Monday 16 April 2012

China faces 'timebomb' of ageing population

China faces 'timebomb' of ageing population:
Life expectancy in China is increasing but the number of young adults is plummeting due to strict birth control policies
While hundreds of millions of Chinese families toasted the new year together, 84-year-old He Daxing huddled on the doorstep of his daughter's home in Chongqing.
On the most important date in the calendar, not one of his six grown children – born before the country's one-child policy was imposed – would take him in.
Filial piety is so embedded here that officials offered to help him sue his offspring when he fell ill after four nights outside: Chinese law requires adults to support their parents. Yet his case shows that traditional ideals are under growing pressure in a fast-changing, increasingly individualistic society.
China may soon have more He Daxings. It faces a soaring number of old people and a shrinking number of young adults, who are also less able – and sometimes less willing – to support their elders.
Life expectancy has soared in China, while fertility has plummeted due to strict birth control policies. In 2009 there were 167 million over-60s, about an eighth of the population. By 2050 there will be 480 million, while the number of young people will have fallen. "It's a timebomb," warned Wang Feng of the Brookings-Tsinghua Centre for Public Policy in Beijing.
China's economic miracle has been fuelled by its "demographic dividend": an unusually high proportion of working age citizens. That population bulge is becoming a problem as it ages. In 2000 there were six workers for every over-60. By 2030, there will be barely two.
Other countries are also ageing and have far lower birth rates. But China is the first to face the issue before it has developed – and the shift is two to three times as fast.
"China is unique: she is getting older before she has got rich," said Wang Dewen, of the World Bank's China social protection team.
Tens of millions of workers have migrated to the cities, creating an even worse imbalance in rural areas which already suffer low incomes, poor public services and minimal social security.
Most old people there rely on their own labour and their children. China not only needs to support more older people for longer, but to extend support to new parts of society. World Bank researchers point to promising advances, such as the national rural pension scheme and the expansion of health insurance.
China can help deal with increased costs by raising its retirement age; at present, only about a fifth of urban women are still working at 55. Improving education should also raise productivity. Some experts believe such measures will be enough to wipe out the "demographic debt". Others wonder if China will begin to welcome immigrants.
Wang Feng thinks China has been far too timid, storing up trouble for the future. "Leaders have ridden the economic boom and largely collected and spent money and built infrastructure – the hardware: railroads, bridges," he said.
"[In future] they will not have the money to spend, but what is more challenging is the part policymakers have stayed away from: building software – the pensions and healthcare system. That will be critical to social stability and regime legitimacy, but it is much harder to do."
The current five-year plan is the first to address ageing. But Wang said leaders had yet to accept it also meant tackling fertility. Under the "one child policy" – which has several exemptions – the fertility rate has dropped to between 1.5 and 1.8, say experts. That is well below the 2.1 figure required to keep the population stable.
Many experts have urged the government to move to a uniform two-child policy. Instead, it has extended what was meant to be a one-generation measure.
China's 150 million only children face a heavier burden of duties, but economic changes such as migration make them harder to fulfil.
In many ways, China is a good place to age. Older people tend to be active, involved and respected community members. Family bonds remain strong.
"Having undutiful children or being an undutiful child is something really shameful in Chinese culture," said Dr Fengshu Liu of Oslo University, who has researched intergenerational relationships.
Society has moved away from the "top-down, authoritarian" family model, but still expects children to meet their parents' physical and emotional needs and often to support them financially.
Several of the young people she interviewed saw filial piety as a basic requirement in a spouse.
Officials have been keen to promote such ideals – some have even pushed for laws ordering children to visit regularly – and not just for economic reasons, Liu argued. They see it as helping to preserve stability and social co-operation.
In a more individualistic society relationships face new challenges. Children and their spouses can find their parents' demands excessive or intrusive.
He Daxing's daughters complained he had favoured his sons. And even when personal relations are good, practicalities may intervene. Children may work far from their parents, like one of He's sons, or simply lack time to help.
"I have one daughter and there's no way she will be able to take care of me. I will be in a care home when I get older," predicted Liu Zhongli.
Her pragmatism is unusual, but then Liu is director of Evergreen, a state-owned old people's home in north Beijing. She says that children still love their parents – her facility is inundated with visitors each weekend – but that the pressures of modern life are often overwhelming. "Even if your parents live with you, every day you leave early and come back from work late – so you still leave them at home alone. That's not support and that's not filial," she said.
Increased life expectancy can also mean children need care themselves, like the 88-year-old son of the home's oldest resident, who has just turned 109.
For many, there is still a stigma in moving into a care home. But 86-year-old Zhang Jiazhen tried living with her daughters in the US and said she is happier in Evergreen. "I'm an independent person … I really don't like China's old-fashioned view that you raise sons and daughters to support you when you're old," she said. "I can mix with a bigger family here."
The facilities are modern and comfortable and the atmosphere companionable. Retirees sing together or battle it out at billiard and mahjong tables.
But even if you can afford Evergreen's fees of up to 5,100 yuan (£510) each month, it has just 600 beds, and a waiting list of 1,300. According to the World Bank, China has only enough care home places for 1.6% of over-60s, while in developed countries the capacity is about 8%.
Many of those homes are grim and there is a desperate shortage of good staff: most are unskilled or have little training.
Evergreen is a testing ground for potential solutions. A team from Beijing Aeronautics and Astronautics University are trialling a bed that turns into a wheelchair, giving residents more independence, and a robot "dog" to keep them company. "The robot can have simple chats with them, play music and opera, or even dance for them through sound controls. It says 'It feels so good!' when they pet it," said researcher Zhang Guanxin.
But while such innovations may smooth the later years of wealthier urban citizens, the poor will need help from China's leaders to meet basic needs. Even then, argues Wang Feng, families will face extra strain.
"People who could have had a second child [were it not for the one child policy] have missed the opportunity and when they grow older it is not clear how the government can come to the rescue. In fact, I think it's clear that the government cannot substitute for families," he said.
Additional research by Han Cheng

guardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

China grows older before it grows rich - video

China grows older before it grows rich - video:
How can a country that is still developing cope with what some call a demographic timebomb?

Sunday 4 March 2012

China softens line on single child policy

China softens line on single child policy:

Officials phasing out older, threatening slogans in favour of more upbeat ones to 'make family planning keep pace with the times'

China's single child policy was once a source of pride to government planners, with slogans reflecting strict family planning laws emblazoned on buildings across the country.

But reminders of the policy's harshest excesses are being scrubbed away in an effort to create a softer message, with officials phasing out older, threatening slogans in favour of more upbeat ones.

According to the People's Daily, the aim is to "make family planning work keep pace with the times and go deep among the masses".

The single child policy is unlikely to be rescinded soon, because doing so would cause uproar among those denied second children. But it has frayed at the edges, with multiple groups, including ethnic minorities and the mothers of disabled children, being allowed a second child.

Family planners are also seeking subtler approaches, such as more teenage sex education.

Slogans from the early days of the policy, which was launched in 1979, stressed punishments for couples who had unplanned pregnancies. Typical examples included: "If sterilisation or abortion demands are rejected, houses will be toppled, cows confiscated".

These slogans conveyed "coldness, constraint and even threats. They easily caused resentment in people and led to social tension", the People's Daily said.

A report entitled Outdoor Propaganda for Population and Family Planning has called for fresh slogans, the newspaper said. Work to scrub away remnants of the old ones began in 2007. Recent slogans will also be reviewed for suitability.

Newer slogans tend to promote the benefits of having fewer children or advocate gender equality, for instance: "Lower fertility, better quality; boys and girls are all treasures". A current slogan warns: "Mistreatment and abandonment of baby girls is strictly prohibited."

An unintended consequence of the single child policy has been widespread, though illegal, sex-selective abortion, and infanticide.

Forced abortions continue to take place, human rights groups say. Chen Guangcheng, a lawyer, remains under house arrest in Shandong province for campaigning on behalf on local women. Police have prevented foreign journalists from visiting him.

Wall slogans are no longer the main method of propaganda, because sex information is widely available online. Recent experiments with sex lessons for primary school children, using anatomically explicit dolls, caused controversy.

Teenage sex education is increasingly accepted and focuses on relationship-building, making limiting family size a more easily digestible message.

Propagandists have been busy modernising and softening other slogans and imagery felt to be out of date and potentially counterproductive prior to the March annual meeting of the National People's Congress.

Photos of the model soldier Lei Feng, a Maoist youth hero, have emerged showing him astride a motorbike, sporting a fashionably floppy haircut.

Lei was a model soldier who died in 1962, aged 22, when a telegraph pole fell on him. Lei was known for selfless service to his comrades. Chairman Mao coined the slogan "learn from Lei Feng". A national Lei Feng day started in 1963 on 5 March.

Exhortations to learn from Lei continue to be used. A more cynical catchphrase is "I'm not Lei Feng", used to reject, or mock, a request the speaker finds unreasonable. But debate has emerged about whether China's youth can still relate to him.

Past role models were also usually depicted as "overly self-controlled and lofty to the extent of being like gods", the paper said.

The "de-deification of Lei Feng will promote his appeal," according to the Global Times newspaper.


guardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds




Thursday 1 December 2011

Will You Still House Me When I'm 64?

Will You Still House Me When I'm 64?:

In the song by the Beatles, the worry was about being fed and needed at 64. Things have changed. If the Beatles wrote those lyrics today, the worry instead might be about housing.


Australia’s aging population is an inevitability. As our replacement rate falls (we’re having fewer children per family) and life expectancy extends, the proportion of over 65s will double in 40 years. In raw numbers, there were 2.5 million over 65s in 2002, and this will rise by 6.2 million in 2042. That’s an extra 4 million in this demographic. Have we given enough thought to where they’re going to live, and what styles of housing they might prefer?


There have been a number of developers who have understood the looming significance of Australia’s aging population, and who have sought to supply the ‘retirement living’ market with product that suits. At one end have been the glitzy apartment style residences in inner city locations, while at the other have been the aged care ‘homes’ provided for those in need of access to nursing care or medical assistance, or at least the reassurance of it being present.


Running parallel with the provision of retirement living or seniors living projects has been an assumption that, once ready to abandon the family home of many years, seniors will be happy to move across town and relocate to the facilities that are available. Perhaps this is hangover from the days when retirement or aged care living was provided on Stalinist lines: our oldies were forcibly shuffled off to some retirement centre well away from the rest of the community they grew up in. A sort of gulag for grumpies?


But what if seniors simply want a change of housing style within their community? What if they don’t want to move across town to the only available accommodation because they would prefer to continue to live in the neighbourhood and community they have spent a large part of their lives living in? They may want to continue to shop with ‘their’ local butcher, visit their local supermarket, newsagent, bank branch (if it still exists) and generally remain connected to the people and places that they’re familiar with – including (quite possibly) members of their family, children and grandchildren.


Meeting that need in the future is going to be close to impossible unless planning schemes (old fashioned zoning laws) adopt a more flexible approach. Flexibility will be needed because most of the existing suburbs of our major population centres are largely built out and will require retrofits and redevelopment of existing stock to accommodate senior’s housing preferences. Generally, the only tracts of undeveloped land capable of meeting seniors housing needs tend to be on the outskirts and while there’s nothing wrong with fringe development, it seems unfair to expect seniors to relocate across town to regions they’re unfamiliar with and to alienate themselves from their community simply because supply side mechanisms (controlled by planning schemes) don’t permit choice.


Further, the built out status of our ‘established’ suburbs – as they now stand – is something that much planning law seems to want to preserve for time immemorial. It’s a little bit like imagining that someone has declared the existing housing mix and styles a fixture of permanency: let’s put a giant glass dome over it all and call the city a museum – because we don’t (it seems) want anything to change.


But if we are to allow Australia’s seniors to ‘age in place’ and to ensure our markets provide choice, it’s going to mean some things will need to change, given the likely levels of future demand. The fastest growth of aging populations will be around our ‘middle ring’ suburbs and given the overwhelming preference to ‘age in place’, it is these suburbs that are going to have to change if those needs are to be met.


What will that change look like? The psychology of seniors in years to come – even today – is going to be different to those of previous generations. They’ll likely be more active rather than sedentary. The family home that’s served them to this point may now be simply too big for their needs, or contain too many stairs (the artificial hip or knee doesn’t like too many stairs). Their future housing needs will vary widely - some will be happy with apartments in high to medium density developments (elevators to their level of living means no stairs) while others (generally the majority) will prefer smaller, detached or semi-detached, single level dwellings. Many may want a small yard or garden (or at least a large balcony or terrace if in a unit), and perhaps want to keep a small pet dog or cat. They may want a spare bedroom for visitors or for babysitting grandchildren. They will probably prefer to be close to shops and near to public transport. And the majority will want to find something of that nature generally within the same community they’ve been living in. It is unlikely they’ll be searching for the ‘retirement home’ style of assisted care living until they’re well into their later years when their choices will be more limited.


Their problem will be that developers will struggle under current planning schemes to get approval for semi-detached housing designed with seniors in mind, if it means amalgamating some detached residential dwellings near local shops, because that land use is highly protected. They will struggle to gain approval to convert a large single site into medium or high rise in areas near local shops or transport, because the community will likely object – particularly if it’s in a neighbourhood where low density prevails (typical of most of suburban Brisbane). Advocates of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) style development might now be shouting at this article that ‘TODs are the answer.’ That might be so, if only one single TOD had been delivered during the past 15 years we’ve been talking about them.


Plus, the majority of proposed ‘TOD’ style development areas largely surround inner city transport nodes. Not much use if you’re in Aspley and want to stay there. And of course there’s the reality that multi level apartments are much more costly to develop and construct than the cottage building industry’s approach to single level, small detached housing.


The changes needed need not be dramatic, and subtle changes to land use surrounding existing retail or service centres in middle ring suburbs ought to be able to be achieved with minimal planning fuss. It is still possible to imagine something being done with minimal planning fuss, but very difficult to point to any actual examples. Still, hope springs eternal.


The changes could allow (for example) for some amalgamations of larger lot, detached post war homes into higher density cottage-style dwellings on a group title, still single level and with low construction costs. A 2000 square metre amalgamation could in theory provide 10 such cottages, with private garden space and minimal likelihood of community objection. The key would be to keep regulatory costs down, so punitive development levies would be out of order. After all, the infrastructure already exists and seniors tend to be much less demanding on utilities or services than young households. (Have a think about how little garbage they generate, or how little water they use as an illustration. It would surely be unfair to tax seniors in this type of housing for infrastructure upgrades under the circumstances?).


The traditional ‘retirement home’ or ‘aged care’ model of seniors housing is still going to be needed, especially as people require more frequent or acute care in their later years, and become less and less independent. But there will be a good 10 to 15 year period for people for whom the family home no longer suits, and who aren’t yet ready for ‘God’s waiting room.’ How we accommodate this coming bubble of seniors who want to age in place and continue to live independently, and how planning schemes will allow markets to provide choice and diversity, is something that perhaps should be a policy focus now.


Ross Elliott has more than 20 years experience in property and public policy. His past roles have included stints in urban economics, national and state roles with the Property Council, and in destination marketing. He has written extensively on a range of public policy issues centering around urban issues, and continues to maintain his recreational interest in public policy through ongoing contributions such as this or via his monthly blog The Pulse.


Photo by BigStockPhoto.com



Wednesday 30 November 2011

UN: farmers must produce 70% more food by 2050 to feed population

UN: farmers must produce 70% more food by 2050 to feed population:

A quarter of farmland is highly degraded, according to the first report into the state of the world's land resources

The United Nations has completed the first global assessment of the state of the planet's land resources, finding in a report that a quarter of all farmland is highly degraded and warning the trend must be reversed if the world's growing population is to be fed.

The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) estimates that farmers will have to produce 70% more food by 2050 to meet the needs of the world's expected 9-billion-strong population. That amounts to 1bn tonnes more wheat, rice and other cereals and 200m more tonnes of beef and other livestock.

But as it is, most available farmland is already being farmed, and in ways that decrease its productivity through practices that lead to soil erosion and wasting of water.

This means that to meet the world's future food needs, a major "sustainable intensification" of agricultural productivity on existing farmland will be necessary, the FAO said in its report, State of the World's Land and Water Resources for Food and Agriculture.

The report was released on Monday, as delegates from around the world meet in Durban, South Africa, for a two-week UN climate change conference aimed at breaking the deadlock on how to curb emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants.

The report found that climate change coupled with poor farming practices had contributed to a decrease in productivity of the world's farmland following the boom years of the "green revolution", when crop yields soared thanks to new technologies, pesticides and the introduction of high-yield crops.

Thanks to the green revolution, the world's cropland grew by just 12% but food productivity increased by 150% between 1961 and 2009.

But the UN report found that rates of growth had been slowing down in many areas and today were only half of what they were at the peak of the green revolution.

It found that 25% of the world's farmland was now "highly degraded" with soil erosion, water degradation and biodiversity loss. Another 8% was moderately degraded, while 36% was stable or slightly degraded and 10% was ranked as "improving".

The rest of the Earth's surface is either bare or covered by inland water bodies.

In western Europe, highly intensive agriculture has led to pollution of soil and aquifers and a resulting loss of biodiversity. In the highlands of the Himalayas, the Andes, the Ethiopian plateau and southern Africa, soil erosion has been coupled with an increased intensity of floods. In rice-based food systems of south-east and eastern Asia, land has been abandoned thanks in part to its loss of cultural value.

The report found that water around the world was becoming ever more scarce and salinated, while groundwater was becoming more polluted by agricultural runoff and other toxins.

In order to meet the world's water needs in 2050, irrigation must become more efficient because most systems perform well below their capacity, the FAO said.

The agency called for new farming practices such as integrated irrigation and fish-farm systems, as well as overall investment in agricultural development.

The investment deemed necessary until 2050 is $1tn (£642bn) for irrigation water management for developing countries alone, with another $160bn for soil conservation and flood control.


guardian.co.uk © 2011 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds