum, who are generally considered part of the
population of the country of origin. This means that population growth
in this table includes net changes from immigration and emigration. For a
table of natural population changes, see list of countries by natural increase.
| Country | Population estimate (1 July 2020) |
Avg annual rate of population change
(%)
2015–2020 |
Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
 Albania
|
2,877,797 | −0.09 | low birth rate, emigration |
 Belarus
|
9,449,323 | +0.02 | low birth rate, emigration, population increased in 2014 due to positive net migration rate following war in Ukraine due to refugee flow |
 Bosnia and Herzegovina
|
3,280,819 | −0.89 | low birth rate, emigration, Bosnian War |
 Bulgaria
|
6,948,445 | −0.71 | low birth rate, high death rate, high rate of abortions, population is old, emigration, a relatively high level of emigration of young people and a low level of immigration and lack of good policies encouraging parents |
 Croatia
|
4,105,267 | −0.61 | low birth rate, population is old, emigration, War in Croatia, difference in statistical methods |
 Estonia
|
1,326,535 | +0.17 | low birth rate, emigration |
 Germany
|
83,783,942
|
+0.48 | low birth rate, population is old, population increased since 2013 due to positive net migration rate following civil war in Syria due to refugee flow |
 Georgia
|
3,989,167 | −0.18 | (figure includes Abkhazia and South Ossetia) high death rate, declining births, high rate of abortions, emigration and a low level of immigration |
 Greece
|
10,423,054 | −0.45 | low birth rate, economic crisis, emigration, population is old |
 Hungary
|
9,660,351 | −0.24 | low birth rate, emigration |
 Italy
|
60,461,826 | −0.04 | low birth rate, economic crisis, population is old, population increased in 2012, 2013, and 2014 due to positive net migration rate |
 Japan
|
126,476,461 | −0.24 | low birth rate, population is old and a low level of immigration |
 Latvia
|
1,886,198 | −1.15 | low birth rate, emigration |
 Lithuania
|
2,722,289 | −1.48 | high death rate, low birth rate, emigration |
 Moldova
|
4,033,963 | −0.18 | (includes the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic) low birth rate, emigration |
 Poland
|
37,846,611 | −0.10 | low birth rate, emigration |
 Portugal
|
10,196,709 | −0.33 | low birth rate, population is old, economic crisis, emigration |
 Puerto Rico
|
2,860,853 | −3.34 | low birth rate, population is old, economic crisis, emigration to the U.S. mainland, effects of Hurricane Maria |
 Romania
|
19,237,691 | −0.70 | low birth rate, high death rate, high rate of abortion, emigration, population is old |
 Russia
|
145,934,462 | +0.13 | high death rate, low birth rate, high rate of abortions, emigration and a low level of immigration until recently Population increased slightly since 2014 due to positive natural change and positive net migration rate |
 Serbia
|
6,963,764 | −0.32 | low birth rate, emigration |
 Spain
|
46,754,778 | +0.04 | low birth rate, population is old, economic crisis |
 Syria
|
17,500,658 | −0.56 | Syrian Civil War prompting mass emigration from the country |
 Ukraine
|
43,733,762 | −0.54 | high death rate, declining births, high rate of abortions, population is old, war in Donbass, emigration and a low level of immigration |
 Venezuela
|
28,435,940 | −1.13 | emigration due to profound socio economic and political crisis, deterioration of healthcare system leading to rapidly increasing infant mortality rate, declining births |
Long-term future trends
A long-term population decline is typically caused by sub-replacement fertility, coupled with a net immigration rate that fails to compensate the excess of deaths over births. A long-term decline is accompanied by population aging and creates an increase in the ratio of retirees to workers and children. When a sub-replacement fertility rate remains constant, population decline accelerates over the long term.
Because of the global decline in the fertility rate, projections
of future global population show a marked slowing of population growth
and the possibility of long-term decline.
The table below summarizes the United Nations' predictions of
future population growth. The UN divides the world into six regions.
Their forecast shows that during the period 2045-2050 Europe's
population will be in decline and all other regions will experience
significant reductions in growth. Furthermore, the UN predicts that by
the end of the 21st century (the period 2095-2100) three of these
regions will be showing population decline and global population growth
will be zero.
| Region | 2020-25 | 2045-50 | 2095-2100 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Africa | 2.4% | 1.7% | 0.6% |
| Asia | 0.8 | 0.1 | -0.4 |
| Europe | 0.0 | -0.3 | -0.1 |
| Latin America & the Caribbean | 0.8 | 0.2 | -0.5 |
| Oceania | 1.2 | 0.8 | 0.4 |
| The World | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.0 |
The table shows that the UN predicts long-term decline of population
growth rates in every region; however, short-term baby booms and
healthcare improvements, among other factors, can cause reversals of
trends. Population declines in Russia (1995-2010), Germany (1975-1985),
and Ireland (1950-1960) have seen long-term reversals. The UK, having seen almost zero growth during the period 1975-1985, is now (2015-2020) growing at 0.6% per year.
United States
Despite ever increasing population in the United States, some American municipalities have shrunk due to urban decay in large cities and rural flight in smaller towns. Detroit
is the most notable of a number of cities with population smaller than
in 1950 and whose population shrinkage has been the most dramatic;
Detroit's population was almost 1.85 million as of the 1950 census but
has plummeted to 677,000 as of 2015, with the most rapid decline
occurring between 2000 and 2010.
Other American cities whose populations have shrunk substantially
since the 1950s—although some have begun to grow again—include New Orleans; St. Louis; Buffalo; Philadelphia; Baltimore; Chicago; Cleveland; Pittsburgh; and Wilmington (Delaware).
Japan
Though Japan's population has been predicted to decline for years,
and its monthly and even annual estimates have shown a decline in the
past, the 2010 census result figure was slightly higher, at just above
128 million,
than the 2005 census. Factors implicated in the higher figures were
more Japanese returnees than expected as well as changes to the
methodology of data collection. The official count put the population as
of October 1, 2015, at 127.1 million, down by 947,000 or 0.7% from the
previous census in 2010.
The gender ratio is increasingly skewed; some 106 women per 100 men
live in Japan. The total population is still 52% above 1950 levels. In 2013, Japan's population fell by a record-breaking 244,000. The Tōhoku region in Japan now has fewer people than in 1950.
Eastern Europe and former Soviet republics
Population is falling due to health factors and low replacement, as
well as emigration of ethnic Russians to Russia. Exceptions to this rule
are in those ex-Soviet states that have a Muslim majority (Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Azerbaijan), where high birth rates are traditional. Much of Eastern Europe has lost population due to migration to Western Europe. In Eastern Europe and Russia, natality fell abruptly after the end of the Soviet Union, and death rates generally rose. Together these nations occupy over 21 million km2
(8 million sq mi) and are home to over 400 million people (less than
six percent of the world population), but if current trends continue,
more of the developed world and some of the developing world could join
this trend.
Albania
Albania's
population in 1989 recorded 3,182,417 people, the largest for any
census. Since then, its population declined to an estimated 2,893,005 in
January 2015. This represents a decrease of 10% in total population since the peak census figure.
Armenia
Armenia's population peaked at 3,604,000 in 1991 and declined to 3,010,600 in the January 2015 state statistical estimate. This represents a 19.7% decrease in total population since the peak census figure.
Belarus
Belarus's
population peaked at 10,151,806 in 1989 Census, and declined to
9,480,868 as of 2015 as estimated by the state statistical service. This represents a 7.1% decline since the peak census figure.
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bosnia and Herzegovina's population is thought to have peaked at 4,377,033 in 1991 Census, shortly before splitting from Yugoslavia before the ensuing war. The latest census of 2013 reported 3,791,622 people. This represents a 15.4% decline since the peak census figure.
Bulgaria
Bulgaria's
population declined from a peak of 9,009,018 in 1989 and since 2001,
has lost yet another 600,000 people, according to 2011 census
preliminary figures to no more than 7.3 million,
further down to 7,245,000. This represents a 24.3% decrease in total
population since the peak, and a -0.82% annual rate in the last 10
years.
Croatia
Croatia's population declined from 4,784,265 in 1991 to 4,456,096 (by old statistical method) of which 4,284,889
are permanent residents (by new statistical method), in 2011, a decline
of 8% (11.5% by the new definition of permanent residency in 2011
census). The main reasons for the decline since 1991 are: low birth
rates, emigration and war in Croatia.
From 2001 and 2011 main reason for the drop in population is due to a
difference in definition of permanent residency used in censuses till
2001 (censuses of 1948, 1953, 1961, 1971, 1981, 1991 and 2001) and the
one used in 2011.
Estonia
In the last Soviet census of 1989, it had a population of 1,565,662, which was close to its peak population. The state statistics reported an estimate of 1,314,370 for 2016.
This represents a 19.2% decline since the peak census figure.
Georgia
In the last Soviet census of 1989, it had a population of 5,400,841, which was close to its peak population. The state statistics reported an estimate of 4,010,000 for 2014 Census, which includes estimated numbers for quasi-independent Abkhazia and South Ossetia. This represents a 25.7% decline since the peak census figure, but nevertheless somewhat higher than the 1950 population.
Latvia
When Latvia split from the Soviet Union, it had a population of 2,666,567, which was very close to its peak population.
The latest census recorded a population of 2,067,887 in 2011, while the
state statistics reported an estimate of 1,986,086 for 2015.
This represents a 25.5% decline since the peak census figure, only one
of two nations worldwide falling below 1950 levels. The decline is
caused by both a negative natural population growth (more deaths than
births) and a negative net migration rate.
Lithuania
When Lithuania split from the Soviet Union, it had a population of 3.7 million, which was close to its peak population. The latest census recorded a population of 3.05 million in 2011, down from 3.4 million in 2001, further falling to 2,988,000 in September 1, 2012.
This represents a 23.8% decline since the peak census figure, and some 13.7% since 2001.
Ukraine
Ukraine census in 1989 resulted in 51,452,034 people. Ukraine's own estimates show a peak of 52,244,000 people in 1993; however, this number has plummeted to 45,439,822 as of December 1, 2013. Having lost Crimean territory and experienced war, the population has plunged to 42,981,850 as of August 2014.
This represents a 19.7% decrease in total population since the peak
figure, but 16.8% above the 1950 population even without Crimea.
Its absolute total decline (9,263,000) since its peak population is the
highest of all nations; this includes loss of territory and heavy net
emigration. Eastern Ukraine may yet lose many Russian-speaking citizens
due to new Russian citizenship law.
Hungary
Hungary's population peaked in 1980, at 10,709,000, and has continued its decline to under 10 million as of August 2010.
This represents a decline of 7.1% since its peak; however, compared to
neighbors situated to the East, Hungary peaked almost a decade earlier
yet the rate has been far more modest, averaging -0.23% a year over the
period.
Romania
Romania's
1991 census showed 23,185,084 people, and the October 2011 census
recorded 20,121,641 people, while the state statistical estimate for
2014 is 19,947,311. This represents a decrease of 16.2% since the historical peak in 1991.
Serbia
Serbia recorded a peak census population of 7,576,837 in 1991, falling to 7,186,862 in the 2011 census. That represents a decline of 5.1% since its peak census figure.
Halted declines
Russia
The decline in Russia's total population is among the largest in
numbers, but not in percentage. After having peaked at 148,689,000 in
1991, the population then decreased, falling to 142,737,196 by 2008.
This represents a 4.0% decrease in total population since the peak
census figure. However, since then the Russian population has risen to
146,870,000 in 2018. This recent trend can be attributed to a lower
death rate, higher birth rate, the annexation of Crimea and continued
immigration, mostly from Ukraine and Armenia. It is some 40% above the
1950 population.
Germany
In
Germany a decades-long tendency to population decline has been offset by
waves of immigration. The 2011 national census recorded a population of
80.2 million people. At the end of 2012 it had risen to 82 million according to federal estimates. This represents about 14% increase over 1950.
Ireland
In the current area of the Republic of Ireland, the population has fluctuated dramatically. The population of Ireland was 8 million in 1841, but it dropped due to the Irish famine
and later emigration. The population of the Republic of Ireland hit
bottom at 2.8 million in the 1961 census, but it then rose and in 2011
it was 4.58 million. As of 2020 it is estimated to be just under 5
million according to the country's Central Statistics Office
Declines within race or ethnicity
Such is the case in California, where the segment of the population considered Non-Hispanic Whites declined from 15.8 million to 14.95 million,
while the total population increased from 33 million to over 37 million
between 2000 and 2010 mostly thanks to immigration from Mexico and
Asian countries.
Singapore has one of the world's lowest birthrates. The ratio of
native Singaporeans (whatever their ethnicity) towards immigrants and
migrants continues to erode, with natives decreasing in absolute
figures, despite the country planning to increase the population by over
20% in coming years.
Economic consequences
The effects of a declining population can be adverse or beneficial for an economy. Possible negative consequences are:
- Permanent recession
- A rise in the dependency ratio
- A crisis in end of life care for the elderly
- Difficulties in funding entitlement programs
- A decline in military strength
- A decline in innovation
- A strain on mental health
- Deflation
Possible benefits include:
- Higher wages due to more demand for fewer workers.
- More labor-saving technologies to make up for the shortfall in workers
- More money available for investment in human capital
- Lower rents and commodity prices, which benefits lower-class consumers
Conversely, 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.
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. A recent meta-study found no relationship
between population growth and economic growth.
In an attempt to better understand the economic impact of these
pluses and minuses, Lee et al. analyzed data from 40 countries. They
found that fertility well above replacement and population growth would
typically be most beneficial for government budgets. However, fertility
near replacement and population stability would be most beneficial for
standards of living when the analysis includes the effects of age
structure on families as well as governments. And fertility moderately
below replacement and population decline would maximize standards of
living when the cost of providing capital for a growing labor force is
taken into account.
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 WWII 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.
National efforts to reverse declining populations
Many European countries, including France, Italy, Germany and Poland, have offered some combination of bonuses and monthly payments to families.
Paid maternity and paternity leave policies can also be used as an incentive. Sweden built up an extensive welfare state from the 1930s and onward, partly as a consequence of the debate following Crisis in the Population Question,
published in 1934. Today, Sweden has extensive parental leave where
parents are entitled to share 16 months' paid leave per child, the cost
divided between both employer and State.
Many nations that are currently witnessing depopulation with
fertility rates below sub-placement (like the west) are recommending quantitative easing to combat deflation, while other economists, such as Paul Krugman, believe governments should prioritize fiscal policy, such as bringing back Keynesian policies.
Alternative concept relative to skills
Sometimes the concept of population decline is applied where there
has been considerable emigration of skilled professionals. In such a
case, the government may have ceased to reward or value certain skills
(e.g. science, medicine and engineering), and sectors of the economy
such as health care and technology may go into decline. Such
characterizations have been made of Italy, Bulgaria and Russia in the period starting about 1990.
