Opinion: Why we should worry about depopulation

When the world starts spinning into its first era of depopulation since the bubonic plague, the United States could be in a unique position to thrive and remain a dominant power.

Nicholas Eberstadt was hardly being radical when he expressed the first part of that (paraphrased) thought in the November/December issue of Foreign Affairs. The Henry Wendt Chair in political economy at the American Enterprise Institute, he understands what demographers and social scientists worldwide now see as inevitable — every corner of the world except sub-Saharan Africa is now, or soon will be, losing population.

Too many people are stuck in the old mindset that views overpopulation as a pending catastrophe. That has always been a false narrative, given how humans are thriving as never before despite steady population growth. But now, the premise of that worry no longer exists. Within a few decades, the world will begin shrinking. Unlike with the plague, this will be entirely by choice.

As for the second part of that opening sentence, Eberstadt makes a good argument. The type of freedom and opportunity the United States offers will help it to thrive in such a world, at least for a while. But only if future generations embrace immigration.

That’s a big “if,” but an important one.

What is less uncertain are the ways governments and economies could collapse in a shrinking world.

Earlier this month, the Deseret News reported on a talk delivered at Harvard University by Jesús Fernández-Villaverde, an economist and professor at the University of Pennsylvania. He described the economic challenges of depopulation: the collapse of Social Security systems, a rising national debt that can’t be retired, a lack of state funds and closed schools.

Every economic problem facing the United States becomes tougher as people retire, leaving fewer workers behind to pay for government programs, budget deficits and a growing national debt. But that debt doesn’t stop in Washington. It includes everyday Americans with credit cards, home loans and student loans, among other things.

Eberstadt approaches this with a note of optimism. “Humanity bestrides the planet, explores the cosmos, and continues to reshape itself because humans are the world’s most inventive, adaptable animal,” he wrote. Then he adds this caution:

“But it will take more than a bit of inventiveness and adaptability to cope with the unintended future consequences of the family and fertility choices being made today.”

Eberstadt is clear that we’re not ready for this future. Some other countries have seen the freight train of depopulation on the horizon and have tried government incentives and programs to spur marriage and childbearing. These have not worked. People today “increasingly prize autonomy, self-actualization, and convenience,” he said. “And children, for their many joys, are quintessentially inconvenient.”

Why is he optimistic about the United States? First, our fertility rates, while still below replacement levels, are higher than most East Asian and European countries. Second, and despite current political battles, we have “strong immigrant inflows.”

“Thanks in large measure to immigration, the United States is on track to account for a growing share of the rich world’s labor force, youth, and highly educated talent,” he wrote. “No other population on the planet is better placed to translate population potential into national power — and it looks as if that demographic edge will be at least as great in 2050.”

Eberstadt believes the world could continue to thrive with a shrinking population, but only with “substantial reforms in government institutions, the corporate sector, social organizations, and personal norms and behavior.”

That’s hardly a recipe that brings hope, and, as he cautions, “far less heroic reform programs fail all the time in the current world, doomed by poor planning, inept leadership, and thorny politics.”

Despite the world having recently reached a population of 8 billion, demographers believe the decline will begin in the mid-to-late years of this century.

South Korea is the leading indicator. Eberstadt notes that South Korea is expected to have three deaths for every one birth by 2050. Under current trends, it could lose 95% of its population within a century.

China’s fertility rate is more than 50% below replacement level, which is why it abandoned its one-child policies. Russia’s rate has been below replacement for more than 50 years. Certainly, depopulation will affect militaries and government regimes, as well.

In my opinion, it could lead governments to close their borders to keep workers and potential soldiers from leaving.

As Fernández-Villaverde said at Harvard, “We’re going to start losing a lot of population, and it’s going to be very fast, much faster than anyone can think.”

It’s way past time to abandon old-fashioned notions of overpopulation and begin addressing this looming, and seemingly unstoppable, new global reality.