Fertility, mortality, migration, and population scenarios for 195 countries and territories from 2017 to 2100: a forecasting analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study.


Journal

Lancet (London, England)
ISSN: 1474-547X
Titre abrégé: Lancet
Pays: England
ID NLM: 2985213R

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
17 10 2020
Historique:
received: 30 08 2019
revised: 14 02 2020
accepted: 13 03 2020
pubmed: 18 7 2020
medline: 28 10 2020
entrez: 18 7 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Understanding potential patterns in future population levels is crucial for anticipating and planning for changing age structures, resource and health-care needs, and environmental and economic landscapes. Future fertility patterns are a key input to estimation of future population size, but they are surrounded by substantial uncertainty and diverging methodologies of estimation and forecasting, leading to important differences in global population projections. Changing population size and age structure might have profound economic, social, and geopolitical impacts in many countries. In this study, we developed novel methods for forecasting mortality, fertility, migration, and population. We also assessed potential economic and geopolitical effects of future demographic shifts. We modelled future population in reference and alternative scenarios as a function of fertility, migration, and mortality rates. We developed statistical models for completed cohort fertility at age 50 years (CCF50). Completed cohort fertility is much more stable over time than the period measure of the total fertility rate (TFR). We modelled CCF50 as a time-series random walk function of educational attainment and contraceptive met need. Age-specific fertility rates were modelled as a function of CCF50 and covariates. We modelled age-specific mortality to 2100 using underlying mortality, a risk factor scalar, and an autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model. Net migration was modelled as a function of the Socio-demographic Index, crude population growth rate, and deaths from war and natural disasters; and use of an ARIMA model. The model framework was used to develop a reference scenario and alternative scenarios based on the pace of change in educational attainment and contraceptive met need. We estimated the size of gross domestic product for each country and territory in the reference scenario. Forecast uncertainty intervals (UIs) incorporated uncertainty propagated from past data inputs, model estimation, and forecast data distributions. The global TFR in the reference scenario was forecasted to be 1·66 (95% UI 1·33-2·08) in 2100. In the reference scenario, the global population was projected to peak in 2064 at 9·73 billion (8·84-10·9) people and decline to 8·79 billion (6·83-11·8) in 2100. The reference projections for the five largest countries in 2100 were India (1·09 billion [0·72-1·71], Nigeria (791 million [594-1056]), China (732 million [456-1499]), the USA (336 million [248-456]), and Pakistan (248 million [151-427]). Findings also suggest a shifting age structure in many parts of the world, with 2·37 billion (1·91-2·87) individuals older than 65 years and 1·70 billion (1·11-2·81) individuals younger than 20 years, forecasted globally in 2100. By 2050, 151 countries were forecasted to have a TFR lower than the replacement level (TFR <2·1), and 183 were forecasted to have a TFR lower than replacement by 2100. 23 countries in the reference scenario, including Japan, Thailand, and Spain, were forecasted to have population declines greater than 50% from 2017 to 2100; China's population was forecasted to decline by 48·0% (-6·1 to 68·4). China was forecasted to become the largest economy by 2035 but in the reference scenario, the USA was forecasted to once again become the largest economy in 2098. Our alternative scenarios suggest that meeting the Sustainable Development Goals targets for education and contraceptive met need would result in a global population of 6·29 billion (4·82-8·73) in 2100 and a population of 6·88 billion (5·27-9·51) when assuming 99th percentile rates of change in these drivers. Our findings suggest that continued trends in female educational attainment and access to contraception will hasten declines in fertility and slow population growth. A sustained TFR lower than the replacement level in many countries, including China and India, would have economic, social, environmental, and geopolitical consequences. Policy options to adapt to continued low fertility, while sustaining and enhancing female reproductive health, will be crucial in the years to come. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Understanding potential patterns in future population levels is crucial for anticipating and planning for changing age structures, resource and health-care needs, and environmental and economic landscapes. Future fertility patterns are a key input to estimation of future population size, but they are surrounded by substantial uncertainty and diverging methodologies of estimation and forecasting, leading to important differences in global population projections. Changing population size and age structure might have profound economic, social, and geopolitical impacts in many countries. In this study, we developed novel methods for forecasting mortality, fertility, migration, and population. We also assessed potential economic and geopolitical effects of future demographic shifts.
METHODS
We modelled future population in reference and alternative scenarios as a function of fertility, migration, and mortality rates. We developed statistical models for completed cohort fertility at age 50 years (CCF50). Completed cohort fertility is much more stable over time than the period measure of the total fertility rate (TFR). We modelled CCF50 as a time-series random walk function of educational attainment and contraceptive met need. Age-specific fertility rates were modelled as a function of CCF50 and covariates. We modelled age-specific mortality to 2100 using underlying mortality, a risk factor scalar, and an autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model. Net migration was modelled as a function of the Socio-demographic Index, crude population growth rate, and deaths from war and natural disasters; and use of an ARIMA model. The model framework was used to develop a reference scenario and alternative scenarios based on the pace of change in educational attainment and contraceptive met need. We estimated the size of gross domestic product for each country and territory in the reference scenario. Forecast uncertainty intervals (UIs) incorporated uncertainty propagated from past data inputs, model estimation, and forecast data distributions.
FINDINGS
The global TFR in the reference scenario was forecasted to be 1·66 (95% UI 1·33-2·08) in 2100. In the reference scenario, the global population was projected to peak in 2064 at 9·73 billion (8·84-10·9) people and decline to 8·79 billion (6·83-11·8) in 2100. The reference projections for the five largest countries in 2100 were India (1·09 billion [0·72-1·71], Nigeria (791 million [594-1056]), China (732 million [456-1499]), the USA (336 million [248-456]), and Pakistan (248 million [151-427]). Findings also suggest a shifting age structure in many parts of the world, with 2·37 billion (1·91-2·87) individuals older than 65 years and 1·70 billion (1·11-2·81) individuals younger than 20 years, forecasted globally in 2100. By 2050, 151 countries were forecasted to have a TFR lower than the replacement level (TFR <2·1), and 183 were forecasted to have a TFR lower than replacement by 2100. 23 countries in the reference scenario, including Japan, Thailand, and Spain, were forecasted to have population declines greater than 50% from 2017 to 2100; China's population was forecasted to decline by 48·0% (-6·1 to 68·4). China was forecasted to become the largest economy by 2035 but in the reference scenario, the USA was forecasted to once again become the largest economy in 2098. Our alternative scenarios suggest that meeting the Sustainable Development Goals targets for education and contraceptive met need would result in a global population of 6·29 billion (4·82-8·73) in 2100 and a population of 6·88 billion (5·27-9·51) when assuming 99th percentile rates of change in these drivers.
INTERPRETATION
Our findings suggest that continued trends in female educational attainment and access to contraception will hasten declines in fertility and slow population growth. A sustained TFR lower than the replacement level in many countries, including China and India, would have economic, social, environmental, and geopolitical consequences. Policy options to adapt to continued low fertility, while sustaining and enhancing female reproductive health, will be crucial in the years to come.
FUNDING
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32679112
pii: S0140-6736(20)30677-2
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30677-2
pmc: PMC7561721
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1285-1306

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Références

Lancet. 2018 Nov 10;392(10159):1736-1788
pubmed: 30496103
Science. 2011 Jul 29;333(6042):569-73
pubmed: 21798936
Glob Environ Change. 2017 Jan;42:181-192
pubmed: 28239237
Lancet. 2016 Dec 10;388(10062):e19-e23
pubmed: 27371184
Popul Stud (Camb). 1996 Nov;50(3):361-87
pubmed: 11618374
Stanford Law Rev. 1988 Apr;40(4):1027-117
pubmed: 11645674
Am J Epidemiol. 2015 Jul 15;182(2):138-47
pubmed: 26081676
Lancet. 2018 Nov 10;392(10159):1923-1994
pubmed: 30496105
Lancet. 2018 Nov 10;392(10159):1995-2051
pubmed: 30496106
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Oct 12;107(41):17521-6
pubmed: 20937861
Lancet. 2018 Nov 10;392(10159):2052-2090
pubmed: 30340847
Science. 2015 Feb 13;347(6223):1259855
pubmed: 25592418
Lancet. 2018 Nov 10;392(10159):e14-e15
pubmed: 30340848
Lancet. 2019 Jun 1;393(10187):2233-2260
pubmed: 31030984
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Aug 28;109(35):13915-21
pubmed: 22908249
Demography. 2011 Aug;48(3):815-39
pubmed: 21748544

Auteurs

Stein Emil Vollset (SE)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Health Metrics Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Emily Goren (E)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Chun-Wei Yuan (CW)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Jackie Cao (J)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Amanda E Smith (AE)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Thomas Hsiao (T)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Catherine Bisignano (C)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Gulrez S Azhar (GS)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Emma Castro (E)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Julian Chalek (J)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Andrew J Dolgert (AJ)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Tahvi Frank (T)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Kai Fukutaki (K)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Simon I Hay (SI)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Health Metrics Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Rafael Lozano (R)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Health Metrics Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Ali H Mokdad (AH)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Health Metrics Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Vishnu Nandakumar (V)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Maxwell Pierce (M)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Martin Pletcher (M)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Toshana Robalik (T)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Krista M Steuben (KM)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Han Yong Wunrow (HY)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Bianca S Zlavog (BS)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Christopher J L Murray (CJL)

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Health Metrics Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. Electronic address: cjlm@uw.edu.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH