Research Brief by Kip Hansen — November 23, 2024 — 700 words
There is a very interesting paper by Anup Malani and Ari Jacob, both from the National Bureau of Economic Research in Cambridge, MA, USA, “This is a study that promotes major economic A private nonprofit organization that provides cutting-edge research and analysis of issues. (The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of NBER.)
The title of this paper is “New measure of children surviving reveals long-term trends in fertility” [ or as .pdf here ].
What are the long-term trends in fertility rates? this [ blue trace is 1950 through 2023]:
The author begins this way:
“Since the Industrial Revolution, the world's total fertility rate (TFR) has fallen sharply. However, the consequences of this decline have come not only from a reduction in birth rates but also from a reduction in the number of children surviving. We propose a new measure of per woman A measure of the number of surviving children, we call the effective fertility rate (EFR). EFR can be approximated as the product of TFR and survival probability.
“We used EFR specifically to measure the number of daughters that survived to reproduce (Reproductive EFR) [EFRR] and the number of children who survive to become workers (EFR work) [EFRL]”.
“We use three datasets to reveal changes in EFR over time in different locations. First, we use data from 165 countries between 1950 and 2019 to show that one-third of the global TFR decline has not changed over this period. EFR work [EFRL], suggestion Much of the decline in fertility simply compensates for higher survival rates.
turn out:
“In this paper, we provide a new measure of the number of surviving children per woman of childbearing age. It is motivated by economic models that assume that households care about the number of children surviving, not just the number born. It can also be used to test these models. Our measurements of surviving children can be specialized via EFR.L and EFRright—A measure of the growth of a productive or reproductive population, respectively.
This figure from the paper gives the best graphical representation of their point:
Why should we care?
Global and national fertility rates predict future population sizes and are important for future economic conditions. In some countries, population decline has led to shortages of workers needed to maintain industrial production.
The United Nations has been making a big fuss about the total fertility rate. I wrote in “population explosion”. The mass media attacked both overgrowth and depopulation.
but this is my idea After reading this new paper:
Maybe we've been looking at the wrong statistics. Malani and Jacobs suggest that a better way to look at fertility from a demographic perspective is to look at their two “new and improved” statistics: Effective fertility rate – labor force and Effective reproductive rate – reproduction.
In developed countries, these fertility rates are well below the necessary replacement rate of 2.1, but have stabilized (no longer fall) since around 1990.
so what?
Analysis of modern social problems is often based on statistics about or related to the perceived problem. The statistics favored by policymakers are often: Not a measure problematic itself But just things that are relevant to the question.
One of the policymakers' favorite statistics on this site is on the broad topic of climate change. many “Global mean surface temperature” index. At every COPxx meeting, this statistic is touted as too high/too high.
However, there are some legitimate arguments that the index, this statistic, is flawed or even fabricated. Some view the statistic as an unscientific hodgepodge of apples and oranges.
Others are perfectly willing to accept the statistics as they are currently used, but argue that this is not the case this Measures of “climate change”.
Today’s discussion points:
1. World Fertility – Problem, Solution, Improvement, and/or Imminent Disaster (in which direction)? None of these?
2. Is the so-called global average surface temperature index suitable to be established? as a measure Global climate change?
3. Are you aware of other areas of research that are based on measurements/measurements/statistics that you believe are wrong?
######
Author comments:
The idea that TFR is not an appropriate or most appropriate statistic for the study of population growth is interesting. This begs the question: Are we using the correct and/or best statistics as indicators of other social problems? Are some of the ones we commonly use suitable? in any way Anyway, was something wrong from the start?
I do have a personal opinion about GAST and its index, which I have previously expressed on WUWT's page.
Overall, perhaps we should reboot many topics by asking, “Are we using the right method to measure the problem?” If so please give examples.
Thank you for reading.
######
Relevant
