DECLINE IN BIRTH RATE

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 189, 7 May 1940, Page 8

DECLINE IN BIRTH RATE

Disquieting Outlook For Future POPULATION CHANGES IN NEW ZEALAND “The position reached iu .1936 and its implications for future years are definitely disquieting,” slates the review of the Census and Statistics Department in dealing with the change in tlie age distribution in New Zealand based on the returns in the 1936 census. Tables compiled from tlie census returns since 1896 show a steady decline in tlie younger age groups, and a swift growth in the upper-age groups. Maoris are excluded from tlie review as tlie full questionnaire is not used in the Maori census.

Tlie review states that the main cause of this position is the decline in the birth-rate. This fall was accentuated by the depression of 1931-35, but had reached a serious position even before those years, and in the three postdepression years of 1936-38 had not regained even the level of 1930. “Tlie long fall in Hie birth-rate was not. peculiar to New Zealand; jt was, indeed, the common experience. The fall in New Zealand, however, continued to a level lower than that of most countries. Other factors, though relatively of Jess significance, include losses iu the Great War and in the influenza epidemic of 191 S, changes'll! the number and ages of immigrants aud the decline in the death-rate, particularly in deaths of infants. “It may serve as an indication of tlie immediate effect of the low birth-rate of recent years to point out that in 1916, when the total population was nearly 400,000 below that of 1936, there were'ls.3l7 more children under five years of age than there were in 1936. At the other end of the scale numbers aged 50-59 and 00-69 increased between 1016 and 1936 by more than 100 per cent.: numbers iu the group 70-79 by 67 per cent., and in the group 80 and over by more than 74 per cent. Comparative Figures. “A simple hut effective comparison may be bad by contrasting the numbers at various ages in 1936 with what they would be if the proportionate age distributions of 1911 still held good. To balance the 1936 population in 1911 lines, there would be required about 155,000 persons under 40 years of age with a compensating loss of about 155.000 persons aged 40 or over. These represent huge figures iu a population of just under a million aud a half. “Even comparing 1926 with 1936, the variations are on a large scale. Thus, to maintain 1926 proportions, the 1936 numbers would need an additional 32,000 children under five, 19,000 children of from five to nine inclusive, 14,000 children of from 10-14 inclusive, and 6000 young folk of 15-19. Heavy deductions would he required iu the upper groups of the 1936 ages. “Changes in the age-constitutiou may in some directions be of more importance than changes in total population. In some instances —and the 1936 position is virtually a case in point—lack of consideration of changing age-con-stitution may obscure an actual future decline in population.

“The ageing of the population has immense ramifications. With declining numbers of children there'is need for fewer teachers, less school accommodation, fewer, toys, and so on through the fields of children’s food and clothing, maintenance, recreation, and so forth. Fewer persons will be required to supply the diminished need, and in turn less will lie required from the groups supplying the persons who cater to children's needs. “Even with a stationary population such a displacement is by no means exactly compensated by still-increasing numbers at advanced ages, for, obviously, the needs of tlie.aged are vastly different from those of children, Again, witli diminished numbers in the ages covering the working-life and increased numbers iu the ages above, the economic stress on the social structure is apparent. Possible Reactions. “Age-distribution inevitably has reactions on future population. A simple case will illustrate one aspect. Persons of, say, 20 to 24 years of age in 1956 must be drawn from the group aged under five iti 1936. In the 20 years a proportion will die. The survivors who reach the age of 20-24 will actually be more thau 20,000 fewer thau the numbers already aged 20-24 years in 1936. “As this age-group represents sufficiently closely the period when greatest efficiency commences, the effect upon industry iu 20 years’ time will be obvious. In addition, t.be position is irrevocable and nothing can alter it iu the direction of increase, though unexpected high mortality could make the position worse. Even a large aud immediate improvement in the birth-rate would require a generation to make up the leeway. ( “This consideration does not take into effect the question of immigration or emigration. As New Zealand has not yet attained economic maturity it may be assumed that the net flow of migration for some decades will, ou the whole, be an inward flow. The extent of flow, however, is not a matter for confident conjecture.

. “It may be noted that almost the whole of New Zealand's population (as stated previously Maoris are omitted from present consideration) is derived, directly or indirectly, from tlie United Kingdom and Eire. In general terms there has been no restriction of foreign immigrants ami aliens resident in New Zealand have and have had almost all the rights of British subjects. Yet there have been no Governmentally assisted passages' granted to aliens since the ‘seventies.’ and the homogeneous nature of the population has always been viewed as a source of satisfaction.

“In these circumstances, it is a cogent reflection Unit the population of the mother countries is in much the same position as that of New Zealand, and that the sources of past immigration into New Zealand may not be available in future years. In any event, it will bo admitted by most that recruiting an otherwise declining or stationary population by migration would not be entirely satisfactory."