China to end one-child policy

Elixir · 29 Oct 2015 at 11:07

China are increasing their one-child policy, in place since 1979, to a two child policy.

Better start re-estimating those world population forecasts! :eek:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-34665539

deuse · 29 Oct 2015 at 11:09

To late for that. There aren't enough girls in china now.
And if you want a GF you must have your own house\car and very good job.

scorza · 29 Oct 2015 at 11:16

I guess our new best friends have lots of man-made islands that need populating.

McPhee · 29 Oct 2015 at 11:20

deuse said:
To late for that. There aren't enough girls in china now.
And if you want a GF you must have your own house\car and very good job.

It's funny in some ways, isn't it? Many parents in China rejected female children. Those that didn't are almost getting the last laugh. Young women now have better prospects in the country than young men.

The Geezer · 29 Oct 2015 at 11:25

deuse said:
To late for that. There aren't enough girls in china now.
And if you want a GF you must have your own house\car and very good job.

Or fight British men so they can have their girls back :rolleyes:

Cosimo · 29 Oct 2015 at 12:11

Stimulating more than the economy...

MichaelAwkward · 29 Oct 2015 at 12:14

Elixir said:
Better start re-estimating those world population forecasts!

Eh?

Freakbro · 29 Oct 2015 at 12:16

MichaelAwkward said:
Eh?

Well, when the biggest single collective of the worlds population decide to double their reproduction rate, I think it's going to have a noticeable effect on the future predictions of the worlds overall population.

MichaelAwkward · 29 Oct 2015 at 12:21

Freakbro said:
Well, when the biggest single collective of the worlds population decide to double their reproduction rate, I think it's going to have a noticeable effect on the future predictions of the worlds overall population.

Incorrect. They're not doubling their reproduction rate (I'm not even sure what that is) and suggesting it'll have any effect on future prediction of world population shows a flawed understanding of demographic processes and the nature of projections.

UTmaniac · 29 Oct 2015 at 13:35

Over the last 25 years, with this Chinese policy in place, the world population has grown from ~5.2 billion to ~7.3 billion (the UK population alone has grown from ~56 million to ~65 million during this time).

Now while the punishment in China was sometimes very harsh for having more than one child, I would be in favour of some form of one child policy worldwide for at least one generation. For example in the UK, no extra child benefit for having more than one child.

I can still remember the eye-opening Horizon special documentary from ~5 years ago, presented by Sir David Attenborough...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oi9z1aZXBQ

Elixir · 29 Oct 2015 at 15:00

MichaelAwkward said:
Incorrect. They're not doubling their reproduction rate (I'm not even sure what that is) and suggesting it'll have any effect on future prediction of world population shows a flawed understanding of demographic processes and the nature of projections.

If we simplify it to Chinese population growth, the growth rate is obviously going to change when increasing the 1 child policy to a 2 child policy.

dl8860 · 29 Oct 2015 at 15:03

MichaelAwkward said:
Incorrect. They're not doubling their reproduction rate (I'm not even sure what that is) and suggesting it'll have any effect on future prediction of world population shows a flawed understanding of demographic processes and the nature of projections.

Care to explain why it won't have any effect rather than just being uppity? If 400m people weren't born due to this policy, surely its removal will mean that future growth will change as a result?

linktoinsanity · 29 Oct 2015 at 15:21

Good. Was a stupid rule anyway.

MichaelAwkward · 29 Oct 2015 at 15:26

Elixir said:
If we simplify it to Chinese population growth, the growth rate is obviously going to change when increasing the 1 child policy to a 2 child policy.

Why? People had 2 children under the 1 child policy, others had none. Some had more. The effect of the One Child Policy on fertility is a highly debated topic with no clear answer.

dl8860 said:
Care to explain why it won't have any effect rather than just being uppity? If 400m people weren't born due to this policy, surely its removal will mean that future growth will change as a result?

The widely quoted figure of 400m not being born due to the One Child Policy is the result of a misunderstanding in the media. When the policy was introduced, China's TFR was already approaching replacement level. The previous decade of trauma had taken care of that, and the continued development of living standards throughout the 70s and 80s ensured it would continue to fall.

The trouble with projecting populations is that population momentum is a fickle mistress. Future growth may change as a result. It may indeed increase. However, it may also decrease. The fact that the government no longer wants to fine or punish those who had more than 1 child doesn't mean that every female of fertile age in China will suddenly increase their fertility, just as the fact that the government suddenly decided it wanted to fine and punish those who had more than 1 child didn't mean that every female of fertile age in China suddenly reduced their fertility.

A micro-level process as complex as fertility has far more determinants and variables, despite what governments (not only China) like to think.

In many examples, the biggest determinant of fertility is female education. Who'd thought that teaching women and allowing them to expand their horizons would mean that they didn't want to bear as many children?

There are some who make the point that the One Child Policy could have actually increased fertility for some women, and if you think about it, that makes sense. If children become valuable (because the government says you're only allowed one), then of course couples will think more carefully about having children. Those that hadn't planned to before may decide to, to take advantage of a surplus of men, for example.

Elixir · 29 Oct 2015 at 15:37

MichaelAwkward said:
Massive overcomplication of a very simple more = more situation

My comment in the OP was exaggeration, but if you think that this won't lead to a relative increase in population growth then you're wrong.

MichaelAwkward · 29 Oct 2015 at 15:38

Elixir said:
My comment in the OP was exaggeration, but if you think that this won't lead to a relative increase in population growth then you're wrong.

It's not a more = more situation. I'm not wrong.

Why do you think that China has changed it's policy? It hasn't got enough young people. It's population structure is becoming top heavy. Give it another decade and they'll try paying people to have children, like they do in other countries with shrinking populations.

China's fertility has continued to fall despite the One Child Policy. Fertility isn't limited by government restrictions. It's a complex equation of determinants at multiple scales. It isn't a tap.

Elixir · 29 Oct 2015 at 15:53

MichaelAwkward said:
It's not a more = more situation. I'm not wrong.

Why do you think that China has changed it's policy? It hasn't got enough young people. It's population structure is becoming top heavy. Give it another decade and they'll try paying people to have children, like they do in other countries with shrinking populations.

China's fertility has continued to fall despite the One Child Policy. Fertility isn't limited by government restrictions. It's a complex equation of determinants at multiple scales. It isn't a tap.

The fertility has fallen because of the one child policy, not despite it. You make it sound like people expected the one child policy to increase fertility. :confused:

One child policy -> ageing population -> falling fertility.

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/china-population/

Before one child policy introduced:
High fertility, low (and decreasing) median age, increasing growth rate

After one child policy introduced:
Decrease in fertility, high (and increasing) median age, decreasing growth rate

MichaelAwkward · 29 Oct 2015 at 15:58

And just to highlight the reality:

https://www.google.co.uk/publicdata..._tfrt_in&idim=country:CHN:USA:JPN&hl=en&dl=en

See how, despite the One Child Policy coming into force in 1980, TFR increased in the early 80s? And it's still way above 1. When the OCP was introduced, TFR had already decreased massively! From a high of 6.16 in 1965, to 2.71 in 1980.

To show the importance of population momentum, since Chinese TFR reached replacement level in 1993, it's still added 186~ million people since then.

If you look at population growth rate:

https://www.google.co.uk/publicdata...USA:JPN&ifdim=region&hl=en_US&dl=en&ind=false

You can see how it's related to TFR. Look at the value for 1980 when the OCP came into force. Basically no effect (unless you're suggesting it increased because of the OCP?

)

EDIT: See above. Fertility did not fall because of the OCP. It fell because of the massive changes in Chinese society, living standards, education, etc, etc. over the same period, the same as in every other country.

MichaelAwkward · 29 Oct 2015 at 16:13

Elixir said:
The fertility has fallen because of the one child policy, not despite it. You make it sound like people expected the one child policy to increase fertility.

No, I'm using your logic.

I'm saying that despite the One Child Policy, Chinese women are deciding to have less than 1 child (hence it's current TFR below replacement level). Your logic is that when a government dictates that women are allowed x number of children, all women will do so. That couldn't be further from the truth.

Elixir · 29 Oct 2015 at 16:24

MichaelAwkward said:
No, I'm using your logic.

I'm saying that despite the One Child Policy, Chinese women are deciding to have less than 1 child (hence it's current TFR below replacement level). Your logic is that when a government dictates that women are allowed x number of children, all women will do so. That couldn't be further from the truth.

My logic is not that all women will do so, my logic is it will have an effect on the average number of children women have.