sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Yi Fuxian argues that, by inflating its population figures, China is doing itself a serious disservice

Yi Fuxian argues that, by inflating its population figures, China is doing itself a serious disservice

Rarely has a census report received as much attention as the one China released this past May. Given China’s long history of fiddling with demographic data, the one-month delay in releasing its 2020 census results was suspicious, to say the least. But it was what happened soon thereafter that effectively confirmed China’s bleak demographic reality.

Officially, China’s demographic situation is nothing to be alarmed about: the 2020 census showed that China’s population reached the expected level of 1.41 billion people in 2020, and continues to grow. And yet, less than a month after the census was released, Chinese authorities announced the loosening of family-planning rules, so that households can have three children, rather than two. They have now also put forward a more comprehensive plan for boosting the fertility rate.

These policy moves suggest that China’s demographic structure is actually much worse than the authorities would have us believe. Indeed, an analysis of the country’s age structure suggests that it has far fewer citizens than the census reported and that its population is already declining.

Past censuses indicate that China’s fertility rate began to fall below replacement level (generally around 2.1 children per woman) in 1991 – 11 years after the one-child policy was implemented nationwide. In 2000 and 2010, China’s fertility rate amounted to only 1.22 and 1.18 respectively, but the figures were adjusted to 1.8 and 1.63.

Those revisions were made on the basis of primary-school enrollment data. But such data are far from reliable. Local authorities often report more students than they have – 20-50% more, in many cases – in order to secure more education subsidies. For example, according to a CCTV report, Jieshou city in Anhui province reported having 51,586 primary-school students in 2012, when the actual number was only 36,234; it duly extracted an additional CN¥10.63 million ($1.63 million) in state funding.

So, from 2004 to 2009, China supposedly had 104 million first-graders. This was consistent with the 105 million births China’s National Bureau of Statistics announced in 1998-2003. Yet there were only 84 million people aged 7-12 registered in the (mandatory) hukou system in 2010, and only 86 million ninth-graders registered in 2012-17.

When the 2000 and 2010 censuses showed a much smaller population than expected, the authorities inflated the numbers. For example, in 2010, Fujian province was found to have a population of 33.29 million, yet the figure was revised to upwards of 36.89 million.

But these headline changes could not obscure the flaws in the breakdown figures. Judging by the number of people aged 0-9 in the 2000 census, one could infer that as many as 39 million fewer babies were born in 1991-2000 than had been recorded in the revised data. Accordingly, the actual population in 2000 may have been closer to 1.227 billion than to the 1.266 billion that was officially reported.

The 2020 census is similarly misleading. The National Bureau of Statistics claims that 227 million babies were born in the 2006-19 period, and the census report shows that there were 241 million Chinese aged 1-14 in 2020. But that would mean that China’s average fertility rate in 2006-19 amounted to 1.7-1.8. Given that the government was enforcing strict population-control policies during that period – the two-child policy was introduced on January 1, 2016 – this seems highly unlikely.

Yes, China’s ethnic minorities were exempted from its one-child policy, so there was no need to hide their births. Yet their fertility rate was only 1.66 in 2000 and 1.47 in 2010. And given that Han Chinese tend to be wealthier and more educated, their fertility rate would be lower even if they were not subjected to stricter family-planning rules.

The truth is that China’s population in 2020 probably amounted to about 1.28 billion – some 130 million fewer people than reported. That makes India, not China, the world’s most populous country.

Of course, China’s latest census was always going to be in line with past releases. Officials from the National Bureau of Statistics and the former family-planning commission are still responsible for executing the census, and they will be held to account if the data are inconsistent. But, given the importance of demographics to China’s future prosperity, these distortions do the country a serious disservice.

To be sure, a declining fertility rate is an expected upshot of development, especially for improvements in health and education. Taiwan, for example, recorded a fertility rate of just 1.55 in 1991-2006, and 1.09 in 2006-20. But Taiwan is about 15 years ahead of mainland China in terms of health and education, and mainland Chinese already show less willingness to have children than their counterparts in Taiwan.

Something else is going on in China, and it is not hard to discern what it is. After facing a strict one-child policy for 36 years, and a two-child policy after that, Chinese people’s ideas about marriage and childbirth have changed profoundly. (The divorce rate in mainland China is 1.5 times that of Taiwan.)

Yet China’s top leaders have not fully grasped the demographic challenges they face. True, they are taking steps to boost the fertility rate. But they also seem convinced by the state economists’ predictions – based on (distorted) official data – that China’s GDP will keep growing until it dwarfs that of the United States. It is this belief in China’s inexorable rise that has spurred them to pursue strategic expansion.

The West, too, is buying into this narrative. In underestimating China’s demographic challenges, Western leaders are overestimating its economic and geopolitical prospects. They see a fire-breathing dragon when what stands before them is really a sick lizard. This raises the risk of strategic miscalculation on both sides.

By around 2035, China will be doing worse than the US on all demographic metrics, and in terms of economic growth. In fact, its GDP is unlikely to surpass that of the US. China’s leaders must recognise this – and take a strategic step back.


Yi Fuxian, a senior scientist in obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, is the author of Big Country with an Empty Nest. Copyright 2021 Project Syndicate, here with permission.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

18 Comments

Take a strategic step back and do what?

They are at least a mono-ethnic state with a high degree of national pride and social cohesion. The US is in the process of tearing itself apart, or at the very least setting itself on a downward spiral of mediocrity as wokedom and self loathing infects the education system and other civic institutions.

The Chinese really don't have much to worry about.

Up
0

China is not a mono-ethnic country. The State officially recognises 56 ethnicities, and Han is the majority presenting 92% of the population. Other major minorities include Hui, Mongols, Zhuang, Tibetans and Uyghurs. Instead of mono-ethnic, China's practice is more mono-cultural in which the Han culture is dominating. And Han people control the State. It follows the introduction of the concept of "Chinese Nation (中华民族)" in the late 19th century when the old mid kingdom is on the edge of collapse after the invasion of western powers.

Up
0

The author misses what is staring him in the face. He thinks because China's population is not growing there is a problem. But look at the economic sucess of the last 30 years.
Maybe ensuring a stable population is a fantastic economic advantage.

Up
0

In ecology the healthy population is the limited one. If population was all that mattered then Mexico city and Manila would have more GDP per capita than Geneva, Copenhagen, Singapore, etc. Agglomeration benefits are inverse logarithmic - if Shanghai doubled in size (or Auckland) GDP per capita would not increase - other negative factors such as pollution and congestion take over. If China's population halves over a long period it would still be double the USA and larger than Europe and I suspect considerably wealthier both in total and by capita.

Up
0

But GDP per-capita means nothing when the game is strategic expansion and domination of your neighbours. It matters how many nuclear powered submarines you have, not how many per-capita.

Up
0

China's success relies on other nations growing their populations, so no.

Up
0

Isn't a declining population the real opportunity?

Love Madison, Wisconsin. I've been a few times while visiting the air show in Oshkosh.

Up
0

Step back from what? They're absolutely on the track needed; less population.

The writer is the propagandist - wonder if he's religious?

Up
0

But much of the 'production' done in China is done in villages where people squat together in a circle on the dirt ground with chickens roaming freely around the workers - who hand assemble many components of the products. For example, think of the cardboard backing on the potato peeler you buy in our supermarkets. Much of the winding of twist ties to join the product to the cardboard is done in villages as opposed to factories. Some jobs just can't be automated easily. We have outsourced those types of labour to China because they don't pay a minimum wage for that work. Family groups and other villagers do it. Hence the need for children.

I suspect that's what worries the CCP - the child labour workforce is/has diminished significantly.

Up
0

No, these tasks are not undertaken in the villages. Actually there are not many children in a lot of the villages. And many of those children are being raised by grandparents, with the parents away working in the cities. Even in rural China, parents and grandparents place a big focus on education of the children.
KeithW

Up
0

I read a review of a book recently, based on research that shows that it isn't true that "grandparents place a big focus on the education of the children" in the villages. In fact the children are taken in a backpack into the fields while the grandparents work; they are fed on a poor starchy diet and get very little stimulation. Consequently the researchers found that the majority will never get an IQ over 90. I can't remember the name of the book, but shouldn't be hard to find. Basically another looming demographic problem for China.

Up
0

The issue of inadequate diets and particularly low protein diets has always been an issue in poor countries. There may be small pockets of poverty in China where that is still an issue, but that is not the 'big picture'. It remains an issue however in some other countries of the world. I know a little about this, having worked on rural development projects in some of those countries and seen what it does.
KeithW

Up
0

interesting that the fiddling wih demographic data is common knowledge yet all their other economic data is often quoted as gospel.

Up
0

Plenty of people are asking questions about Chonas economic data as well. In fact there are several parallel yet independent data series published by private organisations.

Up
0

The Chinese demographic data is detailed and embedded within it is much of the history of China over the last 70 years. Some of the current measurement challenges include that the hukou registration system aligns with where people come from but there are some hundreds of millions of internal migrants living a long way from their registered homeplace. And that complicates the possibilities of both missing people and double counting other people. There will be some fiddling going on particularly at country level by corrupt officials but at a central level the Government tries to weed out those behaviours. There is no doubt that the Chinese births declined markedly last year - by about 15%.
Here is a good starting point to understand China demographics.
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3134187/chinas-popul…

Up
0

Is the SCMP or indeed any Hong Kong publisher really a reliable starting point post-national-security-law where 'Picking quarrels' can land you a hefty gaol sentence?

Up
0

This planet needs far fewer of us, to call China's declining population a "worsening" situation, ignores that, so I cannot take this article with anything other than a grain of salt.

Up
0

Would I be XiJinPing what I would do to invade the western economy?
Integrate my own financial credit assessors workforce in all the major organizations so that the economy is propelled to only my own direction. When I require to sabotage I would be able to do so when I want.
Would I be a western leader what would my responsibility be?
Forget about the the current compromised system and build from scratch immediately.
How far are we far from collapse?
We don't talk about a fallen system anymore.
How would the new system be?
Look at the majority people's need and envision yourself as an empowering individual, who has very limited resources to thrive, however, has potential to amend the world in a better way everyday.
Thanks goodness I am none of them ;)

Up
0