[lorenzo]

I found this interesting article on Eurekalert, dating back from 2004. For the experts it contains nothing new, but it's a real anthropology professor speaking, and not an amateur. So it might be useful to quote her during more formal debates.

The professor offers a surprising hypothesis, which goes against what many of us think about demographic trends as they correlate to economic wealth.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')ublic release date: 12-Feb-2004

Contact: David F. Salisbury
david.salisbury@vanderbilt.edu
615-343-6803
Vanderbilt University

Anthropologist proposes link between per capita energy use and fertility rate

As world reserves of oil and natural gas dwindle over the coming decades – a prospect predicted by many energy experts – the rate at which the people in most societies around the world have babies is likely to drop precipitously as well.

That is the prediction of anthropologist Virginia Abernethy, professor emerita of psychiatry at Vanderbilt University, speaking on Feb. 13 in the symposium "From the Ground Up: The Importance of Soil in Sustaining Civilization" at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science held in Seattle."

[Sys1]

Well, first, beside the subject itself

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')numerous geologists, physicists and computer scientists have calculated that petroleum and liquid natural gas production will begin to plateau and then decline within five to 10 years,"

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nthropologist proposes link betw. energy use & fertility

[NTBKtrader]

This thesis is totally off!!! People have MORE childen during bad economic times because children become their social security and also for use to work on a farm. Africa has the highest birth rate because it is the poorest (and getting poorer) and heavy on farming.

Example: Per her theory British women would be having far more babies right now because of better economic outlook than Ethiopian women right now but the OPPOSITE is true.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html

British Birth Rate:
10.78 births/1,000 population (2005 est.)

Ethiopian Birth Rate:
38.61 births/1,000 population (2005 est.)

IN fact, take any industrialized country versus any non-industrialized and the births will be higher for the non-industrialized.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NTBKtrader', 'I')N fact, take any industrialized country versus any non-industrialized and the births will be higher for the non-industrialized.

[NTBKtrader]

Then you agree with me rhb?

She said "a future marked by declining energy use per capita may be the ultimate driver of worldwide declines in fertility," she wrote. "

Which I reiterate will be incorrect because people will start moving back to the country from the cities in order to become more self sufficient. People will farm and ranch more. Social Security will go bust. Therefore as declining energy use comes into play people will be having more children to work on the farms/ranches just like the old days as well as to replace the lack of social security. Children will always be more likely to take care of mom and dad then the gumment...especially if you have more than one or two.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NTBKtrader', 'T')hen you agree with me rhb?

[elroy]

I think there's a much easier to establish link between wealth, unhealthy living style, and infertility. All this inactivity isn't good for ones body, all these chemicals in our food, our air, our water, isn't good either.

[nero]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NTBKtrader', 'T')his thesis is totally off!!! People have MORE childen during bad economic times because children become their social security and also for use to work on a farm. Africa has the highest birth rate because it is the poorest (and getting poorer) and heavy on farming.

[lorenzo]

I think the idea that generally poorer people have more children, is too general. It's correct, but too general.

What the professor is describing is the adaptation of people's family planning behavior in a "conscious" way, based on what they think the future will look like. This is true also for poorer societies; anthropologists have found long ago that family units in Africa are highly flexible when it comes to family planning; when resource constraints are on the horizon, African women postpone making new children. So this is even true in information-poor societies and in less industrialized societies. (One would expect the phenomenon of conscious family planning based on projections of what the future will look like only to occur in societies where there are clear information sources with which to construct such a notion of "the future".)

So it seems that in modern societies (and nowadays, all societies belong to modernity), the simple trend is one of making less children when the future looks grim, and more when it looks bright.

But this is only part of the story. The professor is describing a *conscious* process, and it probably only holds for mid- to short-term trends. Otherwise the phenomenon of the aging societies in Japan and Europe can't be explained. The "greying" of Japan and Europe is not just an after-effect of the baby-boom; it is a true longterm decline in fertility and clearly it correlates with higher wealth.

So I'm not sure if the professor is correct on all fronts.

But suppose the theory of the "flexibility" of people's conscious family planning behavior is correct. Then this poses a problem for those who predict a violent "die-off" in the light of Peak Oil. It may well be possible that people simply decide, very quickly, to make fewer children when the signs of energy-scarcity become overt and clear. This would then be a natural, smooth and planned way to reduce populations; a bit like a kind of reversed but still very dynamic and straightforward demand & supply logic: less energy, fewer kids, - more energy, more kids. Much depends of course on the speed at which fertility rates can be consciously reduced. Maybe Peak Oil will arrive so quickly and there will be such a fast decline in prosperity, that the conscious reduction of populations will have no effect.

Anyway, I think this hypothesis should be taken seriously by all those who predict a vicious "die-off". It may well be the case that things will happen more smoothly.

[NTBKtrader]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hen the economy is growing strongly fertility increases. When the economy is doing relatively poorly fertility decreases.

[lorenzo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NTBKtrader', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hen the economy is growing strongly fertility increases. When the economy is doing relatively poorly fertility decreases.

[nero]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hen by that logic the US Germany and Japan, the three strongest economies for the last few decades, would have a higher birth rate but that is in fact very untrue. Japan for instance is not even at replacement level and I don't think Germany is either. The US probably wouldn't be if it weren't for immigrants. Now compare that to Africa where many are getting poorer the birthrate is far higher. What gives? Reality is not matching up to the thesis. I'm sure there was a time during the great depression (a hard crash) that people put off having children but that is not the norm.

[rogerhb]

What about the baby-booms 9 months after power-cuts? Hm.

[lyrl]

I agree that's she's right in her basic thesis: within a single culture, where wealth is increasing average fertility rates will go up and where wealth is decreasing average fertility rates will go down.

But culture is a HUGE factor in fertility rates. As is access to modern family planning methods. Especially in third world countries (the ones with the problems with population growth), these two factors way outstrip the effect she's describing.

I guess I find it interesting, but don't really see what the point is.

[nero]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lyrl', 'I') guess I find it interesting, but don't really see what the point is.

[bobcousins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lyrl', 'I') agree that's she's right in her basic thesis: within a single culture, where wealth is increasing average fertility rates will go up and where wealth is decreasing average fertility rates will go down.

But culture is a HUGE factor in fertility rates. As is access to modern family planning methods. Especially in third world countries (the ones with the problems with population growth), these two factors way outstrip the effect she's describing.

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bobcousins', '
')It is a complicated picture, but if the assumption is that people make a rational decision based on some direct or indirect assessment of 'wealth', then surely the calculation is more like :

n = I / C

where n is number of offspring
I is income available for childrearing
C is cost to raise one child.

[nocar]

Yes, in industrialised countries the cost of child rearing has increased immensely, and I am not thinking about monetary costs.

A very important thing is the time requirements, and the contributions children can make. Before the age of the automobile, children from the age of 10 or so were equal to their parents in mobility. They used to help out by running errands. Today a parent is required to chauffeur his/her offspring to various kinds of leisure activities until the child is old enough for a driver's licence. Scheduling work and more than two children's activities becomes quite impossible.

Obviously, your ambitions for your children make a huge difference. If you do not think they are entitled to chauffeured activities, you can have more of them (children).

nocar

[nero]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')t is a complicated picture, but if the assumption is that people make a rational decision based on some direct or indirect assessment of 'wealth', then surely the calculation is more like :

n = I / C

where n is number of offspring
I is income available for childrearing
C is cost to raise one child.

This has the property that birthrate is proportional to income where the cost of childrearing is roughly constant (as in these western examples)