The announcement in October that China is terminating its one-child policy marks the end of a 37-year historical aberration that has accelerated the nation’s demographic aging by decades. The social and economic consequences of the authorities’ drastic population controls, which reduced the average fertility rate in urban households from about three in 1970 to just over one by 1982, have been dramatic. The question now is whether, and to what extent, the nation’s new two-child policy will mitigate those consequences.
In fact, the impact of the two-child policy is likely to be just as far-reaching — and, overall, much more positive — than that of the one-child rule. This is especially true in the long term, but the effects would become apparent even in the relatively shorter term. One key reason for this is that an increase in the number of children per household would force a reduction in the aggregate savings rate, fulfilling a long-standing macroeconomic goal.
China’s current saving rate is so high that it is often blamed for fueling international imbalances and driving down interest rates worldwide. Moreover, it is a major obstacle in China’s ongoing transition from an export-led growth model to one based on domestic consumption and services. The two-child policy might prove indispensable in propelling this transition — a process that is to begin sooner than most observers anticipate.
So far, economists have focused largely on the impending shifts in China’s demographic structure. Driven by the one-child policy, the share of China’s population under the age of 20 fell from 51 percent in 1970 to 27 percent by 2010, while the number of people aged 60 and up rose from 7 percent to 14 percent. As a result, the median age increased from about 20 to 35.
As retirees increasingly outnumber working-age people, the pressure on the younger generation is expected to intensify. Indeed, in the coming years, each member of the post-1980s one-child generation would need to support two older people, on average.
Of course, when the two-child generation becomes middle-aged, its members would each have to support only one elderly person, on average, alleviating the economic pressure associated with such a high old-age dependency ratio. However, that would take a few decades. In the meantime, the post-1980s one-child generation would be supporting not only the elderly, but also a higher number of young people.
Although this would undoubtedly be tough for the one-child generation, an unintended side effect would be a surge in consumption, as its members would have little choice but to spend a lot more. A comparison of families that had twins under the one-child policy and those that had just one child offers an indication of the scale of the change in consumption (though, of course, the inability of twins’ parents to spread out consumption spending over time means that it is not a perfect representation).
In terms of saving, urban households with two children saved 12.8 percent of their incomes, on average, in 2009, compared to 21.3 percent in families with an only child. The difference is large across all income groups.
The child-fueled boost in household consumption would undoubtedly affect some sectors more than others. At first, the surge in the number of children would boost the performance of stocks in children’s books, toys and bicycles. As that generation ages, demand for housing, life insurance and pharmaceuticals would increase substantially.
One of the biggest differences would be expenditure on education. According to the 2009 urban household survey, a one-child household in China spends an average of 10.6 percent of its total income on education, whereas a household with twins spends 17.3 percent. As the number of households with two children increases, this change alone could cause the aggregate saving rate in China to drop by as much as 7 to 10 percentage points, from 30 percent today to about 22 percent over the next 10 years.
However, there is a caveat. More children also mean less education investment per child, which could lead to lower human-capital attainment. Indeed, the average twin receives far less support after age 15 than the average only child, creating large differences in education outcomes. Twins are 40 percent more likely to go to a vocational high school than only children.
Nonetheless, China’s shift to a two-child policy is badly needed — and not just because it would achieve the intended long-term goal of balancing the nation’s demographic structure.
While there are certainly pitfalls, including a difficult transition period, the policy could prove to be a boon to China’s efforts to put its economy on a more stable long-term growth path.
Keyu Jin, a professor of economics at the London School of Economics, is a World Economic Forum young global leader and a member of the Richemont Group Advisory Board.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US