I’ve previously “noted”:http://www.inquit.com/article/46/demography-and-destiny the size and slant of demographic changes that are sweeping North Asia. This weekend’s NY Times Review of Books includes a review of a controversial book about the potential legacy of China’s ‘bare branches’. bq. If these young men cannot find wives or jobs or become a viable part of their societies, the book argues, they can pose a threat to internal stability and make governments more likely to create military campaigns to absorb and occupy these youths. (“NY Times”:http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/03/books/03SEX.html?pagewanted=print) Critics of this line of argument point out that the impacts of demographic trends do not emerge clear cut from the historical record; there are many compounding factors. It’s a very long reach from the gender imbalance to some of its supposed consequences (e.g. jihadism, or perhaps crusadism). Will a low female-male ratio lead to an improvement or a deterioration in the social status of women? Scarcity seems to suggest the former. Does a preponderance of males imply polyandry? Or is migration more likely? Is there any reason to think that war is a more likely result than an increase in sex tourism? Population growth (from Maddison “The World Economy: 1 — 2001”)
Population growth | ||
Year | China | West Europe |
---|---|---|
1 | 59.6 | 24.7 |
1000 | 59.0 | 25.4 |
1300 | 100.0 | 58.4 |
1400 | 72.0 | 41.5 |
1500 | 103.0 | 57.3 |
1820 | 381.0 | 133.0 |
1913 | 437.1 | 261.0 |
1950 | 546.8 | 304.9 |
2001 | 1,275.4 | 392.1 |