POPULATION REFERENCE BUREAU
BY CARL HAUB AND JAMES GRIBBLE
www.prb.org
JULY 2011
VOL. 66, NO. 2
JULY 2011
VOL. 66, NO. 2
Population
Bulletin
THE WORLD AT 7 BILLION
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
CARL HAUB is a senior visiting scholar at PRB.
For more than
30 years,
30 years,
Haub was PRB’s senior demographer and held
the Conrad Taeuber Chair of Population Information. Most
noteworthy among his many published works is PRB’s World
Population Data Sheet, which he has authored since 1980.
JAMES GRIBBLE is vice president of International Programs at PRB,
and director of the USAID-supported IDEA project. He has written
on a range of population and health policy issues. Much of his
current work focuses on the economic and health benefi ts of
family planning.
POPULATION REFERENCE BUREAU
The Population Reference Bureau INFORMS people around
the world about population, health, and the environment,
and EMPOWERS them to use that information to ADVANCE
the well-being of current and future generations.
Funding for this Population Bulletin was provided through
the generosity of the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, and the
David and Lucile Packard Foundation.
OFFICERS
Martin Vaessen, Chair of the Board
Director, Demographic and Health Research Division, ICF Macro,
Calverton, Maryland
Margaret Neuse, Vice Chair of the Board
Independent Consultant, Washington, D.C.
Stanley Smith, Secretary of the Board
Professor and Director, Bureau of Economic and Business Research,
University of Florida, Gainesville
Richard F. Hokenson, Treasurer of the Board
Director, Hokenson and Company, Lawrenceville, New Jersey
Wendy Baldwin, President and Chief Executive Offi cer
Population Reference Bureau, Washington, D.C.
TRUSTEES
George Alleyne, Director Emeritus, Pan American Health Organization/
World Health Organization, Washington, D.C.
Felicity Barringer, National Correspondent, Environment,
The New York Times, San Francisco
Marcia Carlson, Associate Professor of Sociology, University
of Wisconsin, Madison
Elizabeth Chacko, Associate Professor of Geography and International
Affairs, The George Washington University, Washington, D.C.
Bert T. Edwards, Retired Partner, Arthur Andersen LLP, and former
CFO, U.S. State Department, Washington, D.C.
Francis L. Price, President and Chief Executive Offi cer, Interact
Performance Systems and Magna Saxum Partners in Cleveland, Ohio
and Anaheim, California.
Michael Wright, Managing Director for Coastal East Africa,
World Wildlife Fund, Washington, D.C.
Montague Yudelman, Former Director, Agriculture and Rural
Development, World Bank, Washington, D.C.
The Population Bulletin is published twice a year and distributed
to members of the Population Reference Bureau. Population
Bulletins are also available for $7 each (discounts for bulk orders).
To become a PRB member or to order PRB materials, contact
PRB, 1875 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 520, Washington, DC
20009-5728; Tel.: 800-877-9881; Fax: 202-328-3937;
E-mail: popref@prb.org; Website: www.prb.org.
The suggested citation, if you quote from this publication, is:
Carl Haub and James Gribble, “The World at 7 Billion,” Population
Bulletin 66, no. 2. For permission to reproduce portions from the
Population Bulletin, write to PRB, Attn: Permissions; or e-mail:
popref@prb.org.
Cover photo: © 2009 Nikada/iStockphoto
© 2011 Population Reference Bureau. All rights reserved. ISSN 0032-468X
POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011 www.prb.org 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
JULY 2011
VOL. 66, NO. 2
THE WORLD AT 7 BILLION
BY CARL HAUB AND JAMES GRIBBLE
POPULATION REFERENCE BUREAU
Population Bulletin
Even though the world population growth rate has slowed from
2.1 percent per year in the late 1960s to 1.2 percent today, the
size of the world’s population has continued to increase—from
5 billion in 1987 to 6 billion in 1999, and to 7 billion in 2011.
WORLD POPULATION
GROWING AT RECORD SPEED
World population may
reach 8 billion in 2023.
Today, most population
growth is concentrated
in the world’s poorest
countries, and within the
poorest regions of those
countries.
The sixth billion and seventh billion were each
added in record time—only 12 years. If the 2.1
percent growth rate from the 1960s had held
steady, world population would be 8.7 billion
today. It is entirely possible that the 8th billion
will be added in 12 years as well, placing us
squarely in the middle of history’s most rapid
population expansion.
This prospect seems to run counter to the
prevailing belief that concern over population
growth is a thing of the past, and that today’s
“population problem” is that birth rates are too
low, not too high. In fact, there is some truth to
that notion, depending on the region or country
one is talking about. Today, most population
growth is concentrated in the world’s poorest
countries—and within the poorest regions of
those countries.
The decrease in the world growth rate since the
1960s resulted from the realization on the part
of some developing country governments and
donors about unprecedented rates of population
growth. It took all of human history to reach a
world population of 1.6 billion at the beginning of
the 20th century. Just one hundred years later,
in 2000, the population total had reached 6.1
billion. How did this sudden, momentous change
come about? To understand this change, we
must fi rst consider the demographic transition—
the shifts in birth and death rates that historically
have occurred over long periods of time. And
then we must look at how very differently
the transition has taken place in the world’s
developed and developing countries.
The transition describes two trends: the
decline in birth rates as the need or desire for
larger numbers of children diminished, and the
decline in death rates as public health initiatives
and modern medicine lengthened life.
In today’s developed countries, this transition
took many centuries, but in today’s developing
countries the changes are taking place in
mere decades. In developed countries, birth
and death rates tended to decline in parallel.
Economies and societies changed during that
time: Fewer families stayed on farms and the
Industrial Revolution changed the way people
lived and worked. But the transition’s pace was
still slow. In Sweden, for example, the slowly
declining death and birth rates produced a
population growth rate that has remained
fairly stable over the past 250 years, rarely
exceeding 1 percent per year.
In developing countries during the 20th
century, major improvements in public
health, the practice of modern medicine, and
immunization campaigns spread quickly,
particularly after World War II. Death rates
dropped while birth rates stayed high. In Sri
Lanka, infant mortality (under age 1) in the
early 1950s is estimated to have been about
105 deaths per 1,000 live births. By the 1990s,
the rate had dropped dramatically to below
20, due in large part to basic public health
interventions such as immunizations, oral
rehydration therapy, and birth spacing—all of
which have contributed to lower rates of infant
and child mortality.
8
BILLION
POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011 www.prb.org 3
With health conditions improving so rapidly, birth rates in
developing countries did not have time to change as they did
in Europe. This lag between the drop in death rates and the
drop in birth rates produced unprecedented levels of population
growth. In Kenya, infant mortality declined fi rst—contributing
to a rise in life expectancy at birth from about 42 years in the
early 1950s to 56 years in the late 1970s—before fertility began
a decline from the then-prevalent eight children per woman.
During that same period, Kenya’s annual population growth
rate approached an unheard-of 4 percent. In the early 1950s,
Pakistan had a life expectancy of 41 years and an average
fertility rate of 6.6 children per woman. It was not until the early
1980s, when life expectancy had reached 59 years—due
in large part to reductions in infant and child deaths—that
Pakistan’s fertility began to decrease and its population growth
rate began to slow. These lengthy growth spurts resulted in the
relatively new phenomenon of government policies aimed at
lowering birth rates. Some governments, such as Indonesia and
Thailand, were quite successful in lowering birth rates; many
other governments have not been.
In addition to policies, social norms also contribute to how a
country moves through the demographic transition. Although at
times these norms confl ict with public policies and programs,
cultural factors such as age at marriage, desired family size, and
gender roles all have a strong infl uence on fertility behavior.
What might the future look like? It is fundamental to remember
that all population projections, whether performed by a national
statistical offi ce, the United Nations, or the U.S. Census Bureau,
are based on assumptions. Demographers make assumptions
on the future course of the factors that determine population
growth or decline: the birth rate and the death rate. When
looking at projections, one needs to consider the assumptions
before the results. In the case of developing countries, a typical
assumption is that birth and death rates will follow the path of
demographic transition from high birth and death rates to low
ones—mirroring the transition as it played out in developed
PHASE 1
High Birth Rate,
Fluctuating
Death Rate
PHASE 2
Declining Birth
and Death Rates
PHASE 3
Birth Rate
Approaching
Replacement (2.1)
PHASE 4
Low to Very
Low Birth
Rate,
Very Low
Death Rate
Afghanistan
Uganda
Zambia
Ghana
Guatemala
Iraq
India
Gabon
Malaysia Brazil
Germany
Japan
Birth Rate
Death Rate
Time
The Classic Phases of Demographic Transition
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Billions
0
2
4
6
8
10
Less Developed Countries
More Developed Countries
countries. But when, how, and whether that actually happens
cannot be known. When considering a population projection
for a developing country, several questions need to be posed.
If fertility has not yet begun to decline signifi cantly, when will it
begin and why? This question would be appropriate for Niger
and Uganda, whose fertility rates are still very high at 7.0 and
6.4, respectively. If fertility is declining, will it continue to do so
or “stall” for a time at some lower level as it has in Jordan and
Kenya? Finally, will a country’s fertility really fall to as little as two
children per woman or fewer, as is commonly expected?
This Population Bulletin looks at the four phases of the
demographic transition as descriptive of past and future
population growth. We highlight four countries to illustrate each
phase and its implications for human well-being:
• Uganda (high birth rate, fl uctuating death rate).
• Guatemala (declining birth and death rates).
• India (approaching replacement-level fertility).
• Germany (low or very low birth and death rates).
Source: United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010
Revision, medium variant ( 2011).
Notes: Natural increase or decrease is the difference between the number of births and
deaths. The birth rate is the number of live births per 1,000 population in a given year. The
death rate is the number of deaths per 1,000 population in a given year.
FIGURE 1
World Population Growth
FIGURE 2
4 www.prb.org POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011
Uganda has entered into its demographic transition by reducing
its once-high death rate. As a result of lower mortality but still high
fertility, Uganda has developed a very youthful age structure.
UGANDA
AT THE BEGINNING OF A TRANSITION
Deaths among children
under 5 are decreasing.
Fewer than 13 percent of
children die before reaching
age 5, partly a result
of higher levels of full
immunization and better
care at delivery.
Uganda is one of Africa’s
largest and fastestgrowing
countries.
Uganda’s population will continue to grow
because of the large number of people who
are either currently at an age when they are
having children or who will soon enter that
age group. With half of its population age 15
or younger, Uganda stands out as one of the
world’s youngest age structures. As the world
reaches 7 billion, countries at the beginning
of their demographic transition represent a
relatively small proportion—about 9 percent—
of the world’s population. However, these
countries face similar development challenges.
Overview
With a population of 35 million, Uganda is
one of Africa’s largest and fastest-growing
countries. Uganda has several policies and
action plans that address its major population
and development issues, yet none effectively
address the country’s fertility, which is among
the highest in the world. Despite economic
growth in the past decade, many Ugandans
live in poverty and confront social and
economic inequities.
To understand Uganda’s population challenges,
one must examine the roles and status
of women. Ugandan women are greatly
affected by HIV/AIDS, as is the case in many
sub-Saharan African countries. In addition,
maternal and child health indicators for
Uganda show that women and children have
very limited access to health services.
Even though the country continues to improve
the health of its people, Uganda will need to
address its high fertility, increase the number
of youth who attend secondary school and
higher, and foster job creation so that its
families, communities, and the nation as a
whole grow economically.
Population and Policies
The factor driving Uganda’s current
population growth of 3.3 percent per year is
a total fertility rate (TFR) averaging between
six and seven lifetime births per woman. This
level is only a slight reduction from the high
level in the 1970s of 7.1 children per woman.
If the current fertility level persists, Uganda’s
population will double to 70 million by 2031,
and could reach 100 million after 2040.
One reason for this high TFR is that only
about 18 percent of Uganda’s married
women between ages 15 and 49 use effective
contraception, with injectable contraceptives,
pills, and sterilization the most popular
methods. An additional 41 percent of married
women want to postpone or avoid pregnancy
but are not using an effective family planning
method.
Uganda’s 2008 population policy prioritizes
birth spacing and youth-friendly sexual and
reproductive health services, and allocates
funding for these programs. Two focal areas
of Uganda’s National Population Policy Action
Plan 2011-2015 are sexual and reproductive
health and rights, and gender and family
welfare. In spite of these and other policies,
Uganda’s government shows relatively little
support for family planning. For example,
government funding for contraceptives is
not suffi cient even to address the needs of
women living in urban areas, who represent
only 15 percent of the total population. The
lack of public support for family planning by
national leaders is visibly noticed by the global
community.
35
MILLION
PHASE 1
POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011 www.prb.org 5
Economic Inequalities
Uganda’s gross domestic product is growing annually at a
rate of 5 percent to 10 percent. Historically an agriculturally
based economy, the discovery of oil in 2006 offers Uganda
an opportunity for economic growth and diversifi cation. Yet
Uganda is still a resource-poor country and 65 percent of its
population lives on less than US$2 per day. This inequality is
stark: The wealthiest 20 percent (quintile) of the population
holds 49 percent of total income, while the poorest quintile
holds only 6 percent.
According to the 2006 Uganda Demographic and Health
Survey (DHS), wealth distribution is closely related to fertility.
Women in the poorest quintile have eight children on average
during their lives, while women in the wealthiest quintile have
just over four children. Similarly, 41 percent of young women
ages 15 to 19 in the poorest quintile have begun childbearing,
while only 16 percent in the wealthiest quintile have. These
differences are further reinforced by the practice of child
marriage: More than half of women in all but the wealthiest
quintile are married before age 18.
Gender Inequalities
Like many countries that face development challenges, one of
the barriers impeding progress is gender inequality. Gender
roles play out in virtually every aspect of life—from educational
attainment among youth to decisions made within families. In
households where the 2006 DHS was conducted, men age
20 or older always had higher levels of education than women
of the same age. However, females under age 20 had roughly
the same education as males, suggesting greater attention to
educating girls. Women’s empowerment remains elusive—
men indicate that family size is primarily their decision (47
percent), though many see it as a joint decision (45 percent);
few (5 percent) see it as the woman’s decision. Women
reinforce their own lack of power as well: More than 70
percent of women thought that a husband could be justifi ed
for hitting or beating his wife, suggesting a cultural acceptance
of violence against women.
Gender inequalities also play out in the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
According to the 2010 Uganda Report to the United Nations,
6.4 percent of Ugandans between ages 15 and 49 are
infected with HIV. However, young women experience much
higher rates of infection than young men. For example, among
20-to-24-year-olds, 2.4 percent of men are HIV positive,
compared to 6.3 percent of women. Prevalence is highest
among women ages 30 to 34, at 12.1 percent, compared to
8.1 percent among men in that age group. Although AIDS
continues to contribute approximately 64,000 deaths per year
in Uganda, these deaths do not offset the population growth
resulting from the approximately 1 million births each year in
Uganda.
Health of Women and Children
Like other countries in the early phase of the demographic
transition, Uganda has one of the world’s highest maternal
death ratios—approximately 430 deaths per 100,000 live
births. Although most women receive some antenatal care,
only about 47 percent receive four or more visits and only 42
percent have a skilled attendant at delivery. These statistics
vary greatly across Uganda’s nine regions.
Deaths among children under age 5 continue to decrease in
Uganda, and currently fewer than 13 percent of children die
before reaching age 5, due mainly to neonatal causes, malaria,
pneumonia, and diarrhea. This reduction in child deaths is
partly a result of higher levels of full immunization and better
care at delivery, as well as better use of health services when
children are ill. However, poor nutrition undermines the health
of most children: 73 percent have anemia and 38 percent are
stunted (low height for age).
Challenges
Uganda’s continued rapid population growth, according to
the United Nations high projection, will expand its population
in 2050 to 105.6 million; half the population would be age 20
or younger—signifi cantly older than the current median age
of 15. However, if fertility remains at a level of 6.7 children per
woman (from the 2006 DHS), Uganda’s population could be
as high as 145 million by 2050 and have the same youthful
structure as it currently has. To address this challenge,
Uganda will need to focus not only on family planning to slow
its population growth, but on wise investments that will help
develop an educated labor force and create jobs to sustain
and increase its recent economic growth.
2010 Age 2050
Male Female Male
Percentage Percentage
Female
80+
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10
FIGURE 3
Age and Sex Structure of Uganda, 2010 and 2050
Source: United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision
(2011).
6 www.prb.org POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011
As a lower middle-income country, Guatemala is well-advanced in
its demographic transition, showing evidence of recent reductions
in its birth rate.
GUATEMALA
BEYOND THE EARLY PHASE OF THE TRANSITION
Guatemala’s recent
economic growth has
resulted from tourism and
the exports of textiles,
clothing, and agricultural
crops.
At more than 14 million,
Guatemala is the most
populous country in
Central America.
Guatemala’s population structure illustrates
that women have been having fewer children
for several years, which explains why the
base of the pyramid is shorter, compared
to the elongated base of Uganda’s pyramid.
With half of its population age 19 or younger,
Guatemala’s population is still relatively
young and is the youngest in Latin America.
Guatemala is one of many countries in this
second phase of the demographic transition;
together they represent about 7 percent of
the world’s population of 7 billion.
Overview
At more than 14 million, Guatemala is the
most populous country in Central America.
Its growth rate is still high at 2.5 percent per
year—the highest in all of Latin America.
Although Guatemala has several national
policies that support social development and
address population issues, they have not
been carried out very effectively. The country
has experienced economic growth in the past
decade, although growth has recently slowed.
Guatemala remains challenged by high levels
of inequality, especially between the Mayan
population, which represents approximately
40 percent of the country’s population, and
the ladino population, which makes up the
majority of the remaining 60 percent.
Guatemala has made great strides in
addressing many of its gender-based
disparities. However, the more-telling difference
is between the quality of the lives of Mayan
and ladina women, refl ected in differences in
school attendance and use of health services.
Women are having smaller families; people
are healthier and living longer, with a life
expectancy at birth of 71 years; and the child
dependency ratio is decreasing, suggesting
that families may be poised to invest more in
health, education, and savings. Nevertheless,
sustaining economic growth and dealing
with an upturn in violent crime threaten
Guatemala’s longer-term development.
Population and Policies
Over the past 20 years, fertility levels have
decreased substantially in Guatemala. From
5.6 children per woman in 1987, the recent
2008/09 National Survey of Maternal and Child
Health (NSMCH) indicates that women have an
average of 3.6 children each. If current fertility
remains unchanged, Guatemala’s population
will double in 26 years. Although fertility has
gone down, women indicated that, on average,
they want fewer than three children.
The recent reductions in fertility are due
largely to increased use of family planning.
Currently, 44 percent of married women use a
modern family planning method, with female
sterilization and injectable contraceptives the
most common types. At the same time, an
additional 31 percent of married women want
to postpone or avoid pregnancy but are not
using an effective contraceptive method.
Since 2002, Guatemala has had a national
Social Development and Population policy
that prioritizes as health objectives a reduction
in maternal and infant mortality, sexually
transmitted infections, and HIV/AIDS. In 2010,
the Guatemalan Congress approved a law to
support healthy motherhood, and stipulates
that at least 30 percent of taxes on the sale of
alcohol should be used to support reproductive
health programs. Guatemala is also addressing
poverty reduction through Mi Familia Progresa,
14
MILLION
PHASE 2
POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011 www.prb.org 7
a conditional cash transfer program established in 2008 that
encourages the use of health services and education.
Economic Inequalities
Guatemala’s recent economic growth has resulted from tourism
and the exports of textiles, clothing, and agricultural crops. Half
of the labor force works in agriculture. Almost a quarter of the
population lives on less that US$2 per day. The country has a
very inequitable income distribution: The wealthiest 20 percent
(quintile) of the population holds 58 percent of total income,
while the poorest quintile holds only 3 percent.
Economic inequalities infl uence many social behaviors.
Wealthier women have fewer children on average during their
lives than poorer women have: 1.8 children per woman in the
wealthiest quintile compared to 5.7 children per woman in the
poorest quintile. It is not surprising that use of family planning
methods is very high among married women in the wealthiest
quintile—72 percent—but only 36 percent of married women
in the lowest quintile use any form of family planning.
Gender Inequalities
Compared with many other countries, Guatemala has
moved closer toward gender equality. Between 1987 and
2008/09, the percentage of women who never attended
school dropped from 38 percent to 20 percent; among Mayan
women, this improvement was even more notable: from 67
percent never attending school in 1987 to 35 percent not
attending school in 2008/09. Recent educational advances
are fairly equal for both boys and girls. Among children ages
5 to 14, there are no differences in the age at which boys
and girls start school nor in the percentage who never attend
school.
Gender roles also infl uence social behaviors and attitudes.
Many Guatemalan women tend to have more traditional views.
For example, 65 percent of women included in the 2008/09
survey reported that a woman should obey her husband
even when she does not agree with him. Almost 80 percent
responded that they need to get his approval before incurring
a household expense, working outside the house, going
to the doctor when ill, or leaving the house. However, only
56 percent indicated that a woman should seek the man’s
approval about using family planning. Each of these attitudes
was more frequently held by women in the poorer quintiles
than in the wealthier ones.
Gender-based violence is not unusual, as 46 percent of
women reported that they have experienced either verbal,
physical, or sexual violence from their husband or partner.
The frequency of these behaviors is consistent between
Mayan and ladina women, as well as across wealth quintiles.
However, in contrast to other countries where women accept
wife beating, only 7 percent of Guatemalan women agreed
that under certain circumstances a man is justifi ed in hitting
his wife.
Health of Women and Children
As a country with improving access to and use of health
services, Guatemala still has a high maternal mortality ratio
of 110 deaths per 100,000 live births, putting it slightly above
other countries in Central America. Use of antenatal care
is very high, with 93 percent of women receiving care at
some time during their most recent pregnancy. More than
50 percent of women receive care from a physician or nurse
during delivery, but only 30 percent of Mayan women receive
skilled care, compared to 70 percent of ladina women.
Deaths among children under age 5 continue to decrease,
from 109 in 1987 to 42 in 2008/09. More than half of infant
deaths (17 out of 30 deaths per 1,000 live births) occur in the
neonatal period; death at this phase can be prevented through
skilled attendance at deliveries and antenatal care. Almost
half of all children between ages 3 months and 59 months are
stunted (low height for age.) However, almost twice as many
Mayan children are stunted as are ladino children (66 percent
vs. 36 percent, respectively). Just under half (48 percent) of
children ages 6 months to 59 months are anemic, but this
condition is fairly evenly distributed across wealth quintiles and
ethnicity groups.
Challenges
Guatemala has made great advances in social and economic
development in the past two decades, but serious inequities
still exist between the Mayan and ladino populations.
Regardless of the issue considered—fertility, child health,
education—the disparities between these two segments of
the population represent the gap that must be addressed
through future development initiatives. If Guatemala follows
the medium projection scenario, it will have a population of
almost 32 million by 2050, and an age structure similar to
Phase-3 countries.
Male Female Male Female
2010 Age 2050
Percentage Percentage
80+
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10
FIGURE 4
Age and Sex Structure of Guatemala, 2010 and 2050
Source: United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision
(2011).
8 www.prb.org POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011
India is on track to become the world’s largest country about 10
years from now, even though fertility has declined to 2.6 children
per woman, which is less than half of its 1950s level.
INDIA
ON THE PATH TO REPLACEMENT?
India is often portrayed as
an exploding middle-class
economy, but such attitudes
obscure a far more
complex society.
India’s population in 2011.
Between the last three
censuses, India’s population
growth rate has been
declining.
India’s population will surpass China’s,
assuming that China does not alter its current
fertility policy. But India’s population will also
be more youthful than China’s and will not
face a budget-straining situation of population
aging. Countries like India in the third phase
of demographic transition have fertility
rates that have declined signifi cantly from
previously high levels but have not reached
the population-stabilizing “replacement level”
of 2.1 children per woman. These countries
are home to 38 percent of the world’s 7 billion
people.
Overview
As of the recently conducted 2011 Census,
India’s population stood at 1.2 billion. To get an
idea of the size of India’s population, consider
that the population of just one age group,
males ages 0-4, is about 67 million, larger than
the entire population of France. Between the
last three censuses, India’s population growth
rate has been in decline, but the 2011 Census
was the fi rst to show a decrease in the number
added as well. From 2001 to 2011, 181.5
million people were added, down slightly from
182.3 million from 1991 to 2001.
India is often portrayed as an exploding
middle-class economy. While not a complete
exaggeration, such attitudes obscure a far
more complex society. Unlike Vietnam, an
example of a virtually homogeneous country
with a common language and predominant
ethnicity, India is more like a collection of
semi-independent countries united under
one democracy. The country is divided
into 35 states and Union Territories, from
Uttar Pradesh with 200 million people to the
Lakshadweep Islands with 64,429 people. Its
diversity is refl ected by the fact that there are
16 separate languages on rupee notes. Many
states are ruled by regional parties, posing
challenges to the national government in
Delhi in forming coalition governments at the
national level and at some state levels.
Despite much publicity given to the country’s
economic growth, India remains a rural
nation with many towns offi cially designated
as urban still retaining much of their rural
character. Urban places are generally defi ned
as villages and towns of 5,000 or more in
which 75 percent or more of the male labor
force is not directly employed in agriculture.
The average Indian resided in a village of about
4,000 people in 2001. Many of these places
lack adequate sanitation and clean water, and
are often only reachable by primitive roads
and trails. These characteristics often place
considerable obstacles in the path of health
services delivery.
There are also misconceptions regarding the
Indian “middle class” and standards of living.
Indians are not consumers in the Western
sense of impulse purchases or frivolous
spending. A true middle-class Indian, living
a Western-standard life, is more properly
considered part of the super-rich class, a
minuscule proportion of the population.
Media reports on new, glitzy shopping
malls in India fail to mention that few visitors
actually purchase anything; they go to the
air-conditioned malls to visit food courts and
attend the cinema. In the vast majority of
Indian households, traditional ways of life, such
as arranged and early marriages (about half
of Indian females marry below the legal age
1.2
BILLION
PHASE 3
POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011 www.prb.org 9
of 18), deep respect for one’s elders, and close relations with
extended families are the rule. One’s wages are less important
than in the West, since large extended families often pool
resources.
Population and Policy
India is often noted as the fi rst developing country to declare a
policy to reduce fertility, in 1952, although effective funds were
not allocated until 1966 and the fi rst truly comprehensive policy
was not written until 2000. Nonetheless, effective measures
were taken in many states to lower the birth rate and every
state has seen a decline. In the early 1950s, fertility is estimated
to have been 5.9 children per woman by the United Nations
Population Division, not as high as in many other developing
countries at the time where the average was often seven
children or more.
By 2009, fertility in India had declined to 2.6 children per
woman, less than half that of the early 1950s. But this national
fertility rate masks wide disparities by state. The lowest fertility
rates are found in the southern states, especially in Kerala with
a 2009 TFR of 1.7, along with its neighbor Tamil Nadu. Much of
the country’s demographic future will depend on fertility trends
in the northern states which, along with large populations,
have the highest levels of illiteracy and poverty. Bihar and Uttar
Pradesh, the states with the highest TFRs, had populations
of 104 million and 200 million, respectively, in 2011. These two
states, part of the Empowered Action Group States (EAG),
along with Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa,
Rajasthan, and Uttarakhand, are all impoverished and are the
focus of increased family planning efforts.
Skewed Sex Ratio at Birth
Along with China and several Caucasus countries, the preference
for sons in India has resulted in a sex ratio at birth skewed in favor
of males. Worldwide, the biological norm is about 105 male per
100 female births. India’s sex ratio is 111 male per 100 female
births. In India, there are both economic and religious motivations
for the abortion of female fetuses. At marriage, a daughter leaves
the household to live with her in-laws and thereby provides no
economic support to her parent’s family, especially in their old
age. Additionally, a dowry must be paid even though dowries
were banned in 1961. There is a saying that having a daughter
is “like watering your neighbor’s garden.” For Hindus (about 80
percent of the population), having a son light his parent’s funeral
pyre is a prerequisite for Nirvana, the release from the cycle of
reincarnation.
Sex-selective abortion was made illegal in 1994 and, recently,
the prosecution of doctors who engage in the practice was
taken up in a serious way. It is clear that some notable progress
has been made. Generally, the abortion of female fetuses is
more prevalent in wealthier, highly educated, low-fertility states
where parents can afford the ultrasound test and the motivation
to have at least one son is more pressing.
The Future
The size of India’s future population will largely depend upon
the course of fertility decline in the highly populous north. While
clearly in the third phase of the transition, will India move to the
fourth phase of replacement fertility or will it join that group of
developing countries where that seems doubtful? For the fourth
phase to begin, fertility in the very large and poor Indian states
will have to decline to that of an industrialized country, around
two or fewer children. In terms of future world population
size, India will be one of the important demographic stories in
coming decades.
1999-
2001
2000-
02
2001-
03
2002-
04
2003-
05
2004-
06
2005-
07
2006-
08
Punjab
0
120
105
135
Male per 100 female births
Rajasthan
Haryana
Himachal Pradesh
FIGURE 5
Sex Ratio at Birth, Selected States of India, 1999-2008
1972 1978 1984 1990 1996 2002 2008
Children per woman
Uttar Pradesh
Maharashtra
Kerala
India Bihar
FIGURE 6
Total Fertility Rates, India and Selected States, 1972-2009
Source: Registrar General of India, Sample Registration System.
Note: The states of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Uttarakhand were separated from
Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh, respectively, in 2000.
Source: Registrar General of India, Sample Registration System.
10 www.prb.org POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011
Germany’s recovery from the devastation of World War II is
often called an “economic miracle” because its economy is now
Europe’s largest. Immigration has been an important part of the
country’s modern demographic history.
GERMANY
BEYOND THE TRANSITION’S END
Germany’s TFR is 1.4 children
per woman. To date,
efforts to raise fertility in
Germany have not been
successful.
Germany is the largest
country in the European
Union by a good margin. Labor shortages led to a guest-worker
program, which began bringing workers
to West Germany from countries such as
Greece, Italy, Spain, Turkey, and Yugoslavia
in the late 1950s. Rather than return to their
homelands, however, many of these workers
brought their families to Germany. From
1960 to the early 1980s, net immigration
averaged several hundred thousand per year,
peaking at more than 500,000 in 1969 and
1970. Following Germany’s reunifi cation in
1990, a new fl ow of migrants arrived: ethnic
Germans who had been trapped behind the
Iron Curtain. In 1992, net immigration neared
800,000. There was concern at the time
that some of these migrants were not true
ethnic Germans, but were economic migrants
seeking a better life in the West. At the end
of 2009, 19 percent of Germany’s population
had what the German Federal Statistical
Offi ce calls a “migrant” background, which
includes immigrants since 1950 and their
offspring.
Germany is a dramatic example of the fourth
phase of demographic transition: Countries
with low or very low birth and death rates
represent almost half, or 46 percent, of the
world’s population.
Overview
Germany’s population stands at an estimated
81.8 million in mid-2011, the largest country
in the European Union by a good margin. But
that total is down from 82.3 million at the end
of 2006. Germany’s principal demographic
concerns today are its very low birth rate and
the lack of social and cultural integration of
its migrant population. Recently, Chancellor
Angela Merkel stated that integration was “not
working.”
In 1964, births exceeded deaths by 486,985,
the highest postwar surplus. By 1972, deaths
in Germany exceeded births by 64,032, and
deaths have surpassed births every year
since. In 2010, the difference between births
and deaths stood at -180,833. Only a positive
balance of net immigration has forestalled
a much more rapid population decline. As
a member of the European Union (EU),
Germany must also abide by the Schengen
Agreement of 1985 whereby the EU has no
border controls. Member states do have the
right to impose certain restrictions, however.
In 1995, the agreement was in force in the
25 member states. There has been some
resistance to including new member states
from eastern and southern Europe in the
passport-free zone. The EU is now debating
the Schengen status of new members
Bulgaria and Romania.
Population and Policies
The fourth phase of the demographic
transition is often described as an extended
period of near demographic equilibrium, with
fertility near the replacement level of about
2.1 children per woman. In the majority of
industrialized countries, fertility fell quite
rapidly throughout the late 1960s and early
1970s, a transformation that was to alter
demographic prospects in many countries in
unforeseen ways. In the United States, fertility
fell from 2.9 children per woman in 1965 to a
record low of 1.7 in 1976. Germany reached
82
MILLION
PHASE 4
POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011 www.prb.org 11
a TFR of 1.7 in 1970. But while the U.S. fertility rate slowly
rebounded to 2.1 in 1990 (and has remained close to that ever
since), the German fertility rate did not rebound, and today is
much lower, at 1.4.
Fertility in the former East and West Germany followed a very
similar path up to the mid-1970s. But East Germany, under
Communist rule, instituted a number of pronatalist measures
such as family allowances, maternity leave, and child care
subsidies. Fertility rose until the economic disruption after the
country’s reunifi cation and the subsequent out-migration from
East Germany to the West.
In western Germany, however, little was done to reverse the
trend in low fertility. Fertility has remained below 1.5 children
per woman since 1975, and at times considerably below.
Obstacles to increasing the birth rate are similar to other
low-fertility countries, particularly people’s lack of confi dence
in their economic future. But there are several other factors.
Day care centers usually close at 1 p.m., a burden on the
growing number of two-earner families. Social attitudes tend
to disfavor leaving one’s child in the care of someone else
for the entire day. Mothers who do leave their children all day
are often considered to be “raven mothers” (Rabenmutter)
because a raven abandons her young at an early age.
But this attitude may be slowly changing with growing
acknowledgment of a birth rate crisis. Some day care centers
now sport Ganztags! signs (all-day day care). The government
took little direct action until well after 2000, despite growing
concern over the diminished number of young people and
its effect on supporting pension programs and virtually free
health care, particularly for the elderly.
To try to increase the birth rate, the government gives 184
euros monthly for the fi rst and second child, 190 euros for the
third, and 215 for the fourth until each child turns 18 (or 25 if
still pursuing an education). Maternity leave spans 14 weeks,
six weeks prior to the birth and eight weeks afterward—with
a minimum benefi t paid of 13 euros per day. Finally, a monthly
minimum of 300 euros is allocated for care of a newborn but
can rise to 1,800 euros or 67 percent of one’s prior salary. This
is paid for 14 months with the stipulation that one parent must
use the benefi t for two months, a feature that ensures that
fathers will take part in child care. The additional expense has
put a strain on the national budget and has had little effect on
birth rates. But only a few countries in the industrialized world
have seen signifi cant increases in birth rates from these kinds
of family benefi ts—notably Russia and the Canadian province
of Quebec.
Challenges
To date, efforts to raise fertility in Germany have not been
successful. In two Eurobarometer surveys, respondents were
asked about their “personal ideal” number of children. In 2001,
German women ages 15 to 24 said 1.8 children; in 2006,
they said 2.0. In contrast, in France the answer was 2.6 for
both survey years. Answers to questions on ideal numbers of
children, however, are nearly always much higher than fertility
actually achieved in developed countries. In the 2001 survey,
among German women ages 18 to 34, nearly 17 percent gave
“none” as their ideal and 9 percent said “one,” percentages far
higher than other EU countries.
Projections from the National Statistical Offi ce assume
that, if there is a rise in fertility, it will be quite modest. With
an increase to a fertility rate of 1.6 children and annual
net immigration of 200,000, Germany’s population would
decrease to 74.5 million in 2060 with 31 percent of the
population ages 65 and older. Should fertility remain at 1.4
children and immigration amount to 100,000 per year, the
2060 population would decline to 64.7 million, with 34 percent
ages 65 and over. Given the stable trend in fertility over the
last 35 years and the lack of success of pronatalist programs,
population decline and continued aging appear to describe
the country’s future quite well.
2009 Age 2050
Male Female Male Female
Percentage Percentage
80+
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10
FIGURE 7
Total Fertility Rate in Germany, 1955-2010
Source: German Federal Statistical Offi ce.
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
East Germany
West Germany
0.5
0
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Unified Germany
FIGURE 8
Age and Sex Structure of Germany, 2009 and 2050
Sources: For 2009: German Federal Statistical Offi ce, Statistical Yearbook 2010. For 2050:
United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision (2011).
12 www.prb.org POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011
Sources
WORLD POPULATION
Central Bureau of Statistics et al., Kenya Demographic and Health Survey, 2003
(Calverton, MD: ORC Macro, 2004.)
Department of Statistics, Amman, Jordan, and ICF Macro, Jordan Population
and Family Health Survey 2009 (Calverton, MD: ICF Macro, 2010).
Carl Haub and Toshiko Kaneda, 2011 World Population Data Sheet (Washington,
DC: Population Reference Bureau, 2011), available at www.prb.org.
Institut National de la Statistique Ministére de l'Èconomie et des Finances Niamey,
Niger, and Macro International Inc., Enquête Démographique et de Santé et Ã
Indicateurs Multiples 2006 (Calverton, MD: Macro International Inc., 2007).
National Council for Population and Development et al., Kenya Demographic and
Health Survey, 1998 (Calverton, MD: Macro International, Inc., 1999.)
Statistics Sweden, accessed at www.scb.se/statistik/_publikationer/
BE0101_2009A01_BR_01_BE0110TAB.xls, on July 1, 2011.
Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) and Macro International Inc., Uganda
Demographic and Health Survey 2006 (Calverton, MD: Macro International Inc.,
2008).
United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010
Revision (New York: United Nations, 2011), accessed at http://esa.un.org/unpd/
wpp/index.htm, on June 2, 2011.
U.S. Census Bureau, “International Data Base,” accessed at www.census.gov/
population/international/data/idb/informationGateway.php, June 4, 2011.
UGANDA
Carl Haub and Toshiko Kaneda, 2011 World Population Data Sheet (Washington,
DC: Population Reference Bureau, 2011), available at www.prb.org.
Government of Uganda, UNGASS Country Progress Report 2008-2009 (New
York: UNAIDS, 2010), accessed at www.unaids.org, on May 26, 2011.
Francis Kagolo, “Uganda Trails in Family Planning Ratings,” May 1, 2001,
accessed at www.newvision.co.ug/PA/8/13/753615, on May 26, 2011.
Revenue Watch Institute, “Uganda Country Data,” accessed at www.
revenuewatch.org/our-work/countries/uganda/country-data, on May 26, 2011.
Trading Economics, “Gini Index in Uganda,” accessed at www.tradingeconomics.
com/ugagnea/gini-index-wb-data.html, on May 26, 2011.
Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) and Macro International Inc., Uganda
Demographic and Health Survey 2006 (Calverton, MD: Macro International Inc.,
2008).
Uganda Ministry of Finance, National Population Policy for Social Transformation
and Sustainable Development 2008 (Kampala: Uganda Ministry of Finance,
Planning and Economic Development, 2008).
“Uganda National Population Policy Action Plan 2011-2015,” accessed at
www.popsec.org/publications_19_220494683.pdf, on May 26, 2011.
UNFPA, Country Profi les for Population and Reproductive Health: Policy
Developments and Indicators 2009/2010 (New York: UNFPA, 2010).
UNICEF, “Statistics on Uganda,” accessed at www.unicef.org/infobycountry/
uganda_statistics.html, on May 26, 2011.
United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010
Revision (New York: United Nations, 2011), accessed at http://esa.un.org/unpd/
wpp/index.htm, on May 26, 2011.
World Health Organization, Mortality Country Fact Sheet—Uganda, 2006
(Geneva: World Health Organization, 2006), accessed at www.who.int/whosis/
mort/profi les/mort_afro_uga_uganda.pdf, on May 26, 2011.
GUATEMALA
Carl Haub and Toshiko Kaneda, 2011 World Population Data Sheet (Washington,
DC: Population Reference Bureau, 2011), available at www.prb.org.
Guatemala, SEGEPLAN, Guatemala Ley de Desarrollo Social y Poblacion (2001),
accessed at www.unicef.org, on May 26, 2011.
Ministerio de Salud Pública y Asistencia Social, Encuesta Nacional de Salud
Materno Infantil 2008 (ENSMI-2008/09) (Guatemala: Ministerio de Salud Pública
y Asistencia Social (MSPAS)/Instituto Nacional de EstadÃstica (INE)/Centros de
Control y Prevención de Enfermedades (CDC), 2010).
Trading Economics, “Gini Index in Guatemala,” accessed at www.
tradingeconomics.com/guatemala/gini-index-wb-data.html, on May 26, 2011.
UNICEF, “Statistics on Guatemala,” accessed at www.unicef.org/infobycountry/
guatemala_statistics.html, on May 26, 2011.
UNFPA, Country Profi les for Population and Reproductive Health: Policy
Developments and Indicators 2009/2010 (New York: UNFPA, 2010).
United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010
Revision (New York: United Nations, 2011), accessed at http://esa.un.org/unpd/
wpp/index.htm, on May 26, 2011.
World Health Organization, Mortality Country Fact Sheet—Guatemala, 2006,
accessed at www.who.int/whosis/mort/profi les/mort_amro_gtm_guatemala.pdf,
on May 26, 2011.
INDIA
Carl Haub and Toshiko Kaneda, 2011 World Population Data Sheet (Washington,
DC: Population Reference Bureau, 2011), available at www.prb.org.
Carl Haub and O.P. Sharma, “India's Population: Reconciling Change and
Tradition,” Population Bulletin 61, no 3 (2006).
India Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, National Population Policy 2000 (New
Delhi: Government of India, 2000).
Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India, “2011 Census,” accessed
at www.censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/census2011_paper1_states.html,
on May 15, 2011.
Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India (RGI), Sample Registration
System Statistical Report, various annual issues (New Delhi: RGI, various years).
Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India (RGI), Vital Rates of India
1971 to 1996 Based on The Sample Registration System (SRS) (New Delhi: RGI,
1998).
United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010
Revision (New York: United Nations, 2011), accessed at http://esa.un.org/unpd/
wpp/index.htm, on June 2, 2011.
GERMANY
Eurobarometer, accessed at http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm,
accessed on June 10, 2011.
“Family Allowances,” personal communication with German World Population
Fund, Hannover, Germany, June 7, 2011.
German Federal Statistics Offi ce, “2009 Age Distribution,” “Migration
Statistics,” “Projections,” and “Vital Statistics,” accessed at www.destatis.de, on
June 8, 2011.
United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010
Revision (New York: United Nations, 2011), accessed at http://esa.un.org/unpd/
wpp/index.htm, on June 21, 2011.
VISIT WWW.PRB.ORG TO FIND:
ARTICLES AND REPORTS. New data and analysis on topics as diverse as
gender, reproductive health, environment, and race/ethnicity.
GRAPHICS BANK. PowerPoint slides of population-related information,
ready for use in presentations or in the classroom.
PRB DISCUSS ONLINE. Available at http://discuss.prb.org. Join
online discussions with experts on newsworthy population, health,
and environment topics, trends, and issues. Transcripts of each
discussion are archived on PRB’s website.
DATAFINDER. PRB’s DataFinder website is getting a new look and new
features that will put a wealth of U.S. and world population data at
your fi ngertips. PRB’s new DataFinder will let you search hundreds of
indicators for thousands of places in the U.S. and around the world.
In addition to data from PRB’s World Population Data Sheet, we’ve
added new data from the 2010 U.S. Census and the U.S. Census
Bureau’s American Community Survey. The redesigned site lets you
easily create custom reports, charts, and maps to print, download,
and share. Available soon at www.prb.org/Datafi nder.aspx.
FOR EDUCATORS. Access online lesson plans, maps, and resources.
FOR JOURNALISTS. Highlights news releases, webcasts, and a
dictionary of population terms.
“PRB NEWS” AND “EVENTS & TRAINING.” Announces monthly policy
seminars, intern and fellowship applications, and workshops,
as well as news about PRB’s programs.
E-MAIL THIS. Send e-mails to others with links to PRB content.
COUNTRY PAGES. Scan up-to-date population, health, and environment
data for any of 210 countries, and fi nd links to related PRB articles
and reports.
WEBUPDATE. Sign up to receive e-mail announcements about new
web content and PRB-sponsored seminars and briefi ngs.
BECOME A MEMBER OF PRB
With new perspectives shaping public policies every day, you need to
be well informed. As a member of the Population Reference Bureau,
you will receive reliable information on United States and world
population trends—properly analyzed and clearly presented in readable
language. Each year you will receive two Population Bulletins, the annual
World Population Data Sheet, and complimentary copies of special
publications. We welcome you to join PRB today.
INDIVIDUAL $50
LIBRARY $75
CORPORATION $300
LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP $5,000
POPULATION REFERENCE BUREAU
1875 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 520
Washington, DC 20009
For faster service, call 800-877-9881
Or visit www.prb.org
Or e-mail popref@prb.org
Or fax 202-328-3937
Recent Population Bulletins
VOLUME 66 (2011)
No. 1 America’s Aging Population
by Linda A. Jacobsen, Mary Kent, Marlene Lee,
and Mark Mather
No. 2 The World at 7 Billion
by Carl Haub and James Gribble
VOLUME 65 (2010)
No. 1 U.S. Economic and Social Trends Since 2000
by Linda A. Jacobsen and Mark Mather
No. 2 World Population Highlights: Key Findings From PRB’s
2010 World Population Data Sheet
by Jason Bremner, Ashley Frost, Carl Haub, Mark Mather,
Karin Ringheim, and Eric Zuehlke
VOLUME 64 (2009)
No. 1 20th-Century U.S. Generations
by Elwood Carlson
No. 2 Urban Poverty and Health in Developing Countries
by Mark R. Montgomery
No. 3 World Population Highlights: Key Findings From PRB’s 2009
World Population Data Sheet
by Population Reference Bureau staff
1875 Connecticut Avenue., NW
Suite 520
Washington, DC 20009
202 483 1100 PHONE
202 328 3937 FAX
popref@prb.org EMAIL
POPULATION REFERENCE BUREAU
www.prb.org
THE WORLD AT 7 BILLIONA
This Population Bulletin looks at the four phases of the demographic
transition as descriptive of past and future population growth. We
highlight four countries to illustrate each phase and its implications
for human well-being:
• Uganda (high birth rate, fl uctuating death rate).
• Guatemala (declining birth and death rates).
• India (approaching replacement-level fertility).
• Germany (low or very low birth and death rates).
Download Population Bulletin: The World At 7 Billion (PDF: 1MB) 
This article is the introduction to Population Bulletin: The World At 7 Billion
(July 2011) Even though the world population growth rate has slowed from 2.1 percent per year in the late 1960s to 1.2 percent today, the size of the world's population has continued to increase—from 5 billion in 1987 to 6 billion in 1999, and to 7 billion in 2011.
The sixth billion and seventh billion were each added in record time—only 12 years. If the 2.1 percent growth rate from the 1960s had held steady, world population would be 8.7 billion today. It is entirely possible that the 8th billion will be added in 12 years as well, placing us squarely in the middle of history's most rapid population expansion.
This prospect seems to run counter to the prevailing belief that concern over population growth is a thing of the past, and that today's "population problem" is that birth rates are too low, not too high. In fact, there is some truth to that notion, depending on the region or country one is talking about. Today, most population growth is concentrated in the world's poorest countries—and within the poorest regions of those countries.
Figure 1
World Population Growth
Source: United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision, medium variant (2011).
The decrease in the world growth rate since the 1960s resulted from the realization on the part of some developing country governments and donors about unprecedented rates of population growth. It took all of human history to reach a world population of 1.6 billion at the beginning of the 20th century. Just one hundred years later, in 2000, the population total had reached 6.1 billion. How did this sudden, momentous change come about? To understand this change, we must first consider the demographic transition—the shifts in birth and death rates that historically have occurred over long periods of time. And then we must look at how very differently the transition has taken place in the world's developed and developing countries.
The transition describes two trends: the decline in birth rates as the need or desire for larger numbers of children diminished, and the decline in death rates as public health initiatives and modern medicine lengthened life.
In today's developed countries, this transition took many centuries, but in today's developing countries the changes are taking place in mere decades. In developed countries, birth and death rates tended to decline in parallel. Economies and societies changed during that time: Fewer families stayed on farms and the Industrial Revolution changed the way people lived and worked. But the transition's pace was still slow. In Sweden, for example, the slowly declining death and birth rates produced a population growth rate that has remained fairly stable over the past 250 years, rarely exceeding 1 percent per year.
In developing countries during the 20th century, major improvements in public health, the practice of modern medicine, and immunization campaigns spread quickly, particularly after World War II. Death rates dropped while birth rates stayed high. In Sri Lanka, infant mortality (under age 1) in the early 1950s is estimated to have been about 105 deaths per 1,000 live births. By the 1990s, the rate had dropped dramatically to below 20, due in large part to basic public health interventions such as immunizations, oral rehydration therapy, and birth spacing—all of which have contributed to lower rates of infant and child mortality.
With health conditions improving so rapidly, birth rates in developing countries did not have time to change as they did in Europe. This lag between the drop in death rates and the drop in birth rates produced unprecedented levels of population growth. In Kenya, infant mortality declined first—contributing to a rise in life expectancy at birth from about 42 years in the early 1950s to 56 years in the late 1970s—before fertility began a decline from the then-prevalent eight children per woman. During that same period, Kenya's annual population growth rate approached an unheard-of 4 percent. In the early 1950s, Pakistan had a life expectancy of 41 years and an average fertility rate of 6.6 children per woman. It was not until the early 1980s, when life expectancy had reached 59 years—due in large part to reductions in infant and child deaths—that Pakistan's fertility began to decrease and its population growth rate began to slow. These lengthy growth spurts resulted in the relatively new phenomenon of government policies aimed at lowering birth rates. Some governments, such as Indonesia and Thailand, were quite successful in lowering birth rates; many other governments have not been.
In addition to policies, social norms also contribute to how a country moves through the demographic transition. Although at times these norms conflict with public policies and programs, cultural factors such as age at marriage, desired family size, and gender roles all have a strong influence on fertility behavior.
Figure 2
The Classic Phases of the Demographic Transition
Notes: Natural increase or decrease is the difference between the numbers of births and deaths. The birth rate is the number of live births per 1,000 population in a given year. The death rate is the number of deaths per 1,000 population in a given year.
What might the future look like? It is fundamental to remember that all population projections, whether performed by a national statistical office, the United Nations, or the U.S. Census Bureau, are based on assumptions. Demographers make assumptions on the future course of the factors that determine population growth or decline: the birth rate and the death rate. When looking at projections, one needs to consider the assumptions before the results. In the case of developing countries, a typical assumption is that birth and death rates will follow the path of demographic transition from high birth and death rates to low ones—mirroring the transition as it played out in developed countries. But when, how, and whether that actually happens cannot be known. When considering a population projection for a developing country, several questions need to be posed. If fertility has not yet begun to decline significantly, when will it begin and why? This question would be appropriate for Niger and Uganda, whose fertility rates are still very high at 7.0 and 6.4, respectively. If fertility is declining, will it continue to do so or "stall" for a time at some lower level as it has in Jordan and Kenya? Finally, will a country's fertility really fall to as little as two children per woman or fewer, as is commonly expected?
This Population Bulletin looks at the four phases of the demographic transition as descriptive of past and future population growth. We highlight four countries to illustrate each phase and its implications for human well-being:
DisclaimerPRB welcomes comments from our readers. Although PRB is not responsible for the content of these comments, PRB reserves the right to delete, move, or edit messages that it deems abusive, defamatory, obscene, off-topic, or otherwise unacceptable. PRB reserves the right to cancel a user's account at our sole discretion.
the Conrad Taeuber Chair of Population Information. Most
noteworthy among his many published works is PRB’s World
Population Data Sheet, which he has authored since 1980.
JAMES GRIBBLE is vice president of International Programs at PRB,
and director of the USAID-supported IDEA project. He has written
on a range of population and health policy issues. Much of his
current work focuses on the economic and health benefi ts of
family planning.
POPULATION REFERENCE BUREAU
The Population Reference Bureau INFORMS people around
the world about population, health, and the environment,
and EMPOWERS them to use that information to ADVANCE
the well-being of current and future generations.
Funding for this Population Bulletin was provided through
the generosity of the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, and the
David and Lucile Packard Foundation.
OFFICERS
Martin Vaessen, Chair of the Board
Director, Demographic and Health Research Division, ICF Macro,
Calverton, Maryland
Margaret Neuse, Vice Chair of the Board
Independent Consultant, Washington, D.C.
Stanley Smith, Secretary of the Board
Professor and Director, Bureau of Economic and Business Research,
University of Florida, Gainesville
Richard F. Hokenson, Treasurer of the Board
Director, Hokenson and Company, Lawrenceville, New Jersey
Wendy Baldwin, President and Chief Executive Offi cer
Population Reference Bureau, Washington, D.C.
TRUSTEES
George Alleyne, Director Emeritus, Pan American Health Organization/
World Health Organization, Washington, D.C.
Felicity Barringer, National Correspondent, Environment,
The New York Times, San Francisco
Marcia Carlson, Associate Professor of Sociology, University
of Wisconsin, Madison
Elizabeth Chacko, Associate Professor of Geography and International
Affairs, The George Washington University, Washington, D.C.
Bert T. Edwards, Retired Partner, Arthur Andersen LLP, and former
CFO, U.S. State Department, Washington, D.C.
Francis L. Price, President and Chief Executive Offi cer, Interact
Performance Systems and Magna Saxum Partners in Cleveland, Ohio
and Anaheim, California.
Michael Wright, Managing Director for Coastal East Africa,
World Wildlife Fund, Washington, D.C.
Montague Yudelman, Former Director, Agriculture and Rural
Development, World Bank, Washington, D.C.
The Population Bulletin is published twice a year and distributed
to members of the Population Reference Bureau. Population
Bulletins are also available for $7 each (discounts for bulk orders).
To become a PRB member or to order PRB materials, contact
PRB, 1875 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 520, Washington, DC
20009-5728; Tel.: 800-877-9881; Fax: 202-328-3937;
E-mail: popref@prb.org; Website: www.prb.org.
The suggested citation, if you quote from this publication, is:
Carl Haub and James Gribble, “The World at 7 Billion,” Population
Bulletin 66, no. 2. For permission to reproduce portions from the
Population Bulletin, write to PRB, Attn: Permissions; or e-mail:
popref@prb.org.
Cover photo: © 2009 Nikada/iStockphoto
© 2011 Population Reference Bureau. All rights reserved. ISSN 0032-468X
POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011 www.prb.org 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
JULY 2011
VOL. 66, NO. 2
THE WORLD AT 7 BILLION
BY CARL HAUB AND JAMES GRIBBLE
POPULATION REFERENCE BUREAU
Population Bulletin
WORLD POPULATION ......................................................................................................2
Figure 1. World Population Growth ........................................................................................3
Figure 2. The Classic Phases of Demographic Transition ..........................................................3
UGANDA: AT THE BEGINNING OF A TRANSITION ......................................................4
Figure 3. Age and Sex Structure of Uganda, 2010 and 2050 ....................................................5
GUATEMALA: BEYOND THE EARLY PHASE OF THE TRANSITION ............................6
Figure 4. Age and Sex Structure of Guatemala, 2010 and 2050 .................................................7
INDIA: ON THE PATH TO REPLACEMENT? ......................................................................8
Figure 5. Sex Ratio at Birth, Selected States of India,
1999-2008 .................................................................................................................................9
Figure 6. Total Fertility Rates, India and Selected States,
1972-2009 .................................................................................................................................9
GERMANY: BEYOND THE TRANSITION'S END...............................................................10
Figure 7. Total Fertility Rate in Germany, 1952-2009 ................................................................11
Figure 8. Age and Sex Structure of Germany, 2009 and 2050 ....................................................11
SOURCES ...............................................................................................................................12
2 www.prb.org POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011Even though the world population growth rate has slowed from
2.1 percent per year in the late 1960s to 1.2 percent today, the
size of the world’s population has continued to increase—from
5 billion in 1987 to 6 billion in 1999, and to 7 billion in 2011.
WORLD POPULATION
GROWING AT RECORD SPEED
World population may
reach 8 billion in 2023.
Today, most population
growth is concentrated
in the world’s poorest
countries, and within the
poorest regions of those
countries.
The sixth billion and seventh billion were each
added in record time—only 12 years. If the 2.1
percent growth rate from the 1960s had held
steady, world population would be 8.7 billion
today. It is entirely possible that the 8th billion
will be added in 12 years as well, placing us
squarely in the middle of history’s most rapid
population expansion.
This prospect seems to run counter to the
prevailing belief that concern over population
growth is a thing of the past, and that today’s
“population problem” is that birth rates are too
low, not too high. In fact, there is some truth to
that notion, depending on the region or country
one is talking about. Today, most population
growth is concentrated in the world’s poorest
countries—and within the poorest regions of
those countries.
The decrease in the world growth rate since the
1960s resulted from the realization on the part
of some developing country governments and
donors about unprecedented rates of population
growth. It took all of human history to reach a
world population of 1.6 billion at the beginning of
the 20th century. Just one hundred years later,
in 2000, the population total had reached 6.1
billion. How did this sudden, momentous change
come about? To understand this change, we
must fi rst consider the demographic transition—
the shifts in birth and death rates that historically
have occurred over long periods of time. And
then we must look at how very differently
the transition has taken place in the world’s
developed and developing countries.
The transition describes two trends: the
decline in birth rates as the need or desire for
larger numbers of children diminished, and the
decline in death rates as public health initiatives
and modern medicine lengthened life.
In today’s developed countries, this transition
took many centuries, but in today’s developing
countries the changes are taking place in
mere decades. In developed countries, birth
and death rates tended to decline in parallel.
Economies and societies changed during that
time: Fewer families stayed on farms and the
Industrial Revolution changed the way people
lived and worked. But the transition’s pace was
still slow. In Sweden, for example, the slowly
declining death and birth rates produced a
population growth rate that has remained
fairly stable over the past 250 years, rarely
exceeding 1 percent per year.
In developing countries during the 20th
century, major improvements in public
health, the practice of modern medicine, and
immunization campaigns spread quickly,
particularly after World War II. Death rates
dropped while birth rates stayed high. In Sri
Lanka, infant mortality (under age 1) in the
early 1950s is estimated to have been about
105 deaths per 1,000 live births. By the 1990s,
the rate had dropped dramatically to below
20, due in large part to basic public health
interventions such as immunizations, oral
rehydration therapy, and birth spacing—all of
which have contributed to lower rates of infant
and child mortality.
8
BILLION
POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011 www.prb.org 3
With health conditions improving so rapidly, birth rates in
developing countries did not have time to change as they did
in Europe. This lag between the drop in death rates and the
drop in birth rates produced unprecedented levels of population
growth. In Kenya, infant mortality declined fi rst—contributing
to a rise in life expectancy at birth from about 42 years in the
early 1950s to 56 years in the late 1970s—before fertility began
a decline from the then-prevalent eight children per woman.
During that same period, Kenya’s annual population growth
rate approached an unheard-of 4 percent. In the early 1950s,
Pakistan had a life expectancy of 41 years and an average
fertility rate of 6.6 children per woman. It was not until the early
1980s, when life expectancy had reached 59 years—due
in large part to reductions in infant and child deaths—that
Pakistan’s fertility began to decrease and its population growth
rate began to slow. These lengthy growth spurts resulted in the
relatively new phenomenon of government policies aimed at
lowering birth rates. Some governments, such as Indonesia and
Thailand, were quite successful in lowering birth rates; many
other governments have not been.
In addition to policies, social norms also contribute to how a
country moves through the demographic transition. Although at
times these norms confl ict with public policies and programs,
cultural factors such as age at marriage, desired family size, and
gender roles all have a strong infl uence on fertility behavior.
What might the future look like? It is fundamental to remember
that all population projections, whether performed by a national
statistical offi ce, the United Nations, or the U.S. Census Bureau,
are based on assumptions. Demographers make assumptions
on the future course of the factors that determine population
growth or decline: the birth rate and the death rate. When
looking at projections, one needs to consider the assumptions
before the results. In the case of developing countries, a typical
assumption is that birth and death rates will follow the path of
demographic transition from high birth and death rates to low
ones—mirroring the transition as it played out in developed
PHASE 1
High Birth Rate,
Fluctuating
Death Rate
PHASE 2
Declining Birth
and Death Rates
PHASE 3
Birth Rate
Approaching
Replacement (2.1)
PHASE 4
Low to Very
Low Birth
Rate,
Very Low
Death Rate
Afghanistan
Uganda
Zambia
Ghana
Guatemala
Iraq
India
Gabon
Malaysia Brazil
Germany
Japan
Birth Rate
Death Rate
Time
The Classic Phases of Demographic Transition
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Billions
0
2
4
6
8
10
Less Developed Countries
More Developed Countries
countries. But when, how, and whether that actually happens
cannot be known. When considering a population projection
for a developing country, several questions need to be posed.
If fertility has not yet begun to decline signifi cantly, when will it
begin and why? This question would be appropriate for Niger
and Uganda, whose fertility rates are still very high at 7.0 and
6.4, respectively. If fertility is declining, will it continue to do so
or “stall” for a time at some lower level as it has in Jordan and
Kenya? Finally, will a country’s fertility really fall to as little as two
children per woman or fewer, as is commonly expected?
This Population Bulletin looks at the four phases of the
demographic transition as descriptive of past and future
population growth. We highlight four countries to illustrate each
phase and its implications for human well-being:
• Uganda (high birth rate, fl uctuating death rate).
• Guatemala (declining birth and death rates).
• India (approaching replacement-level fertility).
• Germany (low or very low birth and death rates).
Source: United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010
Revision, medium variant ( 2011).
Notes: Natural increase or decrease is the difference between the number of births and
deaths. The birth rate is the number of live births per 1,000 population in a given year. The
death rate is the number of deaths per 1,000 population in a given year.
FIGURE 1
World Population Growth
FIGURE 2
4 www.prb.org POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011
Uganda has entered into its demographic transition by reducing
its once-high death rate. As a result of lower mortality but still high
fertility, Uganda has developed a very youthful age structure.
UGANDA
AT THE BEGINNING OF A TRANSITION
Deaths among children
under 5 are decreasing.
Fewer than 13 percent of
children die before reaching
age 5, partly a result
of higher levels of full
immunization and better
care at delivery.
Uganda is one of Africa’s
largest and fastestgrowing
countries.
Uganda’s population will continue to grow
because of the large number of people who
are either currently at an age when they are
having children or who will soon enter that
age group. With half of its population age 15
or younger, Uganda stands out as one of the
world’s youngest age structures. As the world
reaches 7 billion, countries at the beginning
of their demographic transition represent a
relatively small proportion—about 9 percent—
of the world’s population. However, these
countries face similar development challenges.
Overview
With a population of 35 million, Uganda is
one of Africa’s largest and fastest-growing
countries. Uganda has several policies and
action plans that address its major population
and development issues, yet none effectively
address the country’s fertility, which is among
the highest in the world. Despite economic
growth in the past decade, many Ugandans
live in poverty and confront social and
economic inequities.
To understand Uganda’s population challenges,
one must examine the roles and status
of women. Ugandan women are greatly
affected by HIV/AIDS, as is the case in many
sub-Saharan African countries. In addition,
maternal and child health indicators for
Uganda show that women and children have
very limited access to health services.
Even though the country continues to improve
the health of its people, Uganda will need to
address its high fertility, increase the number
of youth who attend secondary school and
higher, and foster job creation so that its
families, communities, and the nation as a
whole grow economically.
Population and Policies
The factor driving Uganda’s current
population growth of 3.3 percent per year is
a total fertility rate (TFR) averaging between
six and seven lifetime births per woman. This
level is only a slight reduction from the high
level in the 1970s of 7.1 children per woman.
If the current fertility level persists, Uganda’s
population will double to 70 million by 2031,
and could reach 100 million after 2040.
One reason for this high TFR is that only
about 18 percent of Uganda’s married
women between ages 15 and 49 use effective
contraception, with injectable contraceptives,
pills, and sterilization the most popular
methods. An additional 41 percent of married
women want to postpone or avoid pregnancy
but are not using an effective family planning
method.
Uganda’s 2008 population policy prioritizes
birth spacing and youth-friendly sexual and
reproductive health services, and allocates
funding for these programs. Two focal areas
of Uganda’s National Population Policy Action
Plan 2011-2015 are sexual and reproductive
health and rights, and gender and family
welfare. In spite of these and other policies,
Uganda’s government shows relatively little
support for family planning. For example,
government funding for contraceptives is
not suffi cient even to address the needs of
women living in urban areas, who represent
only 15 percent of the total population. The
lack of public support for family planning by
national leaders is visibly noticed by the global
community.
35
MILLION
PHASE 1
POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011 www.prb.org 5
Economic Inequalities
Uganda’s gross domestic product is growing annually at a
rate of 5 percent to 10 percent. Historically an agriculturally
based economy, the discovery of oil in 2006 offers Uganda
an opportunity for economic growth and diversifi cation. Yet
Uganda is still a resource-poor country and 65 percent of its
population lives on less than US$2 per day. This inequality is
stark: The wealthiest 20 percent (quintile) of the population
holds 49 percent of total income, while the poorest quintile
holds only 6 percent.
According to the 2006 Uganda Demographic and Health
Survey (DHS), wealth distribution is closely related to fertility.
Women in the poorest quintile have eight children on average
during their lives, while women in the wealthiest quintile have
just over four children. Similarly, 41 percent of young women
ages 15 to 19 in the poorest quintile have begun childbearing,
while only 16 percent in the wealthiest quintile have. These
differences are further reinforced by the practice of child
marriage: More than half of women in all but the wealthiest
quintile are married before age 18.
Gender Inequalities
Like many countries that face development challenges, one of
the barriers impeding progress is gender inequality. Gender
roles play out in virtually every aspect of life—from educational
attainment among youth to decisions made within families. In
households where the 2006 DHS was conducted, men age
20 or older always had higher levels of education than women
of the same age. However, females under age 20 had roughly
the same education as males, suggesting greater attention to
educating girls. Women’s empowerment remains elusive—
men indicate that family size is primarily their decision (47
percent), though many see it as a joint decision (45 percent);
few (5 percent) see it as the woman’s decision. Women
reinforce their own lack of power as well: More than 70
percent of women thought that a husband could be justifi ed
for hitting or beating his wife, suggesting a cultural acceptance
of violence against women.
Gender inequalities also play out in the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
According to the 2010 Uganda Report to the United Nations,
6.4 percent of Ugandans between ages 15 and 49 are
infected with HIV. However, young women experience much
higher rates of infection than young men. For example, among
20-to-24-year-olds, 2.4 percent of men are HIV positive,
compared to 6.3 percent of women. Prevalence is highest
among women ages 30 to 34, at 12.1 percent, compared to
8.1 percent among men in that age group. Although AIDS
continues to contribute approximately 64,000 deaths per year
in Uganda, these deaths do not offset the population growth
resulting from the approximately 1 million births each year in
Uganda.
Health of Women and Children
Like other countries in the early phase of the demographic
transition, Uganda has one of the world’s highest maternal
death ratios—approximately 430 deaths per 100,000 live
births. Although most women receive some antenatal care,
only about 47 percent receive four or more visits and only 42
percent have a skilled attendant at delivery. These statistics
vary greatly across Uganda’s nine regions.
Deaths among children under age 5 continue to decrease in
Uganda, and currently fewer than 13 percent of children die
before reaching age 5, due mainly to neonatal causes, malaria,
pneumonia, and diarrhea. This reduction in child deaths is
partly a result of higher levels of full immunization and better
care at delivery, as well as better use of health services when
children are ill. However, poor nutrition undermines the health
of most children: 73 percent have anemia and 38 percent are
stunted (low height for age).
Challenges
Uganda’s continued rapid population growth, according to
the United Nations high projection, will expand its population
in 2050 to 105.6 million; half the population would be age 20
or younger—signifi cantly older than the current median age
of 15. However, if fertility remains at a level of 6.7 children per
woman (from the 2006 DHS), Uganda’s population could be
as high as 145 million by 2050 and have the same youthful
structure as it currently has. To address this challenge,
Uganda will need to focus not only on family planning to slow
its population growth, but on wise investments that will help
develop an educated labor force and create jobs to sustain
and increase its recent economic growth.
2010 Age 2050
Male Female Male
Percentage Percentage
Female
80+
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10
FIGURE 3
Age and Sex Structure of Uganda, 2010 and 2050
Source: United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision
(2011).
6 www.prb.org POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011
As a lower middle-income country, Guatemala is well-advanced in
its demographic transition, showing evidence of recent reductions
in its birth rate.
GUATEMALA
BEYOND THE EARLY PHASE OF THE TRANSITION
Guatemala’s recent
economic growth has
resulted from tourism and
the exports of textiles,
clothing, and agricultural
crops.
At more than 14 million,
Guatemala is the most
populous country in
Central America.
Guatemala’s population structure illustrates
that women have been having fewer children
for several years, which explains why the
base of the pyramid is shorter, compared
to the elongated base of Uganda’s pyramid.
With half of its population age 19 or younger,
Guatemala’s population is still relatively
young and is the youngest in Latin America.
Guatemala is one of many countries in this
second phase of the demographic transition;
together they represent about 7 percent of
the world’s population of 7 billion.
Overview
At more than 14 million, Guatemala is the
most populous country in Central America.
Its growth rate is still high at 2.5 percent per
year—the highest in all of Latin America.
Although Guatemala has several national
policies that support social development and
address population issues, they have not
been carried out very effectively. The country
has experienced economic growth in the past
decade, although growth has recently slowed.
Guatemala remains challenged by high levels
of inequality, especially between the Mayan
population, which represents approximately
40 percent of the country’s population, and
the ladino population, which makes up the
majority of the remaining 60 percent.
Guatemala has made great strides in
addressing many of its gender-based
disparities. However, the more-telling difference
is between the quality of the lives of Mayan
and ladina women, refl ected in differences in
school attendance and use of health services.
Women are having smaller families; people
are healthier and living longer, with a life
expectancy at birth of 71 years; and the child
dependency ratio is decreasing, suggesting
that families may be poised to invest more in
health, education, and savings. Nevertheless,
sustaining economic growth and dealing
with an upturn in violent crime threaten
Guatemala’s longer-term development.
Population and Policies
Over the past 20 years, fertility levels have
decreased substantially in Guatemala. From
5.6 children per woman in 1987, the recent
2008/09 National Survey of Maternal and Child
Health (NSMCH) indicates that women have an
average of 3.6 children each. If current fertility
remains unchanged, Guatemala’s population
will double in 26 years. Although fertility has
gone down, women indicated that, on average,
they want fewer than three children.
The recent reductions in fertility are due
largely to increased use of family planning.
Currently, 44 percent of married women use a
modern family planning method, with female
sterilization and injectable contraceptives the
most common types. At the same time, an
additional 31 percent of married women want
to postpone or avoid pregnancy but are not
using an effective contraceptive method.
Since 2002, Guatemala has had a national
Social Development and Population policy
that prioritizes as health objectives a reduction
in maternal and infant mortality, sexually
transmitted infections, and HIV/AIDS. In 2010,
the Guatemalan Congress approved a law to
support healthy motherhood, and stipulates
that at least 30 percent of taxes on the sale of
alcohol should be used to support reproductive
health programs. Guatemala is also addressing
poverty reduction through Mi Familia Progresa,
14
MILLION
PHASE 2
POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011 www.prb.org 7
a conditional cash transfer program established in 2008 that
encourages the use of health services and education.
Economic Inequalities
Guatemala’s recent economic growth has resulted from tourism
and the exports of textiles, clothing, and agricultural crops. Half
of the labor force works in agriculture. Almost a quarter of the
population lives on less that US$2 per day. The country has a
very inequitable income distribution: The wealthiest 20 percent
(quintile) of the population holds 58 percent of total income,
while the poorest quintile holds only 3 percent.
Economic inequalities infl uence many social behaviors.
Wealthier women have fewer children on average during their
lives than poorer women have: 1.8 children per woman in the
wealthiest quintile compared to 5.7 children per woman in the
poorest quintile. It is not surprising that use of family planning
methods is very high among married women in the wealthiest
quintile—72 percent—but only 36 percent of married women
in the lowest quintile use any form of family planning.
Gender Inequalities
Compared with many other countries, Guatemala has
moved closer toward gender equality. Between 1987 and
2008/09, the percentage of women who never attended
school dropped from 38 percent to 20 percent; among Mayan
women, this improvement was even more notable: from 67
percent never attending school in 1987 to 35 percent not
attending school in 2008/09. Recent educational advances
are fairly equal for both boys and girls. Among children ages
5 to 14, there are no differences in the age at which boys
and girls start school nor in the percentage who never attend
school.
Gender roles also infl uence social behaviors and attitudes.
Many Guatemalan women tend to have more traditional views.
For example, 65 percent of women included in the 2008/09
survey reported that a woman should obey her husband
even when she does not agree with him. Almost 80 percent
responded that they need to get his approval before incurring
a household expense, working outside the house, going
to the doctor when ill, or leaving the house. However, only
56 percent indicated that a woman should seek the man’s
approval about using family planning. Each of these attitudes
was more frequently held by women in the poorer quintiles
than in the wealthier ones.
Gender-based violence is not unusual, as 46 percent of
women reported that they have experienced either verbal,
physical, or sexual violence from their husband or partner.
The frequency of these behaviors is consistent between
Mayan and ladina women, as well as across wealth quintiles.
However, in contrast to other countries where women accept
wife beating, only 7 percent of Guatemalan women agreed
that under certain circumstances a man is justifi ed in hitting
his wife.
Health of Women and Children
As a country with improving access to and use of health
services, Guatemala still has a high maternal mortality ratio
of 110 deaths per 100,000 live births, putting it slightly above
other countries in Central America. Use of antenatal care
is very high, with 93 percent of women receiving care at
some time during their most recent pregnancy. More than
50 percent of women receive care from a physician or nurse
during delivery, but only 30 percent of Mayan women receive
skilled care, compared to 70 percent of ladina women.
Deaths among children under age 5 continue to decrease,
from 109 in 1987 to 42 in 2008/09. More than half of infant
deaths (17 out of 30 deaths per 1,000 live births) occur in the
neonatal period; death at this phase can be prevented through
skilled attendance at deliveries and antenatal care. Almost
half of all children between ages 3 months and 59 months are
stunted (low height for age.) However, almost twice as many
Mayan children are stunted as are ladino children (66 percent
vs. 36 percent, respectively). Just under half (48 percent) of
children ages 6 months to 59 months are anemic, but this
condition is fairly evenly distributed across wealth quintiles and
ethnicity groups.
Challenges
Guatemala has made great advances in social and economic
development in the past two decades, but serious inequities
still exist between the Mayan and ladino populations.
Regardless of the issue considered—fertility, child health,
education—the disparities between these two segments of
the population represent the gap that must be addressed
through future development initiatives. If Guatemala follows
the medium projection scenario, it will have a population of
almost 32 million by 2050, and an age structure similar to
Phase-3 countries.
Male Female Male Female
2010 Age 2050
Percentage Percentage
80+
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10
FIGURE 4
Age and Sex Structure of Guatemala, 2010 and 2050
Source: United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision
(2011).
8 www.prb.org POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011
India is on track to become the world’s largest country about 10
years from now, even though fertility has declined to 2.6 children
per woman, which is less than half of its 1950s level.
INDIA
ON THE PATH TO REPLACEMENT?
India is often portrayed as
an exploding middle-class
economy, but such attitudes
obscure a far more
complex society.
India’s population in 2011.
Between the last three
censuses, India’s population
growth rate has been
declining.
India’s population will surpass China’s,
assuming that China does not alter its current
fertility policy. But India’s population will also
be more youthful than China’s and will not
face a budget-straining situation of population
aging. Countries like India in the third phase
of demographic transition have fertility
rates that have declined signifi cantly from
previously high levels but have not reached
the population-stabilizing “replacement level”
of 2.1 children per woman. These countries
are home to 38 percent of the world’s 7 billion
people.
Overview
As of the recently conducted 2011 Census,
India’s population stood at 1.2 billion. To get an
idea of the size of India’s population, consider
that the population of just one age group,
males ages 0-4, is about 67 million, larger than
the entire population of France. Between the
last three censuses, India’s population growth
rate has been in decline, but the 2011 Census
was the fi rst to show a decrease in the number
added as well. From 2001 to 2011, 181.5
million people were added, down slightly from
182.3 million from 1991 to 2001.
India is often portrayed as an exploding
middle-class economy. While not a complete
exaggeration, such attitudes obscure a far
more complex society. Unlike Vietnam, an
example of a virtually homogeneous country
with a common language and predominant
ethnicity, India is more like a collection of
semi-independent countries united under
one democracy. The country is divided
into 35 states and Union Territories, from
Uttar Pradesh with 200 million people to the
Lakshadweep Islands with 64,429 people. Its
diversity is refl ected by the fact that there are
16 separate languages on rupee notes. Many
states are ruled by regional parties, posing
challenges to the national government in
Delhi in forming coalition governments at the
national level and at some state levels.
Despite much publicity given to the country’s
economic growth, India remains a rural
nation with many towns offi cially designated
as urban still retaining much of their rural
character. Urban places are generally defi ned
as villages and towns of 5,000 or more in
which 75 percent or more of the male labor
force is not directly employed in agriculture.
The average Indian resided in a village of about
4,000 people in 2001. Many of these places
lack adequate sanitation and clean water, and
are often only reachable by primitive roads
and trails. These characteristics often place
considerable obstacles in the path of health
services delivery.
There are also misconceptions regarding the
Indian “middle class” and standards of living.
Indians are not consumers in the Western
sense of impulse purchases or frivolous
spending. A true middle-class Indian, living
a Western-standard life, is more properly
considered part of the super-rich class, a
minuscule proportion of the population.
Media reports on new, glitzy shopping
malls in India fail to mention that few visitors
actually purchase anything; they go to the
air-conditioned malls to visit food courts and
attend the cinema. In the vast majority of
Indian households, traditional ways of life, such
as arranged and early marriages (about half
of Indian females marry below the legal age
1.2
BILLION
PHASE 3
POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011 www.prb.org 9
of 18), deep respect for one’s elders, and close relations with
extended families are the rule. One’s wages are less important
than in the West, since large extended families often pool
resources.
Population and Policy
India is often noted as the fi rst developing country to declare a
policy to reduce fertility, in 1952, although effective funds were
not allocated until 1966 and the fi rst truly comprehensive policy
was not written until 2000. Nonetheless, effective measures
were taken in many states to lower the birth rate and every
state has seen a decline. In the early 1950s, fertility is estimated
to have been 5.9 children per woman by the United Nations
Population Division, not as high as in many other developing
countries at the time where the average was often seven
children or more.
By 2009, fertility in India had declined to 2.6 children per
woman, less than half that of the early 1950s. But this national
fertility rate masks wide disparities by state. The lowest fertility
rates are found in the southern states, especially in Kerala with
a 2009 TFR of 1.7, along with its neighbor Tamil Nadu. Much of
the country’s demographic future will depend on fertility trends
in the northern states which, along with large populations,
have the highest levels of illiteracy and poverty. Bihar and Uttar
Pradesh, the states with the highest TFRs, had populations
of 104 million and 200 million, respectively, in 2011. These two
states, part of the Empowered Action Group States (EAG),
along with Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa,
Rajasthan, and Uttarakhand, are all impoverished and are the
focus of increased family planning efforts.
Skewed Sex Ratio at Birth
Along with China and several Caucasus countries, the preference
for sons in India has resulted in a sex ratio at birth skewed in favor
of males. Worldwide, the biological norm is about 105 male per
100 female births. India’s sex ratio is 111 male per 100 female
births. In India, there are both economic and religious motivations
for the abortion of female fetuses. At marriage, a daughter leaves
the household to live with her in-laws and thereby provides no
economic support to her parent’s family, especially in their old
age. Additionally, a dowry must be paid even though dowries
were banned in 1961. There is a saying that having a daughter
is “like watering your neighbor’s garden.” For Hindus (about 80
percent of the population), having a son light his parent’s funeral
pyre is a prerequisite for Nirvana, the release from the cycle of
reincarnation.
Sex-selective abortion was made illegal in 1994 and, recently,
the prosecution of doctors who engage in the practice was
taken up in a serious way. It is clear that some notable progress
has been made. Generally, the abortion of female fetuses is
more prevalent in wealthier, highly educated, low-fertility states
where parents can afford the ultrasound test and the motivation
to have at least one son is more pressing.
The Future
The size of India’s future population will largely depend upon
the course of fertility decline in the highly populous north. While
clearly in the third phase of the transition, will India move to the
fourth phase of replacement fertility or will it join that group of
developing countries where that seems doubtful? For the fourth
phase to begin, fertility in the very large and poor Indian states
will have to decline to that of an industrialized country, around
two or fewer children. In terms of future world population
size, India will be one of the important demographic stories in
coming decades.
1999-
2001
2000-
02
2001-
03
2002-
04
2003-
05
2004-
06
2005-
07
2006-
08
Punjab
0
120
105
135
Male per 100 female births
Rajasthan
Haryana
Himachal Pradesh
FIGURE 5
Sex Ratio at Birth, Selected States of India, 1999-2008
1972 1978 1984 1990 1996 2002 2008
Children per woman
Uttar Pradesh
Maharashtra
Kerala
India Bihar
1
0
2
3
4
5
6
7
Madhya PradeshFIGURE 6
Total Fertility Rates, India and Selected States, 1972-2009
Source: Registrar General of India, Sample Registration System.
Note: The states of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Uttarakhand were separated from
Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh, respectively, in 2000.
Source: Registrar General of India, Sample Registration System.
10 www.prb.org POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011
Germany’s recovery from the devastation of World War II is
often called an “economic miracle” because its economy is now
Europe’s largest. Immigration has been an important part of the
country’s modern demographic history.
GERMANY
BEYOND THE TRANSITION’S END
Germany’s TFR is 1.4 children
per woman. To date,
efforts to raise fertility in
Germany have not been
successful.
Germany is the largest
country in the European
Union by a good margin. Labor shortages led to a guest-worker
program, which began bringing workers
to West Germany from countries such as
Greece, Italy, Spain, Turkey, and Yugoslavia
in the late 1950s. Rather than return to their
homelands, however, many of these workers
brought their families to Germany. From
1960 to the early 1980s, net immigration
averaged several hundred thousand per year,
peaking at more than 500,000 in 1969 and
1970. Following Germany’s reunifi cation in
1990, a new fl ow of migrants arrived: ethnic
Germans who had been trapped behind the
Iron Curtain. In 1992, net immigration neared
800,000. There was concern at the time
that some of these migrants were not true
ethnic Germans, but were economic migrants
seeking a better life in the West. At the end
of 2009, 19 percent of Germany’s population
had what the German Federal Statistical
Offi ce calls a “migrant” background, which
includes immigrants since 1950 and their
offspring.
Germany is a dramatic example of the fourth
phase of demographic transition: Countries
with low or very low birth and death rates
represent almost half, or 46 percent, of the
world’s population.
Overview
Germany’s population stands at an estimated
81.8 million in mid-2011, the largest country
in the European Union by a good margin. But
that total is down from 82.3 million at the end
of 2006. Germany’s principal demographic
concerns today are its very low birth rate and
the lack of social and cultural integration of
its migrant population. Recently, Chancellor
Angela Merkel stated that integration was “not
working.”
In 1964, births exceeded deaths by 486,985,
the highest postwar surplus. By 1972, deaths
in Germany exceeded births by 64,032, and
deaths have surpassed births every year
since. In 2010, the difference between births
and deaths stood at -180,833. Only a positive
balance of net immigration has forestalled
a much more rapid population decline. As
a member of the European Union (EU),
Germany must also abide by the Schengen
Agreement of 1985 whereby the EU has no
border controls. Member states do have the
right to impose certain restrictions, however.
In 1995, the agreement was in force in the
25 member states. There has been some
resistance to including new member states
from eastern and southern Europe in the
passport-free zone. The EU is now debating
the Schengen status of new members
Bulgaria and Romania.
Population and Policies
The fourth phase of the demographic
transition is often described as an extended
period of near demographic equilibrium, with
fertility near the replacement level of about
2.1 children per woman. In the majority of
industrialized countries, fertility fell quite
rapidly throughout the late 1960s and early
1970s, a transformation that was to alter
demographic prospects in many countries in
unforeseen ways. In the United States, fertility
fell from 2.9 children per woman in 1965 to a
record low of 1.7 in 1976. Germany reached
82
MILLION
PHASE 4
POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011 www.prb.org 11
a TFR of 1.7 in 1970. But while the U.S. fertility rate slowly
rebounded to 2.1 in 1990 (and has remained close to that ever
since), the German fertility rate did not rebound, and today is
much lower, at 1.4.
Fertility in the former East and West Germany followed a very
similar path up to the mid-1970s. But East Germany, under
Communist rule, instituted a number of pronatalist measures
such as family allowances, maternity leave, and child care
subsidies. Fertility rose until the economic disruption after the
country’s reunifi cation and the subsequent out-migration from
East Germany to the West.
In western Germany, however, little was done to reverse the
trend in low fertility. Fertility has remained below 1.5 children
per woman since 1975, and at times considerably below.
Obstacles to increasing the birth rate are similar to other
low-fertility countries, particularly people’s lack of confi dence
in their economic future. But there are several other factors.
Day care centers usually close at 1 p.m., a burden on the
growing number of two-earner families. Social attitudes tend
to disfavor leaving one’s child in the care of someone else
for the entire day. Mothers who do leave their children all day
are often considered to be “raven mothers” (Rabenmutter)
because a raven abandons her young at an early age.
But this attitude may be slowly changing with growing
acknowledgment of a birth rate crisis. Some day care centers
now sport Ganztags! signs (all-day day care). The government
took little direct action until well after 2000, despite growing
concern over the diminished number of young people and
its effect on supporting pension programs and virtually free
health care, particularly for the elderly.
To try to increase the birth rate, the government gives 184
euros monthly for the fi rst and second child, 190 euros for the
third, and 215 for the fourth until each child turns 18 (or 25 if
still pursuing an education). Maternity leave spans 14 weeks,
six weeks prior to the birth and eight weeks afterward—with
a minimum benefi t paid of 13 euros per day. Finally, a monthly
minimum of 300 euros is allocated for care of a newborn but
can rise to 1,800 euros or 67 percent of one’s prior salary. This
is paid for 14 months with the stipulation that one parent must
use the benefi t for two months, a feature that ensures that
fathers will take part in child care. The additional expense has
put a strain on the national budget and has had little effect on
birth rates. But only a few countries in the industrialized world
have seen signifi cant increases in birth rates from these kinds
of family benefi ts—notably Russia and the Canadian province
of Quebec.
Challenges
To date, efforts to raise fertility in Germany have not been
successful. In two Eurobarometer surveys, respondents were
asked about their “personal ideal” number of children. In 2001,
German women ages 15 to 24 said 1.8 children; in 2006,
they said 2.0. In contrast, in France the answer was 2.6 for
both survey years. Answers to questions on ideal numbers of
children, however, are nearly always much higher than fertility
actually achieved in developed countries. In the 2001 survey,
among German women ages 18 to 34, nearly 17 percent gave
“none” as their ideal and 9 percent said “one,” percentages far
higher than other EU countries.
Projections from the National Statistical Offi ce assume
that, if there is a rise in fertility, it will be quite modest. With
an increase to a fertility rate of 1.6 children and annual
net immigration of 200,000, Germany’s population would
decrease to 74.5 million in 2060 with 31 percent of the
population ages 65 and older. Should fertility remain at 1.4
children and immigration amount to 100,000 per year, the
2060 population would decline to 64.7 million, with 34 percent
ages 65 and over. Given the stable trend in fertility over the
last 35 years and the lack of success of pronatalist programs,
population decline and continued aging appear to describe
the country’s future quite well.
2009 Age 2050
Male Female Male Female
Percentage Percentage
80+
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10
FIGURE 7
Total Fertility Rate in Germany, 1955-2010
Source: German Federal Statistical Offi ce.
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
East Germany
West Germany
0.5
0
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Unified Germany
FIGURE 8
Age and Sex Structure of Germany, 2009 and 2050
Sources: For 2009: German Federal Statistical Offi ce, Statistical Yearbook 2010. For 2050:
United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision (2011).
12 www.prb.org POPULATION BULLETIN 66.2 2011
Sources
WORLD POPULATION
Central Bureau of Statistics et al., Kenya Demographic and Health Survey, 2003
(Calverton, MD: ORC Macro, 2004.)
Department of Statistics, Amman, Jordan, and ICF Macro, Jordan Population
and Family Health Survey 2009 (Calverton, MD: ICF Macro, 2010).
Carl Haub and Toshiko Kaneda, 2011 World Population Data Sheet (Washington,
DC: Population Reference Bureau, 2011), available at www.prb.org.
Institut National de la Statistique Ministére de l'Èconomie et des Finances Niamey,
Niger, and Macro International Inc., Enquête Démographique et de Santé et Ã
Indicateurs Multiples 2006 (Calverton, MD: Macro International Inc., 2007).
National Council for Population and Development et al., Kenya Demographic and
Health Survey, 1998 (Calverton, MD: Macro International, Inc., 1999.)
Statistics Sweden, accessed at www.scb.se/statistik/_publikationer/
BE0101_2009A01_BR_01_BE0110TAB.xls, on July 1, 2011.
Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) and Macro International Inc., Uganda
Demographic and Health Survey 2006 (Calverton, MD: Macro International Inc.,
2008).
United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010
Revision (New York: United Nations, 2011), accessed at http://esa.un.org/unpd/
wpp/index.htm, on June 2, 2011.
U.S. Census Bureau, “International Data Base,” accessed at www.census.gov/
population/international/data/idb/informationGateway.php, June 4, 2011.
UGANDA
Carl Haub and Toshiko Kaneda, 2011 World Population Data Sheet (Washington,
DC: Population Reference Bureau, 2011), available at www.prb.org.
Government of Uganda, UNGASS Country Progress Report 2008-2009 (New
York: UNAIDS, 2010), accessed at www.unaids.org, on May 26, 2011.
Francis Kagolo, “Uganda Trails in Family Planning Ratings,” May 1, 2001,
accessed at www.newvision.co.ug/PA/8/13/753615, on May 26, 2011.
Revenue Watch Institute, “Uganda Country Data,” accessed at www.
revenuewatch.org/our-work/countries/uganda/country-data, on May 26, 2011.
Trading Economics, “Gini Index in Uganda,” accessed at www.tradingeconomics.
com/ugagnea/gini-index-wb-data.html, on May 26, 2011.
Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) and Macro International Inc., Uganda
Demographic and Health Survey 2006 (Calverton, MD: Macro International Inc.,
2008).
Uganda Ministry of Finance, National Population Policy for Social Transformation
and Sustainable Development 2008 (Kampala: Uganda Ministry of Finance,
Planning and Economic Development, 2008).
“Uganda National Population Policy Action Plan 2011-2015,” accessed at
www.popsec.org/publications_19_220494683.pdf, on May 26, 2011.
UNFPA, Country Profi les for Population and Reproductive Health: Policy
Developments and Indicators 2009/2010 (New York: UNFPA, 2010).
UNICEF, “Statistics on Uganda,” accessed at www.unicef.org/infobycountry/
uganda_statistics.html, on May 26, 2011.
United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010
Revision (New York: United Nations, 2011), accessed at http://esa.un.org/unpd/
wpp/index.htm, on May 26, 2011.
World Health Organization, Mortality Country Fact Sheet—Uganda, 2006
(Geneva: World Health Organization, 2006), accessed at www.who.int/whosis/
mort/profi les/mort_afro_uga_uganda.pdf, on May 26, 2011.
GUATEMALA
Carl Haub and Toshiko Kaneda, 2011 World Population Data Sheet (Washington,
DC: Population Reference Bureau, 2011), available at www.prb.org.
Guatemala, SEGEPLAN, Guatemala Ley de Desarrollo Social y Poblacion (2001),
accessed at www.unicef.org, on May 26, 2011.
Ministerio de Salud Pública y Asistencia Social, Encuesta Nacional de Salud
Materno Infantil 2008 (ENSMI-2008/09) (Guatemala: Ministerio de Salud Pública
y Asistencia Social (MSPAS)/Instituto Nacional de EstadÃstica (INE)/Centros de
Control y Prevención de Enfermedades (CDC), 2010).
Trading Economics, “Gini Index in Guatemala,” accessed at www.
tradingeconomics.com/guatemala/gini-index-wb-data.html, on May 26, 2011.
UNICEF, “Statistics on Guatemala,” accessed at www.unicef.org/infobycountry/
guatemala_statistics.html, on May 26, 2011.
UNFPA, Country Profi les for Population and Reproductive Health: Policy
Developments and Indicators 2009/2010 (New York: UNFPA, 2010).
United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010
Revision (New York: United Nations, 2011), accessed at http://esa.un.org/unpd/
wpp/index.htm, on May 26, 2011.
World Health Organization, Mortality Country Fact Sheet—Guatemala, 2006,
accessed at www.who.int/whosis/mort/profi les/mort_amro_gtm_guatemala.pdf,
on May 26, 2011.
INDIA
Carl Haub and Toshiko Kaneda, 2011 World Population Data Sheet (Washington,
DC: Population Reference Bureau, 2011), available at www.prb.org.
Carl Haub and O.P. Sharma, “India's Population: Reconciling Change and
Tradition,” Population Bulletin 61, no 3 (2006).
India Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, National Population Policy 2000 (New
Delhi: Government of India, 2000).
Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India, “2011 Census,” accessed
at www.censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/census2011_paper1_states.html,
on May 15, 2011.
Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India (RGI), Sample Registration
System Statistical Report, various annual issues (New Delhi: RGI, various years).
Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India (RGI), Vital Rates of India
1971 to 1996 Based on The Sample Registration System (SRS) (New Delhi: RGI,
1998).
United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010
Revision (New York: United Nations, 2011), accessed at http://esa.un.org/unpd/
wpp/index.htm, on June 2, 2011.
GERMANY
Eurobarometer, accessed at http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm,
accessed on June 10, 2011.
“Family Allowances,” personal communication with German World Population
Fund, Hannover, Germany, June 7, 2011.
German Federal Statistics Offi ce, “2009 Age Distribution,” “Migration
Statistics,” “Projections,” and “Vital Statistics,” accessed at www.destatis.de, on
June 8, 2011.
United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010
Revision (New York: United Nations, 2011), accessed at http://esa.un.org/unpd/
wpp/index.htm, on June 21, 2011.
VISIT WWW.PRB.ORG TO FIND:
ARTICLES AND REPORTS. New data and analysis on topics as diverse as
gender, reproductive health, environment, and race/ethnicity.
GRAPHICS BANK. PowerPoint slides of population-related information,
ready for use in presentations or in the classroom.
PRB DISCUSS ONLINE. Available at http://discuss.prb.org. Join
online discussions with experts on newsworthy population, health,
and environment topics, trends, and issues. Transcripts of each
discussion are archived on PRB’s website.
DATAFINDER. PRB’s DataFinder website is getting a new look and new
features that will put a wealth of U.S. and world population data at
your fi ngertips. PRB’s new DataFinder will let you search hundreds of
indicators for thousands of places in the U.S. and around the world.
In addition to data from PRB’s World Population Data Sheet, we’ve
added new data from the 2010 U.S. Census and the U.S. Census
Bureau’s American Community Survey. The redesigned site lets you
easily create custom reports, charts, and maps to print, download,
and share. Available soon at www.prb.org/Datafi nder.aspx.
FOR EDUCATORS. Access online lesson plans, maps, and resources.
FOR JOURNALISTS. Highlights news releases, webcasts, and a
dictionary of population terms.
“PRB NEWS” AND “EVENTS & TRAINING.” Announces monthly policy
seminars, intern and fellowship applications, and workshops,
as well as news about PRB’s programs.
E-MAIL THIS. Send e-mails to others with links to PRB content.
COUNTRY PAGES. Scan up-to-date population, health, and environment
data for any of 210 countries, and fi nd links to related PRB articles
and reports.
WEBUPDATE. Sign up to receive e-mail announcements about new
web content and PRB-sponsored seminars and briefi ngs.
BECOME A MEMBER OF PRB
With new perspectives shaping public policies every day, you need to
be well informed. As a member of the Population Reference Bureau,
you will receive reliable information on United States and world
population trends—properly analyzed and clearly presented in readable
language. Each year you will receive two Population Bulletins, the annual
World Population Data Sheet, and complimentary copies of special
publications. We welcome you to join PRB today.
INDIVIDUAL $50
LIBRARY $75
CORPORATION $300
LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP $5,000
POPULATION REFERENCE BUREAU
1875 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 520
Washington, DC 20009
For faster service, call 800-877-9881
Or visit www.prb.org
Or e-mail popref@prb.org
Or fax 202-328-3937
Recent Population Bulletins
VOLUME 66 (2011)
No. 1 America’s Aging Population
by Linda A. Jacobsen, Mary Kent, Marlene Lee,
and Mark Mather
No. 2 The World at 7 Billion
by Carl Haub and James Gribble
VOLUME 65 (2010)
No. 1 U.S. Economic and Social Trends Since 2000
by Linda A. Jacobsen and Mark Mather
No. 2 World Population Highlights: Key Findings From PRB’s
2010 World Population Data Sheet
by Jason Bremner, Ashley Frost, Carl Haub, Mark Mather,
Karin Ringheim, and Eric Zuehlke
VOLUME 64 (2009)
No. 1 20th-Century U.S. Generations
by Elwood Carlson
No. 2 Urban Poverty and Health in Developing Countries
by Mark R. Montgomery
No. 3 World Population Highlights: Key Findings From PRB’s 2009
World Population Data Sheet
by Population Reference Bureau staff
1875 Connecticut Avenue., NW
Suite 520
Washington, DC 20009
202 483 1100 PHONE
202 328 3937 FAX
popref@prb.org EMAIL
POPULATION REFERENCE BUREAU
www.prb.org
THE WORLD AT 7 BILLIONA
This Population Bulletin looks at the four phases of the demographic
transition as descriptive of past and future population growth. We
highlight four countries to illustrate each phase and its implications
for human well-being:
• Uganda (high birth rate, fl uctuating death rate).
• Guatemala (declining birth and death rates).
• India (approaching replacement-level fertility).
• Germany (low or very low birth and death rates).
Population Bulletin: The World at 7 Billion
Download Population Bulletin: The World At 7 Billion (PDF: 1MB) This article is the introduction to Population Bulletin: The World At 7 Billion
(July 2011) Even though the world population growth rate has slowed from 2.1 percent per year in the late 1960s to 1.2 percent today, the size of the world's population has continued to increase—from 5 billion in 1987 to 6 billion in 1999, and to 7 billion in 2011.
The sixth billion and seventh billion were each added in record time—only 12 years. If the 2.1 percent growth rate from the 1960s had held steady, world population would be 8.7 billion today. It is entirely possible that the 8th billion will be added in 12 years as well, placing us squarely in the middle of history's most rapid population expansion.
This prospect seems to run counter to the prevailing belief that concern over population growth is a thing of the past, and that today's "population problem" is that birth rates are too low, not too high. In fact, there is some truth to that notion, depending on the region or country one is talking about. Today, most population growth is concentrated in the world's poorest countries—and within the poorest regions of those countries.
Figure 1
World Population Growth
Source: United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision, medium variant (2011).
The decrease in the world growth rate since the 1960s resulted from the realization on the part of some developing country governments and donors about unprecedented rates of population growth. It took all of human history to reach a world population of 1.6 billion at the beginning of the 20th century. Just one hundred years later, in 2000, the population total had reached 6.1 billion. How did this sudden, momentous change come about? To understand this change, we must first consider the demographic transition—the shifts in birth and death rates that historically have occurred over long periods of time. And then we must look at how very differently the transition has taken place in the world's developed and developing countries.
The transition describes two trends: the decline in birth rates as the need or desire for larger numbers of children diminished, and the decline in death rates as public health initiatives and modern medicine lengthened life.
In today's developed countries, this transition took many centuries, but in today's developing countries the changes are taking place in mere decades. In developed countries, birth and death rates tended to decline in parallel. Economies and societies changed during that time: Fewer families stayed on farms and the Industrial Revolution changed the way people lived and worked. But the transition's pace was still slow. In Sweden, for example, the slowly declining death and birth rates produced a population growth rate that has remained fairly stable over the past 250 years, rarely exceeding 1 percent per year.
In developing countries during the 20th century, major improvements in public health, the practice of modern medicine, and immunization campaigns spread quickly, particularly after World War II. Death rates dropped while birth rates stayed high. In Sri Lanka, infant mortality (under age 1) in the early 1950s is estimated to have been about 105 deaths per 1,000 live births. By the 1990s, the rate had dropped dramatically to below 20, due in large part to basic public health interventions such as immunizations, oral rehydration therapy, and birth spacing—all of which have contributed to lower rates of infant and child mortality.
With health conditions improving so rapidly, birth rates in developing countries did not have time to change as they did in Europe. This lag between the drop in death rates and the drop in birth rates produced unprecedented levels of population growth. In Kenya, infant mortality declined first—contributing to a rise in life expectancy at birth from about 42 years in the early 1950s to 56 years in the late 1970s—before fertility began a decline from the then-prevalent eight children per woman. During that same period, Kenya's annual population growth rate approached an unheard-of 4 percent. In the early 1950s, Pakistan had a life expectancy of 41 years and an average fertility rate of 6.6 children per woman. It was not until the early 1980s, when life expectancy had reached 59 years—due in large part to reductions in infant and child deaths—that Pakistan's fertility began to decrease and its population growth rate began to slow. These lengthy growth spurts resulted in the relatively new phenomenon of government policies aimed at lowering birth rates. Some governments, such as Indonesia and Thailand, were quite successful in lowering birth rates; many other governments have not been.
In addition to policies, social norms also contribute to how a country moves through the demographic transition. Although at times these norms conflict with public policies and programs, cultural factors such as age at marriage, desired family size, and gender roles all have a strong influence on fertility behavior.
Figure 2
The Classic Phases of the Demographic Transition
Notes: Natural increase or decrease is the difference between the numbers of births and deaths. The birth rate is the number of live births per 1,000 population in a given year. The death rate is the number of deaths per 1,000 population in a given year.
What might the future look like? It is fundamental to remember that all population projections, whether performed by a national statistical office, the United Nations, or the U.S. Census Bureau, are based on assumptions. Demographers make assumptions on the future course of the factors that determine population growth or decline: the birth rate and the death rate. When looking at projections, one needs to consider the assumptions before the results. In the case of developing countries, a typical assumption is that birth and death rates will follow the path of demographic transition from high birth and death rates to low ones—mirroring the transition as it played out in developed countries. But when, how, and whether that actually happens cannot be known. When considering a population projection for a developing country, several questions need to be posed. If fertility has not yet begun to decline significantly, when will it begin and why? This question would be appropriate for Niger and Uganda, whose fertility rates are still very high at 7.0 and 6.4, respectively. If fertility is declining, will it continue to do so or "stall" for a time at some lower level as it has in Jordan and Kenya? Finally, will a country's fertility really fall to as little as two children per woman or fewer, as is commonly expected?
This Population Bulletin looks at the four phases of the demographic transition as descriptive of past and future population growth. We highlight four countries to illustrate each phase and its implications for human well-being:
- Uganda (high birth rate, fluctuating death rate).
- Guatemala (declining birth and death rates).
- India (approaching replacement-level fertility).
- Germany (low or very low birth and death rates).
DisclaimerPRB welcomes comments from our readers. Although PRB is not responsible for the content of these comments, PRB reserves the right to delete, move, or edit messages that it deems abusive, defamatory, obscene, off-topic, or otherwise unacceptable. PRB reserves the right to cancel a user's account at our sole discretion.
Showing 6 comments
Sort by 
Subscribe by email 
Subscribe by RSS
Subscribe by email Subscribe by RSS 
No comments:
Post a Comment