BRITAIN’S “DECLINING” POPULATION

Manawatu Times, Volume 61, Issue 189, 12 August 1936, Page 16

BRITAIN’S “DECLINING” POPULATION

14TOST PEOPLE’ have heard of one or other of the so-called “estimates” of the future population of Britain and are aware that the population is likely to decline. But there is some misapprehension about the nature of these “estimates,” says Mr Carr-Saunders in the London “Observer.” W T kat they are may be illustrated by supposing that there are so many counters in a bag, that a certain number of counters is added and acertain number substracted every year; under these circumstances, we can calculate how many counters there will be in the bag a given numbers of years hence. If for counters now in the bag we read present population, if for additions we read births and for substructions deaths, we can understand how these “estimates” are made. ■». Since iu a country such as this the birth-rate and the death rate are not subject to violent fluctuations, wo can calculate the population some two or three decades ahead with some degree of confidence. But, when it comes to five or sis decades ahead, it is increasingly a matter of speculation what the annual additions and substructions will be. When these “estimates” aro continued to cover dates far ahead they aro apt to be taken merely as illustrations of what would happen under certain circumstances. Thus Dr. Enid Charles has shown that, if additions and substructions were continued on the level of 1933, the population would

birth rate estimates

Small Family Habit

be reduced to half its size in a century from now. What follows from such an “estimate” is not that the population will be halved in a century, but that things are now set towards a hoavy decline which will occur unless the average number of children in a family is increased. There can bo few people who would maintain that the prospect of a decline of the population to half its present size in a century is to be welcomed. There aro some, it is true, who would welcome some decline in numbers because they believe that it would reduce unemployment. But this belief cannot be substantiated; those who hold it might be invited to reflect that the United States, with tlioir immense resources and only about forty persons per square mile as against our 700 or so per square mile, have relatively more unemployment than Britain. On the other hand there aro reasons why this prospect should cause apprehension. It may suffice to mention one of them. Variation in rates of growth of population between countries are likely to cause international difficul-

ties, and these difficulties will become more acute when the population of some countries, and especially when the population of a country which has assumed large colonial responsibilities, begins to decline. Countries with expanding populations, whether actually over-populated or not, tend to think that they are destined to inherit, if not the earth, at least the possessions of their less dynamic neighbours.. It may be noted that not only the home country, but also Australia and New Zealand are failing to keep their reproduction rates up to replacement rate, and that in consequence the population of these Dominions, unless much augmented by immigration, may presently also begin to decline. There can bo little doubt that under these circumstances the conditions within the Empiro will be an unsettling factor in world politics. There is only one way to avoid a serious decline in population, and that is to increase the average size of the family. But wo can do little that is likely to be effective unless we can have a clearer understanding of the

reasons for the present small size of family. We aro aware of many reasons but we know hardly anything about their relative importance. There are medical reasons, fear of pregnancy, and of maternal mortality; there are other fears,' such as of unemployment and of war. There aro economic reasons, the fact that the fewer the children the more parents can do for them. So far as these reasons are important, something could be done in many cases by policies carefully designed to lessen their cogency. But it may be that other reasons are still more important; it may be that even in the absence of economic pressure and ot apprehensions ot any kind of parental instinct is satisfied by one or two children; but if one and two-child families become the rule, the population will decline to extinction. Ihe remedy in this case lies not in social policy so much as in arousing the social conscience. This is why discussion is welcome; tor people must become aware that they are endangering the future of the country and perhaps the peace of the world before they can be expected to play their part in contributing to the recruitment of the population of the future. The time is now ripe for an inquiry into the whole matter. If things are allowed to drift the small family habit may become so firmly set that it will be very difficult to raise the reproduction rate to a replacement rate, that is to say to increase the average size of the family to a point where the population will remain stable.