global population profile: 2002 - global population growth · u.s. census bureau global population...

GLOBAL POPULATION GROWTH

The absolute size of the population of the globe and the pace at which it grows can bedifficult to grasp. Similarly, the mechanismsthat drive change in population size are oftennot fully appreciated.

This section on Global Population Growthprovides a series of essays that shed somelight on these topics. First, two pieces put into

context the current size and rate of growth ofthe globe's population. We then discuss themechanics that drive change in the size of pop-ulations and summarize the current trendsaround the globe in fertility, mortality, andmigration. Finally, we examine our projectionsabout the future of population growth aroundthe globe.

U.S. Census Bureau Global Population Profile: 2002 11

In 2002, 5 Billion More PeopleInhabited the Globe Than in 1800

According to the U.S. CensusBureau, world population hit the 6-billion mark in June of 1999. Thisfigure is over 3.5 times the size ofthe earth’s population at the begin-ning of the 20th century and roughlydouble its size in 1960. Neverbefore has the earth sustained sucha large human population.

The time required for global popu-lation to grow from 5 to 6 billionwas shorter than the intervalbetween any of the previous bil-lions. As depicted in Figure 1, ittook just 12 years for this to occur,just slightly less time than the 13 years between the fourth andfifth billion, but considerably lesstime than the 118 years betweenthe first and second billion.

Current Census Bureau projectionsindicate that it will take increasinglylonger periods of time to reach theseventh, eighth, and ninth billionmarkers of world population.Those engaged in long-term pro-jections suggest that the currentrun up of world population maypeak before it reaches 10 billion(United Nations, 1999b; NRC,2000).

BILLIONS AND BILLIONS

Figure 1.Time to Successive Billions in World Population: 1800-2050 The sixth billion accrues to world population in record time!

Source: United Nations (1995b); U.S. Census Bureau, International Programs Center, International Data Base and unpublished tables.

Population in billions Total world population

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

2050200019501900 18501800

1804

1922

1959

1974

1999

1987

2013

2028

2048

20years

15years

14 years

12 years

13years

15years

37 years

118 years

12 Global Population Profile: 2002 U.S. Census Bureau

Asia-Oceania Has Held OverHalf of the World’s PopulationSince Before 1950 and IsExpected to Continue to Do So Through 2050

In 2002, China was not only themost populous country in theworld, it was also more populousthan most of the world’s regions(Table 1). This situation has exist-ed at least since 1950 (Figure 2).

India, the second most populouscountry in the world, has beengaining rapidly on China in bothabsolute and relative terms (Figure 2). According to CensusBureau projections, India willeclipse China in total population in 2037.

The less developed countries inAsia and Oceania excluding Indiaand China are expected to be morepopulous than any other region by2050 (Figure 2). This is due, inpart, to growth in top-ten countriessuch as Indonesia, Pakistan, andBangladesh (Table 1).

Figure 2.Regional Distribution of Global Population: 1950, 2002, and 2050 Population rankings of major world regions continue to shift in favor of developing regions.

* "Developed World" refers to North America (excluding Latin America and the Caribbean), Western Europe, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand. Rest of Asia andOceania refers to Asia excluding Japan, China, and India plus Oceania excluding Australia and New Zealand. NIS indicates the New Independent States of the former Soviet Union.** Current boundaries. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Programs Center, International Data Base.

Population in millions

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

205020021950**

China Eastern Europe and the NIS Developed World* Sub-Saharan Africa India Latin America and the CaribbeanRest of Asia and Oceania Near East and North Africa


Projected Growth in Sub-Saharan Africa DiffersMarkedly From That for the Developed World andEastern Europe

The largest percentage increase inpopulation size over the next fivedecades (from 2002 to 2050) isprojected to occur in Sub-Saharan

Africa. Over 800 million people areexpected to be added to thisregion, with Congo (Kinshasa) join-ing Nigeria on the list of the tenmost populous countries (Table 1).Sub-Saharan Africa, which was one-third the size of China in 1950 andone-half its size in 2002, is likelyto surpass it in size by 2050(Figure 2).

At the opposite end of the spec-trum, more than half of the world’smore developed countries (MDCs),including those in Eastern Europeand the former Soviet Union, areexpected to experience populationdeclines over the next 50 years.The United States is the only MDCexpected to be among the tenmost populous countries in 2050.

Table 1.The Top Ten Most Populous Countries: 1950, 2002, and 2050*Less developed countries dominate the list of the world's ten most populous countries

1950** 2002 2050

1. China 1. China 1. India2. India 2. India 2. China3. United States 3. United States 3. United States4. Russia 4. Indonesia 4. Indonesia5. Japan 5. Brazil 5. Nigeria6. Indonesia 6. Pakistan 6. Bangladesh7. Germany 7. Russia 7. Pakistan8. Brazil 8. Bangladesh 8. Brazil9. United Kingdom 9. Nigeria 9. Congo (Kinshasa)

10. Italy 10. Japan 10. Mexico

Rankings of future or past top-ten countries

11. Bangladesh 11. Mexico 14. Russia13. Pakistan 13. Germany 16. Japan15. Nigeria 21. United Kingdom 24. Germany16. Mexico 22. Italy 29. United Kingdom32. Congo (Kinshasa) 23. Congo (Kinshasa) 35. Italy

*More developed countries/less developed countries. **Current boundaries.Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Programs Center, International Data Base and unpublished tables.

World Population Increase in 2002 Was More Than thePopulation of All but the 14 Largest Nations

In 2002, the world’s populationincreased by 74 million people. Ifall of these people formed a newcountry, it would be the fifteenth

largest country in the world, justlarger than Egypt and just smallerthan Vietnam. As shown in Figure 3, adding people at this rate is equivalent to:

• 2 1/3 people per second,

• 141 people per minute,

• 200,000+ people per day,

• 6.2 million per month.

At this rate of growth, the worldwould add nearly the equivalent ofthe population of Western Europe(392 million persons in 2002) in 5 years.


REMARKABLE POPULATION GROWTH

Per Minute

141 peopleA Boeing 737 airplane

Per Second

2 people203,024 people

Two large sports stadiums

Per Day

Per Month

6.2 million peopleIndiana, USA in 200274 million people

About the population ofEgypt in 2002 (73 million)

Per Year

Over the Next 5 Years

371 million peopleNearly the population of

Western Europein 2002 (392 million)

Figure 3.Net Additions to the World: 2002 In 2002, the world gained 2 people per second.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Programs Center, International Data Base and unpublished tables.

3


The Single Largest AnnualIncrease in World PopulationIs Estimated to Have Occurredin 1989-90

As Figure 4 shows, however, theaverage annual rate of growth forthe globe’s population peaked in1963-64.1 Then, in 1989-90, theabsolute annual increase to globalpopulation reached its apex andbegan to decline. According toCensus Bureau projections, thepace of global population growthwill continue to decline into theforeseeable future.

Figure 4.Annual Additions and the Annual Growth Rate of Global Population: 1950-2050 By 2002, the pace of global population growth was on the decline.


Average annual growth rate (percent)

Population added midyear to midyear(millions)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Growth ratePopulation added

1989-9087.4 million1963-64

2.2%

0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

2049-2050

2039-2040

2029-2030

2019-2020

2009-2010

1999-2000

1989-1990

1979-1980

1969-1970

1959-1960

1950-1951

1 In Figure 4, the dip in populationgrowth during 1959-60 was due to a severefamine in China.


Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa Are Responsible for Most Current and Future WorldPopulation Increase

Since 1950, India has contributedmore people to the world than anyother country (Table 2). It alsorivaled regional contributions topopulation increase during thistime period (Figure 5). The rest ofless developed Asia and Oceaniawas also a key contributor toannual population growth in thelast half century (Figure 5).

Over the next 50 years, Sub-Saharan Africa is expected tobecome the primary source of glob-al population increase (Figure 5).Countries such as Nigeria, Congo(Kinshasa), Madagascar, and Ugandaare likely to rise quickly in therankings of the largest contributorsto population growth (Table 2).China, conversely, is expected tobegin to lose population in largernumbers than any other country orregion of the globe by 2050 (Figure 5, Table 2).

Figure 5.Regional Contributions to Net World Population Change: 1950, 2002, and 2050Sub-Saharan Africa is projected to become the primary contributor to world population increase by 2050.


Population change in millions

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

205020021950

Developed World Latin America and the Caribbean India Eastern Europe and the NISRest of Asia and Oceania Sub-Saharan AfricaChina Near East and North Africa

Total = 74.2 million




China and the More Developed Regions of theGlobe Are Projected toExperience ConsistentPopulation Declines by 2050

In 1950, more developed countrieswere major contributors to annualglobal population increase (Figure

5). By 2002, however, their contri-bution was dwarfed by that of lessdeveloped countries. Only theUnited States retained a position inthe list of the top ten largest con-tributors (Table 2).

During the next 50 years, moredeveloped countries are expected

to contribute fewer and fewer peo-ple to world population increase.Again, only the United States isprojected to retain a position in thelist of the top ten largest contribu-tors to global population growth in2050 (Table 2).

Table 2.Country Rank by Size of Annual Population Change: 1950, 2002, and 2050*Major changes occur between 1950 and 2050 in the ranking of the largest contributors to annual population change.

1950** 2002 2050

1. India 1. India 1. India2. China 2. China 2. Nigeria3. United States 3. Indonesia 3. Ethiopia4. Russia 4. Nigeria 4. Congo (Kinshasa)5. Brazil 5. Pakistan 5. United States6. Japan 6. United States 6. Saudi Arabia7. Indonesia 7. Bangladesh 7. Pakistan8. Pakistan 8. Ethiopia 8. Madagascar9. Mexico 9. Philippines 9. Uganda

10. Ukraine 10. Congo (Kinshasa) 10. Yemen

Rankings of future or past top-ten countries

11. Nigeria 11. Brazil 12. Philippines12. Philippines 12. Mexico 16. Bangladesh16. Bangladesh 19. Saudi Arabia 20. Indonesia23. Ethiopia 20. Uganda 26. Mexico31. Congo (Kinshasa) 23. Yemen 215. Brazil (negative)48. Uganda 29. Madagascar 221. Ukraine (negative)62. Yemen 55. Japan 225. Japan (negative)69. Saudi Arabia 226. Ukraine (negative) 226. Russia (negative)70. Madagascar 227. Russia (negative) 227. China (negative)

*More developed countries/less developed countries. **Current boundaries.Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Programs Center, International Data Base and unpublished tables.


The Size of a Population Will Stay Constant WhenMortality Is Constant, FertilityIs Constant at ReplacementLevel, and There Is NoMigration or Momentum

The most basic description of pop-ulation change identifies three fun-damental building blocks: births,deaths, and migrants. Put simply,when the balance of these compo-nents deviates from zero, the sizeof the population will change.

The usefulness of this descriptionis limited, however, because rawnumbers are not good indicators ofthe magnitude of these events.Understanding magnitude is

helpful because it can provideinformation about likely futuretrends in each component and,consequently, about populationgrowth itself.

To produce such a description, theraw numbers of births, deaths, and migrants can be expressed asrates — i.e., in terms of the size ofthe population that contributes toeach event type. Hence, we usewomen of childbearing age (typicallybetween ages 15 and 49) to expressbirths, and the entire population toexpress deaths and migrants.

Next, the level at which each com-ponent will not affect the size of a

population is identified. For fertili-ty, this is the replacement level, orthe level of fertility at which eachsuccessive generation of womenproduces just enough offspring sothat it is matched in number bydaughters surviving to reproduc-tive age. Similarly, a constant levelof mortality and number of deathswill contribute to the stability inthe size of a population. Formigration, constant size will beencouraged when immigrationequals emigration (i.e., net migra-tion is zero). In the end, change inpopulation size can then bedescribed in terms of deviationsfrom these levels.

THE MECHANICS OF POPULATION CHANGE

Figure 6.The Major Component of Population Change by Country: 2002Fertility and population momentum were the principal drivers of population growth in 2002.


Momentum (positive)Momentum (negative)

Net in-migrationNet out-migration

Above-replacement fertilityBelow-replacement fertility

Not available


One outcome of this modification tothe original description is that a

change in the size of a population(either growth or decline) may now

occur even if fertility is at replace-ment, mortality is constant, and thepopulation itself is closed to migra-tion. The cause of this is an abun-dance (or dearth) of women in theirchildbearing years relative to therest of the population.

In practice, this abundance (ordearth) is commonly caused bypast deviations of fertility from thereplacement level. Hence, thisphenomenon has been labeledpopulation momentum. Over time,sustained replacement-level fertili-ty and constant mortality in a pop-ulation closed to migration willcause these cohorts to come intobalance with the rest of the popu-lation and the expected zero popu-lation growth will result.

Population Momentum Is Expected to GraduallyBecome the Sole Driver ofGlobal Population Growth

In 2002, population momentum(i.e., the relatively large numbersof childbearing women) was theprincipal driver of world popula-tion growth. Above-replacementfertility played a lesser role andmortality decline played almost no

Figure 7.The Components of Yearly Global Population Growth: 2002-2050 Fertility's overall contribution to global population growth is projected to cease by 2050.


Average annual percent growth — total and contribution of components

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

205020402030202020102002

Fertility effectMortality effectPopulation momentum effect

0.42

1.19

1.06

0.88

0.69

0.55


role at all (Figure 7). At the coun-try level, population momentumwas dominant in most of Asia andthe Americas, whereas above-replacement fertility was theprincipal driver in Sub-SaharanAfrica. Below-replacement fertility

was the primary cause of changein Europe (Figure 6).2

Over the next 50 years, the role ofpopulation momentum is likely to

become increasingly dominant(Figure 7). By 2050, it is expectedto become the principal driver ofgrowth in Asia, Africa, and theAmericas, and of decline in Europedue to the relatively few women ofchildbearing age compared to thelarge numbers of elderly people(Figure 8).

Momentum (positive)Momentum (negative)

Net in-migrationNet out-migration

Above-replacement fertilityBelow-replacement fertility

Not available

Figure 8.The Major Component of Population Change by Country: 2050In 2050, population momentum will encourage increases in population size for muchof the world but decreases in population size for many European countries.


2This disaggregation of the componentsof growth builds on previous work byChristenson and Johnson (2002) and Knodel(1999).

In 2002, the Women of the Globe Needed to Have anAverage of 2.3 Children inTheir Lifetime to Assure the Replacement of theGlobe’s Population

Childbirth contributes positively to global population growth. Putsimply, if the number of births isgreater than the number of deaths,the size of the globe’s populationwill grow.

A useful way to express the rate atwhich women have children is theTotal Fertility Rate (TFR). The TFRis the average number of childrenthat would be born per woman ifall women lived to the end of theirchildbearing years and bore chil-dren according to a given set of

age-specific fertility rates. Thus, aTFR of 3 means that we wouldexpect the average woman in apopulation to have three births inher lifetime.

In the context of populationgrowth, another useful concept isthe replacement level of fertility: thelevel of fertility at which each suc-cessive generation of women pro-duces exactly enough offspring sothat the same number of womensurvive to have children them-selves. In general, therefore, thehigher the level of mortality in apopulation, the higher the replace-ment level of fertility will be.

It is often said that fertility is atreplacement when the TFR is

2.1 births per woman. In fact, thisis the replacement level of a rela-tively developed country. In 2002,the actual replacement level of fer-tility for the globe as a whole was2.3 children per woman. For thenations of the globe, the replace-ment level ranged from a low ofjust over 2 children per woman inseveral more developed countriesto a high of 3.4 children perwoman in Mozambique (U.S. Census Bureau, InternationalPrograms Center, unpublishedtables).

Over the next five decades, CensusBureau projections indicate that thereplacement level of fertility for theglobe will decline gradually to reach2.1 children per woman by 2050.


FERTILITY AND POPULATION GROWTH

Figure 9.Total Fertility Rate Relative to the Replacement Level for Each Country Across the Globe: 2002In 2002, fertility levels were highest in the countries of Sub-Saharan Africa and the Near East, and lowest in the more developed countries.


Below replacement

Less than 1 child per womanabove replacement

1-2 children per womanabove replacement

3 or more children per womanabove replacement

Not available


For the nations of the globe, manymore are expected to approach thelow of just over 2 children perwoman, while the maximum nation-al average is projected to decline toapproximately 2.5 children perwoman (U.S. Census Bureau,International Programs Center,unpublished tables).

The Globe Is Currently in the Midst of a RemarkableDecline in Fertility

In 2002, the globe’s TFR was 2.6 births per woman, about three-tenths of a child per woman abovethe replacement level (Figure 10).If current trends persist, the gapbetween the actual level of fertilityand the replacement level willdecrease gradually, with the actuallevel dipping below replacement in2043.

Figure 10.Global Fertility Levels Relative to Replacement Level: 2002-2050

The level of global fertility is projected to drop below replacement by mid-century.

Note: Global total fertility rates underlying figure 10 were derived by calculatingweighted age-specific fertility rates from country-and-age-specific births and numbers of women.Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Programs Center, International Data Base and unpublished tables.

Deviation from replacement-level fertility (births per woman)

-0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

2050

2045

2040

2035

2030

2025

2020

2015

2010

2005

2002

TFR = 2.09

TFR = 2.60


At the country level, fertility wasbelow replacement in almost all ofthe more developed world and insome countries in the less devel-oped world in 2002. Still, themajority of less developed

countries had fertility rates abovereplacement (Figure 9). If currenttrends continue, the number ofcountries with above-replacementfertility is expected to declinegradually over the coming

five decades. In addition, in coun-tries where fertility continuesabove replacement, the gapbetween the actual and replace-ment levels is expected to shrink(Figure 11).

Figure 11.Total Fertility Rate Relative to the Replacement Level for Each Country Across the Globe: 2050In the next 50 years, country-to-country differences in fertility are expected to persist despite a general trend toward convergence.


Below replacement

Less than 1 child per womanabove replacement

1-2 children per womanabove replacement

3 or more children per womanabove replacement

Not available


Mortality Contributes to Population Change byAffecting the Number ofPeople Who “Exit” a Populationand by Determining theReplacement Level of Fertility

Whereas childbirth is the naturalinput mechanism behind globalpopulation change, death is thenatural output mechanism. Putsimply, if the number of deaths isgreater than the number of births,the size of the globe’s populationwill decrease.

A useful way to express the level of mortality of a population is lifeexpectancy at birth. Life

expectancy at birth is the averagenumber of years a group of peopleborn in the same year can beexpected to live if mortality at eachage remains constant in the future.

In the context of populationgrowth, the level of mortality hastwo effects on our understandingof how the size of a populationchanges. First, a change in thelevel of mortality will encourage achange in the size of the popula-tion — i.e., a declining rate willindicate fewer deaths than in theprevious year, whereas an increas-ing rate will indicate more deaths.Second, as mentioned in the

previous section, a higher level ofmortality will create a higherreplacement level of fertility — i.e.,a higher level of fertility that willallow each successive generationof women to produce exactlyenough offspring so that the samenumber of women survive to havechildren themselves.

Declining mortality most stronglyinfluenced population growth atthe end of the 19th century and thebeginning of the 20th century(Bongaarts and Bulatao, 1999).Currently, the great majority ofcountries are experiencing onlygradual declines in mortality.

MORTALITY AND POPULATION GROWTH

Figure 12.Life Expectancy at Birth Across the Globe: 2002Sub-Saharan African countries had by far the lowest life expectancy at birth of any region on the globe in 2002.

80 years or more

70-79 years

60-69 years

50-59 years

Less than 50 years



However, there are several coun-tries where the AIDS pandemic iscausing mortality to rise quickly(see the fourth section of thisreport). As a result, the fertilitylevel needed to maintain the bal-ance between births and deaths isalso changing quickly.

Life Expectancy at Birth Is Generally in a GradualUpward Trend

In 2002, the overall life expectancyat birth in the world was 63.8 years. Countries with thehighest levels of life expectancy atbirth in 2002 were predominantlythose of Europe and North America(Figure 12). Most of the countrieswith the lowest levels, in contrast,were in Sub-Saharan Africa. Thislatter fact is in part due to theeffects of the HIV/AIDS pandemic.

Figure 13.World Life Expectancy at Birth: 2002-2050 Global life expectancy at birth is projected to increase gradually through 2050.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Programs Center, International Data Base.

Life expectancy at birth for both sexes

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

20502045204020352030202520202015201020052002

63.8

76.6


U.S. Census Bureau projectionsindicate that the global level of lifeexpectancy at birth will increaseslowly but steadily to 76.6 years in

2050 (Figure 13). The levels formost countries are expected tomirror this gradual upward trend,with countries with lower life

expectancies enjoying substantiallyfaster improvements on averagethan countries with higher lifeexpectancies in 2002 (Figure 14).

Figure 14.Life Expectancy at Birth Across the Globe: 2050In the next 50 years, current disparities between countries in levels of life expectancy at birth are expected to decrease.

Not available

80 years or more

70-79 years

60-69 years

Less than 60 years



The Relationship BetweenMigration and PopulationChange Is Different From the Relationship BetweenFertility or Mortality andPopulation Change

The relationship between migrationand change in the size of a popula-tion is different from the effects offertility and mortality in tworespects. First, by definition, migra-tion will not affect global popula-tion change. Every person wholeaves one country must necessarily

enter another, so net world migra-tion will always equal zero.

Second, migration is a far less pre-dictable phenomenon than fertilityor mortality. Whereas fertility andmortality can be considered basichuman experiences, migration ismore a social phenomenon. As aresult, the number of births anddeaths, as well as the ages at whichwomen give birth and at which indi-viduals die, tend to vary less thanthe numbers and ages of peoplewho migrate. For this reason, the

data that are available to estimatethe effect of migration on change inthe size of a population are likely tobe much less dependable, and pro-jections of migration are especiallyproblematic.

Despite these differences, migra-tion is an important component ofpopulation change for many coun-tries. If net migration, the differ-ence between the numbers of peo-ple entering and leaving an area, ispositive, the size of the populationwill grow, all else constant.

MIGRATION AND POPULATION GROWTH

Table 3.The Top Net Senders and Receivers of Migration: 2002In 2002, net migration to the United States was three times higher than the next highest receiving country.

Top ten net senders Top ten net receivers

Rank Country Net migration Rank Country Net migration

1 Mexico -280,000 1 United States 1,040,0002 China -230,000 2 Afghanistan 300,0003 Tanzania -180,000 3 Canada 190,0004 Congo (Kinshasa) -150,000 4 Germany 180,0005 Philippines -130,000 5 Russia 140,0006 Pakistan -120,000 6 United Kingdom 130,0007 Kazakhstan -100,000 7 Italy 120,0008 Bangladesh -100,000 8 Singapore 120,0009 India -80,000 9 Australia 80,000

10 Burma -80,000 10 East Timor 50,000

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Programs Center, International Data Base.


While the Flow of Migrants in 2002 Was an InterestingPhenomenon, the TypicalEffect of Net Migration onPopulation Change Was Small to Moderate

In 2002, there was a shift acrossnational boundaries of approxi-mately 3 million people. Mexicowas the largest sender of people,having a net outflow of 280,000people into other countries, includ-ing the United States (Table 3).China was the next largest sender,transferring approximately230,000 people to other countries.

As Figure 15 shows, almost everynet sender of migrants was a lessdeveloped country.

On the other side of the equation,the United States absorbed aboutone-third of the total net in-migration (total net migration forreceiving countries) in 2002. Sixof the remaining nine top ten netreceivers (Table 3) were also moredeveloped countries, the excep-tions being Afghanistan,Singapore, and East Timor.Afghanistan and East Timor madethe list in 2002 due to the return

of refugees, and Singaporebecause of its proximity to China,the largest net-sending country.

In relative terms, the countrieswhere net migration had the mostimpact on population size in 2000(whether positive or negative) wereeither island nations or nationswith recent experience of militaryconflict (Table 4). For the majorityof larger countries, however, therelative effect of net migration wassmall to moderate (Figure 16).

Figure 15.Net Migration Around the Globe: 2002There are both sending countries and receiving countries in each region of the globe.

-1 to -9,999

0 to 9,99910,000 to 49,99950,000+


-10,000 to -49,999-50,000+

Net in-migration

Net out-migration


Table 4.The Top Relative Gainers and Losers of Population Due to Net Migration: 2002Migration tends to have the most impact on small countries and countries in crisis.

Top ten gainers Top ten losers

Rank Country Net migration Rank Country Net migration

1 Montserrat 74.2 1 Dominica -18.32 East Timor 51.1 2 Grenada -15.23 Singapore 26.1 3 Eritrea -13.64 Cayman Islands 19.8 4 Cape Verde -12.35 Qatar 18.8 5 Samoa -11.66 Northern Mariana Islands 17.0 6 Liberia -10.97 Anguilla 15.0 7 Trinidad and Tobago -10.88 Kuwait 13.9 8 Saint Kitts and Nevis -9.59 Turks and Caicos Islands 13.0 9 Suriname -8.9

10 San Marino 11.3 10 Greenland -8.4

*The net migration rate is the net number of migrants entering (or leaving) a country per 1,000 residents.Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Programs Center, International Data Base.

-0.1 to -0.9

0 to 0.91 to 9.910+

-1.0 to -9.9-10+

Net migration rate (in)

Net migration rate (out)

Figure 16.Net Migration Rates Around the Globe: 2002The effect of net migration on population size in 2002 was small to moderate for most countries.


The Globe’s Population Is Expected to Grow toApproximately 9.1 Billion in 2050

The task of producing long-termpopulation projections is fraughtwith difficulties. It requires thatvery broad assumptions be maderegarding future trends in theunderlying components of popula-tion change: fertility, mortality, andmigration. (See Appendix B fordetails about the actual assump-tions used in producing the projec-tions in this volume.) In addition,the effects of these assumptionscumulate over time so that seem-ingly small adjustments can havesubstantial impacts on the resultingprojections. For this reason, long-term population projections shouldbe used with caution.

Nevertheless, the exercise of pro-ducing long-term projections canprovide valuable insight into thelikely development of phenomenathat have important policy implica-tions. Furthermore, populationprojections provide a concretemeasure that can be used in subse-quent analyses to evaluate themethods used to produce the pro-jections and the assumptions thatlie behind them.

The U.S. Census Bureau’s long-termprojections indicate that theglobe’s population will grow toapproximately 9.1 billion in 2050,an increase of over 45 percentcompared to its size in 2002.

The largest gains in populationbetween 2002 and 2050 are pro-jected to be in Sub-Saharan Africa

and the Near East (Figure 17). Inthese regions, many countries areexpected to more than double insize by 2050, with some morethan tripling.

More moderate gains are expectedin that time period for NorthAfrica, the Americas, Asia, and thePacific. Although some countriesin these regions are expected tomore than double in size, thetypical country is likely to experi-ence a smaller increase.

On the opposite end of the spec-trum, a majority of the countries inEurope and the New IndependentStates of the former Soviet Unionare expected to experience adecline in population between 2002and 2050.


THE FUTURE OF POPULATION GROWTH

Figure 17.Population Change Around the Globe: 2002-2050The loss of population in Europe and the NIS over the next five decades is expected to be more than offset by population gains in the rest of the world.

Decline

Grow but not double

More than double

More than triple


Population projected to:

global population profile: 2002 - global population growth · u.s. census bureau global population...

Documents