|
|
 |
| The
most-active population (aged 20-34) in China, India, Europe and the United
States of America, 1950, 2010, 2050 and 2100 (thousands) |
|
 |
|
Source: United Nations,
Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population
Division (2011): World Population Prospects, the 2010 Revision. New York. See:
www.unpopulation.org
Notes: Due to limitation of space country names were abbreviated.
China stands for People's Republic of China, USA stands for United States of America. |
|
This table encapsulates one of the most
striking messages on this web site: It summarizes the estimated and
projected size of the most-active population aged 20 to 34
in China, India, Europe and the United States of America for the
years 1950, 2010, 2050 and 2100. The data are from the most recent
revision of the World Population Prospects, released by the United
Nations Population Division on May 4, 2011. |
|
In 1950, China's most-active population
(aged 20 to 34) was in the range of 126 million - which was only a little
large than the most-active population in Europe, where the population aged 20 to 34 was 122
million. However, by 2010, China's most-active population has
increased to 313 million, while Europe's most-active population has
increased to only to about 158 million. In other words, China has
currently about twice as many people in the most-active age groups
between 20 and 34 than Europe. There can be no doubt that this, at
least partially, explains the diverging economic trends between
Europe and China. |
|
India's most-active population (aged
20-34) increased even more than in China: Between 1950 and 2100 it
more than tripled from some 91 million to 314 million. |
|
In the United States of America, the
most-active population (aged 20-34) increased from 37 to about 64
million between 1950 and 2010. |
|
Future trends in the size of the most-active population very much depend on future trends in fertility -
most dramatically in India and China: If India's fertility trends
turn out as projected, its most-active population would decline
by roughly 55 million - from 314 million in 2010 to 259 million in
2100. However, if India's fertility would decline only a little bit
slower than the medium projection (half-a-child child less per
woman), the most-active population would increase by 178
million. If the fertility would remain constant (and not decline, as
projected), India's most-active population age 20 to 34 would
actually increase to more than 680 million! It is hard to imagine
how India could create employment opportunities for such a huge wave
of young adults in their most productive age. |
|
Europe, on the other hand, has the
opposite problem: In the 48 countries that are classified as
European, the number of people age 20 to 34 will decline by almost
44 million over the 21st century - from 158 million in 2010 to 114
million in 2100. But this assumes that Europe's fertility would
increase ( ! ) towards the replacement fertility of 2.1 children
per woman. If average level of fertility would remain constant at
current levels in each of the European countries (an assumptions
which is not completely unreasonable), then the population in the
most-active age group between 20 and 34 would decline much more
dramatically: first to 105 million in 2050 and then to less than 70
million in 2100. If that would happen, then Europe's most-active
population would have declined by 88 million between 2010 and the
end of the 21st century. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
This section was updated on 8 June 2011 |
|