5.

1 Global Demography
When couples are asked why they have children, their answers are almost always
about their feelings. For most, having a child is the symbol of a successful union. It also
ensures that the family will have a successor of generation that will continue its name.
The kinship is preserved, and the family's story continues. A few, however, worry how
much strain a child can bring to the household as he/she ''competes'' for the
parents attention and in reverse how much energy the family needs to shower its love to
an additional member. Viewed from above, however having or not having children is
mainly driven by economics. Behind the laughter or the tears lies the question, will the
child be an economic asset or a burden to the family?
Rural communities often welcome an extra hand to help in crop cultivation, particularly
during planting and harvesting season. Urbanized, educated, and professional families with
two incomes, however, desire just one or two progenies. With each partner tied down, or
committed to his/ her respective profession, neither has the time to devote to having a
kid, much more to parenting. Rural families view multiple children and large kinship
networks as critical investments.
Urban populations have grown, but not necessarily because families are having more
children. It is rather the combination of the natural outcome of significant migration to the
cities by people seeking work in the "more modern" sectors of society. This movement of
people is especially manifested in the developing countries where industries and
businesses in the cities are attracting more people from the rural areas.
International migration also plays a part. Today, 191 million people live in countries
other than their own, and the United Nations projects that over 2.2 million will move from
the developing world to the First World countries.

The "Perils" of Overpopulation

Development planners see urbanization and industrialization as indicators of a
developing society, but disagree on the role of population growth or decline in
modernization. This lengthy discussion brings back ideas of British scholar Thomas
Malthus who warned in his 1798 "An Essay on the the Principle of Population" that
population growth will inevitably exhaust world food supply by the middle of the 19th
century.
Malthus' prediction was off base, but it was revived in the late 1960s when American
biologist Paul R. Ehrlich and his wife, Anne, wrote The Population Bomb, which argued that
overpopulation in the 1970s and the 1980s will bring about global environmental disasters
that would, in turn, lead to food shortage and mass starvation. They proposed that
countries like the United states take the lead in the promotion of global population control
in order to reduce the growth rate to zero. Their recommendations ranged from the bizarre
(chemical castration) to the policy-oriented (taxing an additional child and luxury taxes on
child related products) to monetary incentives (paying off men who would agree to be
sterilized after two children) to institution-building (a powerful Department of Population
and Environment).
There was some reason for this fear to persist. The rate of global population increase
was at its highest between 1955 and 1975 when nations were finally able to return to
normalcy after the devastations wrought by World War II. The growth rate rose from 1.8
percent per year from 1955 to 1975, peaking at 2.06 percent annual growth rate between
1965 and 1970. By limiting the population, vital resources could be used for economic
progress and not be "diverted" and "wasted" to feeding more mouths. In the mid-20th
century, the Philippines, China, and India sought to lower birth rates on the belief that
unless controlled, the free expansion of family members would lead to a crisis in resources,
which in turn may result in widespread poverty, mass hunger, and political instability.
As early as 1958, the American policy journal, Foreign Affairs, had already advocated
"contraception and sterilization" as the practical solutions to global economic, social, and
political problems. In May 2009, a group of American billionaires warned of how a
"nightmarish" explosion of people was "a potentially disastrous environmental, social, and
industrial threat" to the world.
This worry is likewise at the core of the economist argument for the promotion of
reproductive health. Advocates of population control contend for the universal access to
reproductive technologies (such as condoms, the pill, abortion, and vasectomy) and, more
importantly, giving women the right to choose whether to have children or not. Finally,
politics determine these "birth control" programs. Developed countries justify their
support for population control in developing countries by depicting the latter as
conservative societies.
It's the Economy not the Babies!

The use of population control to prevent economic crisis has its critics. For example,
Betsy Hartmann disagrees with the advocates of neo- Malthusian theory and accused
governments of using population control as a "substitute for social justice and much
needed reforms - such land distribution, employment creation, provision of mass
education and health care, and emancipation. Others pointed out that the population did
grow fast in many countries in the 1960s, and this growth "aided economic
development by spurring technological and institutional innovation and increasing the
supply of human ingenuity."
The median of 29.4 years for females and 30.9 for males in the cities means a young
working population. With this median age, states are assured that they have a robust
military force. The productive capacities of this generation are especially high in regions
like East Asia as "Asia's remarkable growth in the past half century coincided closely with
demographic change in the region.
Population growth has, in fact, spurred "technological and institutional innovation"
and increased " the supply of human ingenuity." Advances in agricultural productions have
grown that the Malthusian nightmare can be prevented. The "Green Revolution" created
high-yielding varieties of rice and other cereals and, along with the development of new
methods of cultivation, increase yields globally, but more particularly in the developing
world. The global famine that neo-Malthusian predicted did not happen. Instead, between
1950 and 1984, global gain production increased by over 250 percent, allowing agriculture
to keep pace with population growth, thereby keeping global famine under control.

Women and Reproductive Rights

The character in the middle of these debates - women - is often the subject of these
population measures. Reproductive rights supporters argue that if population control and
economic development were to reach their goals, women must have control over whether
they will have children or not and whey they will have their progeny, if any. By giving
women this power, they will be able to pursue their vocations - be they economic, social,
or political - and contribute to economic growth.
This serial correlation between fertility, family, and fortune has motivated countries
with growing economies to introduce or strengthen their reproductive health laws,
including abortion. High-income First World nations and fast-developing countries were
able to sustain growth in part because women were given the power of choice and easy
access to reproductive technologies.
Most countries implement reproductive health laws because they worry about the
health of the mother. Opponents regard reproductive rights as nothing but a false front
for abortion. They contend that this method of preventing conception endangers the life
of the mother and must be banned. The religious wing of the anti-reproductive flank goes
further and describes abortion as a debauchery that sullies the name of God; it will send
the mother to hell and prevents a new soul, the baby, to become human.
Muslim countries do not condone abortion and limit wives to domestic chores and
delivering babies. The Philippines with a Catholic majority now has a reproductive health
law in place , buth conservative politicians have enfeebled it through budget cuts and
installed its implementation by filing a case against the law in the Supreme Court.
A country being industrialized and developed, however, does not automatically assure
pro-women reproductive regulations.

The Feminist Perspective

Feminists approach the issue of reproductive rights from another angle. They are,
foremost, against any form of population control because they are compulsory by nature,
resorting to a carrot-and-stick approach (punitive mechanism co-exist alongside benefits)
that actually does not empower women. They believe that government assumptions that
poverty and environmental degradation are caused by overpopulation are wrong. These
factors ignore other equally important causes like the unequal distribution of wealth, the
lack of public safety nets like universal health care, education, and gender equality
programs.
Feminists also point out that there is very little evidence that point o overpopulation as
the culprit behind poverty and ecological devastation. Governments have not directly
responded to these criticisms, but one of the goals of the 1994 United Nations
International Conference on Population and Development suggests recognition of this
issue.

Population Growth and Food Security

 Today's global population has reached 7.4 billion. it is estimated to increase to 9.5
billion in 2050, then 11.2 billion by 2100. The median age of this population is 30.1, with
the male median age at 29.4 years and female, 30.9 years. Ninety-five percent of this
population growth will happen in the developing countries, with demographers predicting
that by the middle of this century, several countries will have tripled their population.
Demographers predict that the world population will stabilize by 2050 to 9 billion,
although they warn that feeding this population will be an immense challenge. The decline
in fertility and the existence of a young productive population, however, may not be
enough to offset this concern over food security. The food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) warns that in order for countries to mitigate the impact of population growth, food
production must increase by 70 percent; annual cereal production must rise to 3 billion
tons from the current 2.1 billion; and yearly meat production must go up to 200 million
tons to reach 470 million.
The problem here is that the global rate of growth of cereals had declined considerably
- from 3.2 percent in 1960 to just 1.5 percent in 2000. The FAO recommends that
countries increase their investments in agriculture, craft long-term policies aimed at
fighting poverty, and invest in research and development. The UN body suggests also that
countries develop a comprehensive social service program that includes food assistance,
consistent delivery of health services, and education especially for the poor.

What is Migration?
Migration should not be considered a "problem." There is nothing moral or immoral
about moving from one country to another. Human beings have always been migratory. It
is the result of their movements that areas get populated, communities experience
diversity, and economies proper. Thus, rather than looking at migration in terms of a
simplistic good vs. bad lens, treat it as a complex social phenomenon that even predates
contemporary globalization.
 Cambridge English Dictionary defines global migration as " a situation in which people
go to live in foreign countries, especially in order to find work. Most global migration is
from developing countries to developed ones."
There are two types of migration: internal migration, which refers to people moving
from one area to another within on country and international migration, in which people
cross borders of one country to another.
International migration can be broken down into five groups. First are those who move
permanently to another country (immigrants). The second refers to workers who stay in
another country for a fixed period (at least 6 months in a year). Illegal migrants comprise
the third group, while the fourth are migrants whose families have "petitioned" them to
move for the destination country. The fifth group are refugees (also known as asylum
seekers), i.e., those "unable or unwilling to return because of a well- founded fear of
persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social
group, or political opinion."

Benefits and Detriments for the Sending Countries

 Even if 90 percent of the value generated by migrant workers remains in their host
countries, they have sent billions back to their home countries. In 2014, India held the
highest recorded remittance ($70 billion), followed by China ($62 billion), the Philippines
($28 billion), and Mexico ($25 billion). These remittances make significant contributions to
the development of small- and medium-term industries that help generate jobs.
Remittances likewise change the economic and social standing of migrants, as shown
by new or renovated homes and their relatives' access to new consumer goods. The
purchasing power of a migrant's family doubles and makes it possible for children to start
or continue their schooling. Yet, there remain serious concerns about the economic
sustainability of those reliant on migrant monies. The Asian Development Bank (ADB)
observes that in countries like the Philippines, remittances "do not have a significant
influence on other key items of consumption or investment such as spending on education
and health care.
More importantly, global migration is "siphoning qualified personnel' (and) removing
dynamic young workers. This process has often been referred to as "brain drain." The loss
of professionals in certain key roles, such as doctors, has been detrimental to the migrants'
home countries. In 2006, some 15 percent of locally trained doctors from 21 sub-Saharan
African countries had emigrated to the United States or Canada; the losses were
particularly steep in Liberia (where 43 percent of doctors left), Ghana (30 percent), and
Uganda (20 percent).
Governments are aware of this long-term handicap but have no choice but to continue
promoting migrant work as part of state policy because of the remittances' impact on GDP.

The Problem of Human Trafficking and Integration

On top of the issue of brain drain, sending states must likewise protect migrant
workers. The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation lists human trafficking as the
third largest criminal activity worldwide. In 2012, the International Labor Organization
(ILO) identified 21 million men, women, and children as victims of "forced labor," an
appalling three out of every 1,000 persons worldwide.
Human trafficking has been very profitable, earning syndicates, smugglers, and corrupt
state officials profits as high as $150 million a year in 2014. Governments, the private
sector, and civil society groups have worked together to combat human trafficking, yet
the results remain uneven.
GLOBAL DEMOGRAPHY
INTENDED LEARNING OUTCOMES:
• Explain the theory of demographic transition as it affects the global
population.
• Classify the political, economic, cultural and social factors of global
movements of people.
• Describe firsthand knowledge of the experiences of OFW’s
 • the study of statistics of population
such as births and deaths, and the
DEMOGRAPHY
composition of a particular human
population.
 DIFFERENCES OF A RURAL
FAMILY AND AN URBAN FAMILY:

• Rural
• tend to have more children to help in farm work
or in a small family enterprise.They view children
as a form of investment, with their children’s
houses to serve as their “retirement homes.”
• Urban
• desires to have only one or two progenies
(children). Since partners are tied down on their
own professions, neither has time to devote to
having kids. They have sights to long-term savings
plans.
 Thomas Malthus - “An Essay on the Principle of
Population” – population growth will inevitably
exhaust world food supply by the mid-19th century.

THE PERILS OF
OVERPOPULATION: Paul and Anne Erlich – “The Population Bomb” –
overpopulation in the 70s and 80s will bring about
global environmental disasters that would, in turn,
lead to food shortages and mass starvation. They
proposed that countries like the USA take the lead in
the promotion of global population control to reduce
population growth rate to 0%.

Population Control – programs based

on the argument that resources could be
used for economic progress rather than
being “diverted” and “wasted” to feed
more mouths.
RECOMMENDED POLICIES OF PAUL AND ANNE ERLICH:

Institution-
Policy-Oriented Monetary Building
taxes on additional Incentives
Chemical children and creation of a
paying off men powerful
Castration luxury taxes on who would agree
child-related Department of
to be sterilized Population and
products. after two children. Environment
“IT’S THE ECONOMY, NOT THE BABIES!”

• Betsy Hartmann – a major critic of the neo-Malthusian Theory.

• Other experts pointed out that the population did grow fast in the
1960s, and this growth “aided economic development by spurring
technological and institutional innovation and increasing the supply of
human innovation.”
OTHER CRITICS OF THE NEO-MALTHUSIAN THEORY

• Feminist Perspective
• Against any form of population control because they are compulsory by nature,
resorting to a carrot-and-stick approach that actually does not empower women.
• They believe that government assumptions that poverty and environmental
degradation are caused by overpopulation are wrong.
• Feminist also point out that there is very little evidence that point to overpopulation
as the culprit behind poverty and ecological devastation.
 • Population as of 2014 has reached 7.4 billion and
is projected to increase to 9.5 billion by 2050, and
11.2 billion by 2100. 95% of this population
growth will happen in the developing countries.
POPULATION • The developed world has a generally stable
GROWTH AND population but declining in some of the most
FOOD advanced countries (e.g. Japan, Singapore,
Germany).
SECURITY
• The decline in fertility and the existence of a
young productive population may not be enough
to offset the challenge of food security.
References:
• Claudio, Lisandro E. and Abinales, Patricio N. (2018) The Contemporary World, C & E Publishing, Inc.
• Kennex, Prince and Aldama, Reguyal (2016) The Contemporary World, REX Book Store, Inc.
Global
Migration
Global Migration

Migration – the movement of people

from their place of origin to another.
Humans have always been migratory,
this led to the populating of areas. USA hosts the most number of
Communities experience diversity, and migrants
economies prosper. Migration is a
complex social phenomenon that even
predates contemporary globalization.
 Internal
people move from one area to
another within one country
Types of
Migration:
International
people cross borders of one
country to another
 Workers Illegals
Immigrants
people who stay in another country people who move to another
people who move permanently to
for a fixed period due to country without proper
another country
employment documentation

/ Refugees (asylum-seekers)
Petitioned people who are unable to return to
their country because of a well-
people who move to another
founded fear of persecution on
country with the help of their
account of race, religion, nationality,
migrant families
membership in a particular social
group, or political opinion.

Types of International Migrants:

Demographers estimate that 247 million people are currently living outside the
countries of their birth. 90% left for economic reasons, and the remaining 10% are
refugees or asylum-seekers.
USA remains as the top destination for migrants, followed by West Europe, and Middle
East.

The migrant influx has led to a debate in destination countries on whether migrants
are assets or liabilities to national developments.

Migration
Effects of migration:
Assets – according to a study in 2011 by the Harvard Business School, the likelihood and
magnitude of effects for natives from immigration are substantially weaker than often
perceived.
Liabilities – a number of anti-immigrant groups and political figures see migrants as liabilities
(e.g. Donald Trump).
 Remittances
Benefit of ◦ money remitted or sent to the home countries of
migrant workers that could help in their home
Migration country’s economic development. Remittances can
directly impact the home countries’ economy, and the
migrants’ families.
Brain Drain – the siphoning of qualified personnel and removing dynamic young
workers to work abroad. Focused on whitecollar workers (professionals).

Brawn Drain – the siphoning of skilled and semi-skilled workers out of the labor
force to work abroad. Focused on blue-collar workers (laborers).

Human Trafficking – considered to be the third largest criminal activity in the

world, worth as much as $150 billion in 2014.

Detriments of Migration
References:
• Claudio, Lisandro E. and
Abinales, Patricio N. (2018) The
Contemporary World, C & E
Publishing, Inc.
• Kennex, Prince and Aldama,
Reguyal (2016) The
Contemporary World, REX Book
Store, Inc.