MICHAEL SPECTER
STOCKHOLM,
Sweden - Mia Hulton is a true woman of the late 20th century. Soft-spoken,
well-educated and thoughtful, she sings Renaissance music in a choral group,
lives quietly with the man she loves and works like a demon seven days a week.
At
33, she is in full pursuit of an academic career. And despite the fact that she
lives in Sweden -- which provides more support for women who want families than
any other country -- Ms. Hulton doesn't see how she can possibly make room in
her life for babies. Someday maybe, but certainly not soon.
"There
are times when I think perhaps I will be missing something important if I don't
have a child," she said slowly, trying to put her complicated desires into
simple words. "But today women finally have so many chances to have the
life they want. To travel and work and learn. It's exciting and demanding. I
just find it hard to see where the children would fit in."
Ms.
Hulton would never consider herself a radical, but she has become a cadre in
one of the fundamental social revolutions of the century.
Driven
largely by prosperity and freedom, millions of women throughout the developed
world are having fewer children than ever before. They stay in school longer,
put more emphasis on work and marry later. As a result, birth rates in many
countries are now in a rapid, sustained decline.
Never
before -- except in times of plague, war and deep economic depression -- have
birth rates fallen so low, for so long.
What
was once regarded universally as a cherished goal -- incredibly low birth rates
-- have in the industrial world at least suddenly become a cause for alarm.
With life expectancy rising at the same time that fertility drops, most
developed countries may soon find themselves with lopsided societies that will
be nearly impossible to sustain: a large number of elderly and not enough young
people working to support them. The change will affect every program -- from
health care and education to pension plans and military spending -- that
requires public funds.
There
is no longer a single country in Europe where people are having enough children
to replace themselves when they die. Italy recently became the first nation in
history where there are more people over the age of 60 than there are under the
age of 20. This year Germany, Greece and Spain will probably all cross the same
eerie divide.
"You
can look at this in a philosophical way," said Jean-Claude Chesnais,
director of research at France's National Institute for the Study of
Demography. No country has worried more, or more publicly, about the
implications of a low birth rate. Like so many other European nations, uneasy
officials there see in current trends a world where populations of color --
from Africa, India, Asia -- are still growing, while their own is struggling to
keep from shrinking.
"Europe
is old and rigid," Chesnais said. "So it is fading. You can see that
as the natural cycle of civilization, perhaps something inevitable. And in many
ways, low population growth is wonderful. Certainly to control fertility in
China, Bangladesh, much of Africa -- that is an absolute triumph. Yet we must
look beyond simple numbers. And here I think Europe may be in the vanguard of a
very profound trend. Because you cannot have a successful world without
children in it."
THE
OUTLOOK: Worldwide Drop Confounds Experts
The
effects of the shift will resonate far beyond Europe. Last year Japan's
fertility rate -- the number of children born to the average woman in a
lifetime -- fell to 1.39, the lowest level it has ever reached. In the United
States, where a large pool of new immigrants helps keep the birth rate higher
than in any other prosperous country, the figure is still slightly below an
average of 2.1 children per woman -- the magic number needed to keep the
population from starting to shrink.
Even
in the developing world, where overcrowding remains a major cause of
desperation and disease, the pace of growth has slowed almost everywhere. Since
1965, according to United Nations population data, the birth rate in the Third
World has been cut in half -- from 6 children per woman to 3. In the last
decade alone, for example, the figure in Bangladesh has fallen from 6.2
children per woman to 3.4. That's a bigger drop than in the previous two
centuries.
Little
more than 25 years have passed since a famous set of computer studies sponsored
by the Club of Rome, the global think tank, showed that population pressures
would devastate the world by the mid-1990s.
Nothing
of the kind has come to pass. The authors of that dire forecast could not have
foreseen 30 years ago that women in countries like Italy would by now be
producing an average of fewer than 1.2 children, the lowest figure ever
recorded among humans. Or that the Berlin Wall would disappear, creating
economic uncertainties that have frozen the birth rate from the Black Forest to
Vladivostok.
In
a world where women work more than ever before and contraception remains
readily available, it is hard to find somebody who believes that someday soon
large families will make a comeback.
"I'm
thinking of having children in the future, perhaps two," said Roberta
Lenzi, 27, who is single and studies political science in Bologna, Italy, the
city with the lowest birthrate in the world.
"I'm
an only child and if I could, I'd have more than one child. But most couples I
know wait until their 30s to have children. People want to have their own life,
they want to have a successful career. When you see life in these terms,
children are an impediment. At most you'll have one, more are rare."
There
has long been an assumption that low birth rates were better than high birth
rates. Fewer people put less strain on the resources of the planet. And anyway,
as a country becomes richer its people always have fewer children. If more
people are needed, immigration can be a solution -- and in many places,
specialists now think it's the only one left. But Europe, unlike the United
States, has been resistant to immigration.
"What
is happening now has simply never happened before in the history of the
world," said Nicholas Eberstadt, a demographer based at the American
Enterprise Institute in Washington. "This is terra incognita. If these
trends continue, in a generation or two there may be countries where most
people's only blood relatives will be their parents."
"Would
it be a lonelier and sadder world?" he continued. "Yes, I think it
would. But that might simply be the limits of my own imagination. Frankly, it's
just impossible to really conceive of what this world will be like in 50 years.
But when you come to the end of one era it's almost always impossible to see
your way into the next."
THE
WATERSHED: Birth Incentives No Longer Work
Perhaps
no country has tried harder to change the future than Sweden.
Decades
ago, with its birth rate dwindling, Sweden decided to support family life with
a public generosity found nowhere else. Couples who both work and have small
children enjoy cash payments, tax incentives and job leaves combined with
incredible flexibility to work part time for as many as eight years after a
child's birth.
Sweden
spends 10 times as much as Italy or Spain on programs intended to support
families. It spends nearly three times as much per person on such programs as
the United States. So there should be no surprise that Sweden, despite its
wealth, had the highest birth rate in Europe by 1991.
With
10 million mostly middle-class people, Sweden may have little in common with
any other. But its experience clearly suggested that if countries wanted more
babies they would have to pay for them, through tax incentives, parental leave
programs and family support. At least that's what nearly all the experts
thought it showed.
"We
were a model for the world," said Marten Lagergren, under secretary in the
Ministry of Social Health and Welfare, and the man responsible for figuring out
what is happening with Sweden's birth rate. "They all came to examine us.
People thought we had some secret. Unfortunately, it seems that we do
not."
Sometime
after 1990, the bottom dropped out of Sweden's baby boom. Between then and
1995, the birth rate fell sharply, from 2.12 to 1.6. Most people blamed the
economy, which had turned sour and forced politicians to trim -- ever so
slightly -- the country's benefit program. It is normal for people to put off
having children when the future looks doubtful, so the change made sense.
But
then, the economy got better and the birth rate fell faster and farther than
ever. By March of this year the figure for Sweden was the almost same as that
in Japan -- 1.42. And though it's too soon to say, officials here think it
might be falling still.
"Nobody
on earth can tell you what is going on here," said Mac Murray, a
philosopher trained in statistics who is in charge of strategic planning for
the nation's school system. "Sometimes I think it must be just a blip --
we've had them before -- and everything will turn out the way we expect it to.
But I guess I don't really believe that. I believe we are seeing a fundamental
shift in human behavior. We have lived for 200 years on the idea of progress.
That the future will be better than the past. It's a universal belief -- not
just in our little country.
"But
I think those days have ended now. I have no data to support my views. But
young people now seem to have a sense that living for today is about the best
they can do."
It
is Murray's job to plan for the material implications of these changes. But
it's not going to be easy. Sweden has 6,000 schools serving children from the
ages of 6 to 18. This year there are more than 130,000 8-year-olds in the
system -- 1990 was a boom year for births. They need classrooms and teachers
and all the support that goes with them.
But
in just three years the 8-year-old population will shrink drastically, to
75,000. "So what are we doing?" Murray asked rhetorically. "We
are recruiting more teachers now than ever before and giving them raises that
nobody else can hope to have. Have you ever tried to tell a politician to plan
for something that's 20 years away?" It is a problem felt across Europe as
the elderly supplant the young.
There
used to be many more young people than old people in the world. Right now there
are roughly equal numbers. But by 2050, according to data supplied by the
European Union, there will be nearly twice as many old people as young people.
Yet most governments programs still encourage people to retire early.
"The
whole system is backward," said Massimo Livi-Bacci, professor of demography
at the University of Florence. "In Italy we are paying people to retire at
an earlier age than ever before even though we know they are now going to live
longer than ever before. We have the best pension system in Europe and the
worst system for family support. Rich old people supported by the labor of poor
young people. No wonder nobody wants to have a family."
THE
PERCEPTION: The Good Life Is Top Priority
Ask
dozens of people, and few of them even realize that the birth rate is dropping
all across Europe. When they do think about it, most people see it as somebody
else's problem.
"I
am supposed to have an extra child to help the system?" said Jan Delaror,
a recently married marketing expert for Erikkson AB, the Swedish telephone
giant. Delaror says he has no children but expects to "if and when it
makes sense, not because the government thinks it's a good idea."
Delaror
was standing in the middle of the Sture Gallery, one of Stockholm's many
exclusive malls. He was trying to decide whether to buy a box of Havana cigars,
for several hundred dollars, or to wait until he traveled to London in a few
weeks.
"It's
not as easy to have children these days as it once was," he said, voicing
a commonly held belief. "The sacrifices are not always acceptable."
In
surveys, young couples almost always report that they want two children -- but
many also mention the future and their concerns for maintaining a good life. It
doesn't seem to matter that materially at least -- people in the developed
world live better now than they ever have. There is a perception -- shared even
in vastly different countries like Sweden and Italy -- that what was possible
for previous generations is not possible for this one.
"I'd
like to have a child but my work situation is unstable," said Francesca
Casotti, 29, a lawyer in Rome who has been married nine months. "I'm at
the office all day and it is difficult to think about having a child. People my
age want their freedom. They see children as a burden, as an inconvenience. I'd
like to have a stable job and I'd like to have more than one child. But there
is the economic question."
"Children
cost more than they used to," she continued. "Today you have to bring
them to the pool and you need to get a nanny, and they have to learn a foreign
language. Children have more needs. Parents just didn't think of all these
things before."
Not
everyone agrees, of course, that the need for pool memberships or foreign
language tuition is responsible for such a remarkable drop in birth rates.
"We
have become so selfish, so greedy," said Ninni Lundblad, 31, a biologist
who works in Stockholm. Ms. Lundblad has no children but hopes that will soon
change.
"Did
your parents sit down with a spreadsheet and figure out whether they could
afford to have two or three children?" she said, her bright eyes widening
at the absurdity of her own statement. No, of course not. Did this ever happen
before anywhere? No, of course not. We live in the richest place and at the
best time, and everyone is worrying whether they can afford to take their next
vacation or buy a boat. It's kind of sickening, really."
THE
EPICENTER: Bologna Focuses Help on Elderly
If
there were a ground zero in the epidemic of low fertility it would have to be
in the northern Italian city of Bologna, where women give birth to an average
of fewer than one child (in 1997, the number was 0.8). The city has more highly
educated women than any other in the country. Incomes average more than $16,500
a year. Produce is rich and cheap, food is wonderful and living is generally
easy.
The
local population has dropped steadily for two decades, but 1,500 people turn 75
every year. Fewer children and more elderly mean a greater need for health care
programs and specialized housing and transportation. But that does nothing to
help or encourage young couples to have families.
This
year the budgets for retirees and children are roughly the same in Bologna, a
city of 375,000. Next year 5 percent will be shifted from the young to the old.
And that will happen every year for the next decade as the city becomes filled
with elderly and starved for children.
How
did Italy, a largely Roman Catholic country that has always been seen as the
stereotypical land of big, close-knit families, became the place with the
world's lowest level of fertility?
"Prosperity
has strangled us," said Dr. Pierpaolo Donati, professor of sociology at
the University of Bologna and a leading Catholic intellectual. "Comfort is
now the only thing anybody believes in," he said. "The ethic of
sacrifice for a family -- one of the basic ideas of human societies -- has
become a historical notion. It is astonishing."
Where
Donati sees selfishness, however, others see women who have been placed under
monumental stress. To some minds, the women of Italy -- and of other southern
European countries like Spain and Portugal -- have the worst of both worlds.
They now work for a living in record numbers, but tremendous obstacles remain
for balancing work and family life.
Far
more than in places like Sweden, France, or even the United States, the Italian
man still seeks a wife who will make his dinner every night and who takes
complete charge of the family. Women have responded by realizing that with only
24 hours in each day something has to give. Children seem to have become that
something.
Whatever
the reasons, the changes, and what they will mean, are difficult to ignore. In
20 years, at present birth rates, for every child under the age of 5 in Bologna
there will be 25 people over the age of 50 -- and 10 of them will be older than
80.
"It
is impossible to have a human society built like this," Donati said.
"Something simply has to change."
Walter
Vitali agrees. The mayor of the longtime leftish town -- its nickname Red
Bologna still stands -- Vitali is a former Communist who likes to invoke the
name of the city's cardinal when talking about population figures.
"The
cardinal says our lack of interest in families symbolizes our loss of faith in
ourselves," he said. "It's sort of hard to disagree with that. Let's
face it, something is going on here that is very troubling."
But
exactly how troubling is it? And for whom? The birth rate is dropping, but
there are still plenty of people on the earth. As a result, the world's total
population is still growing rapidly, and that won't stop for at least another
generation -- when more than two thirds of all countries are at or below the
replacement level. The fertility rate of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, where
population growth is viewed as weapon of war against Israel, has soared to 8.8
children per woman. The 45 nations of East, West and Middle Africa average more
than six births per woman.
Right
now, the populations of Europe (including Russia) and Africa are about the
same. If trends continue as they are now, by 2050 Africans will outnumber
Europeans three to one. Between now and then, India will add more people to its
labor force than currently live in all of Europe.
And
in that same year, half of all residents of Italy will be over the age of 50.
Half of the residents of Iraq will be under 25.
"The
truth is there doesn't have to be a demographic catastrophe," said Lalla
Golfarelli, the head of family planning in Bologna. "Look at a map. Look
at Europe on that map. We are all only two to four hours away by boat or plane
away from many countries with many people. Open the gates. Immigration can
solve this problem. If people would just open their minds they would realize
there are enough people on this earth to go around."
In
other words, either the developed world adapts -- and that probably means large
waves of immigration -- or it gets pushed aside.
"The
world is hardly about to disappear," said Jan Hoem, head of the
demographics faculty at the University of Stockholm. "It's just becoming a
very different place."
July
10, 1998
No comments:
Post a Comment