History suggests Singapore will enjoy a welcome baby boom in this Year of the Dragon, the most auspicious year for births in the Chinese zodiac.
However, after 25 years of state-sponsored matchmaking and fertility-boosting campaigns, the government’s attempts to arrest a sliding birthrate are falling flat, with potentially profound consequences for the wealthy Asian city-state.
The calls to conception are now urgent and constant to citizens whose fertility ranks last among 222 nations in the CIA’s World Factbook.
Faced with such dismal statistics, the government has begun a review of population and immigration policy and says it plans new measures to encourage births by the time it publishes the results of its consultation early next year.
The message to have more babies is all the more pressing as resentment builds over an influx of foreigners who now make up more than one-third of the population of 5.2 million, a factor that is eroding support for the long-ruling People’s Action Party.
“We have a problem. The long-term trend is down but we cannot give up,” Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (李顯龍) said in a speech on Aug. 26 about the nation’s future. “We need to create the right environment, the right social environment, the right ethos so that Singaporeans want to settle down and have kids.”
Social and economic engineering is nothing new in Singapore, where a firm government hand helped to steer a small island with no natural resources to become one of the world’s most affluent countries in a little over a generation.
However, the relentless drop in the birthrate reveals the limits of that influence in what has been described as a “nanny state.”
For a global trade and financial center like Singapore, its extremely low fertility rate has implications for economic growth, tax revenues, healthcare costs and immigration policy as the number of elderly people looks set to triple by 2030.
There are now 6.3 Singaporeans of working age for every senior citizen. By 2030, the ratio will be closer to 2:1.
At current levels, the birthrate implies that the local population will fall by half within a generation, said Sanjeev Sanyal, a Singapore-based global strategist at Deutsche Bank.
“Even to attract a pipeline of good quality foreign talent, you need socio-political continuity and stability that can only be provided by a robust anchor population,” he said.
If there were any doubts about the government’s blatant message, the mint maker Mentos put out an advertisement urging married Singaporeans to do their civic duty on the evening of the Aug. 9 during Singapore’s National Day festivities.
“I’m talking about making a baby, baby,” the video’s rapped lyrics said, accompanied by hip-thrusting animated hearts. “It’s National Night, let’s make Singapore’s birthrate spike.”
Not long ago, Singapore had the opposite problem.
From the mid-1960s, with post-war baby boomers hitting child-bearing age, the fears were that a population surge would threaten the development of the newly independent nation.
With the slogan “Stop at two,” the government penalized big families, legalized abortion and rewarded sterilization. It was so effective that, by 1987, the policy was reversed and the slogan became “Have three or more if you can afford it.”
Conspiring against more births are powerful contraceptives in the form of intense career pressure, long work hours, small apartments, waiting lists for nurseries and soaring prices.
“Work and life balance is what everybody’s after,” said Evonne, a marketing professional in her 30s, adding she and her husband plan to have one child. “If you don’t want kids, no matter what the government throws at you, I don’t think you really care.”
The 2010 census showed Singaporeans are marrying later than a decade earlier. In the age group of 30 to 34-year-olds, a key time for career, 43 percent of men and 31 percent of women were not married.
For women in their 40s who were or had been married, those with only one child rose to 19 percent from 15 percent.
The issue is acute for the ethnic Chinese who make up 74 percent of Singapore’s citizens and permanent residents, a majority that has ebbed from nearly 78 percent in 1990. Statistics show ethnic Chinese are having fewer babies than the Malay and Indian communities and are more likely to be single.
Officials have sought to balance the call for more children with a message that the country must remain open to immigration to provide the labor and expertise needed for future growth.
However, not all are convinced, as many Internet posts show.
Gilbert Goh, who runs Transitioning, a support group for the unemployed, decried the “relentless messages sent out by the government to accept foreigners” because of the low birthrate.
“Besides seemingly solving the whole birthrate issue here for our government, foreigners also are brought in to solve a bigger issue for employers — cheap hard-working labor,” he wrote on his Web site.
Simmering anger over immigration is widely believed to have contributed to the People’s Action Party’s unexpected loss of seats in last year’s parliamentary elections.
Saying it recognizes concerns about jobs, living standards and social cohesion, the government has put tighter controls on the number of foreigners it lets in, particularly lower-skilled and lower-wage workers.
In July, it put out a paper for public input on ways to encourage Singaporeans to marry and have families as part of its review of population and immigration policy.
The paper, titled Our Population Our Future, set out a troubling scenario for an ageing society if birth trends persist, including a less vibrant economy, an exodus of major companies and a shrinking number of workers and consumers.
To encourage parenthood, the government gives out baby bonuses of up to S$4,000 (US$3,200) for each of the first two children, rising to S$6,000 for the third and fourth. It also matches deposits made into a Child Development Account.
The Social Development Network, part of a government agency, offers free romantic advice from its relationship guru, “Dr Love,” and oversees the activities of private dating agencies.
To reverse the trend, changes in social and workplace attitudes are needed, along with more support for families with housing and affordable, accessible childcare, Lee said in his speech.
If women were having at least two children, that would mean a rise in the population. However, at a fertility rate of 0.78, according to the CIA, the number of Singaporeans is waning.
The government has different data showing women, on average, giving birth to 1.2 babies in a lifetime — down from 1.87 in 1990 and 1.42 in 2001 and far below the replacement rate.
The city-state is not alone. Taiwan, Hong Kong and South Korea also have very low fertility rates and many of the same cost, space and career pressures.
Among Southeast Asian neighbors, Thailand’s fertility rate of 1.66 is below replacement, but populations in Indonesia (2.23), Malaysia (2.64) and the Philippines (3.15) are growing.
Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀), the country’s founding leader and father of the current prime minister, warned last month that Singapore “will fold up” unless it reverses the drop in the birthrate.
“Do we want to replace ourselves or do we want to shrink and get older and be replaced by migrants and work permit holders?” said Lee Kuan Yew, who launched the “Stop at two” campaign in 1966.
Some hope for a zodiac-linked baby boom that is borne out by government figures. Births rose in previous Dragon years in 1976, 1988 and 2000, but those were only minor spikes in a steady decline in Singapore’s fertility rate from 3.07 in 1970.
The government is promising new measures to encourage births and help families, but unless career and cost pressures change dramatically, there may be little effect.
“Can Singaporeans be persuaded to have more children?” was the survey question during a recent television panel discussion on the birthrate. Channel News Asia’s telephone poll may not have been completely scientific, but the answer was clear: a resounding 74 percent of respondents said “no.”
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry