EDUCATION AND DEMOGRAPHY: A CRITICAL INTERACTION
The major brake on progress towards EFA is population growth. Table 2 shows the projected increase in the population of primary school-age children in the nine countries between 1980 and 2000: a total of 90 million children. If the primary school-age population had remained at the level reached in 1980 (i.e. 276 million) while school capacity continued to expand, reaching an estimated 291 million places in 1993, there would at present be a surplus of school places in most countries. This is not, of course, what has happened. During the past thirteen years (1980 to 1993), the school-age population in the nine countries has increased by more than 56 million. Thus, even though capacity (i.e. enrolment) grew by 87 million places during the same period, it was insufficient to accommodate all out-of-school children. Achieving universal enrolment, as the school-age population rapidly expands, might be likened to running up a down escalator in that it requires a considerable effort to simply stay where you are, and major exertions to advance.
Table 2
SCHOOL AGE POPULATION IN THE NINE HIGH POPULATION COUNTRIES
(MILLIONS)
COUNTRY 1980 1990 1993 Estimates
2000
Bangladesh 14.3 16.7 17.6 19.7
Brazil 24.0 26.8 28.0 29.9
China 75.2 90.9 98.9 117.1
Egypt 5.7 6.3 6.5 7.0
India 90.6 99.7 102.1 106.7
Indonesia 23.5 26.9 26.8 25.4
Mexico 12.0 12.9 13.0 14.0
Nigeria 17.3 18.6 20.1 22.2
Pakistan 13.5 17.7 19.3 23.9
TOTAL 276.1 316.5 332.3 365.9
The impact of population growth upon school enrolment is, of course, only half of the story. It is the reciprocal relationship, that of education upon population growth, that is both more important and more interesting. The exact dynamics by which education influences population growth, that is demographers and other specialists. The original 'demographic
5
transition' theory posited that the economic and social changes accompanying the industrial revolution resulted, within a generation or so, in lower birth rates. If true, this theory holds out little hope to countries that are already highly populated and have not as yet achieved industrialization or, indeed, even to those that have industrialized and have thereby entered the 30-year 'waiting period'. During those thirty years, a nation growing at a rate of over two per cent would see its population double. A more recent theory, known as the 'social Justice theory', suggests that it is not so much the degree of technological change that matters, but the extent to which all levels of the population share in its benefits. To the extent that 'life-support systems', such as education, health, employment, pensions and legal protection, are available to all, expectations relevant to reproductive decisions are changed. No longer are large families, especially sons, seen as necessary to provide security in old age. The Indian state of Kerala is often cited in support of this theory. In this state, where literacy rates and life expectancy are high and infant mortality rates low, the birthrate declined sharply as economic and social progress advanced.
Whatever the precise dynamics, there is an abundance of empirical evidence showing that rising education levels especially among women - coincide with declining fertility rates. As a whole or in particular areas, all of the nine countries have witnessed the impact of education upon fertility. In Brazil, for example, illiterate women have 6.5 children on average whereas women with a secondary education have 2.5 children. Improvement in rates of child survival has a powerful and logical impact on the number of births: as parents come to expect their children to survive into adulthood, they tend to prefer smaller families. Improved child survival, in turn, is closely related to the educational level of parents, especially mothers. Figure 2, derived from the Indian country report, shows the rate of child mortality for mothers with differing levels of education. What is of particular interest in this figure is that relatively modest levels of education result in very significant declines in child mortality. For example, literate mothers with less than six years of education have an average infant mortality rate of slightly over 100 whereas the children of illiterate mothers experience up to 170 fatalities per 1,000 live births. Education, thus, can be seen to work in ways that are both direct and indirect to reduce fertility rates and, over time, population. But the benefits of a mother's education go far beyond survival: her children are likely to be better cared for and nourished. Her children, especially her daughters, are also far more likely to receive an education themselves. Thus, in a very real sense, the cycle of illiteracy is broken and a cycle of education and progress begun.
6
The situation regarding population differs greatly from country to country2. Bangladesh is the world's most densely populated nation. Parts of Indonesia, including Java, also have population, densities of over 800 inhabitants per square kilometer. In most of the nine countries, there are regions of both high and low population density. China and India are, of course, the most populated countries on earth and, together, account for more than a third of the world's population. The estimated rates of annual population growth also differ sharply among countries, ranging from 1.5 per cent in China to well over 3 per cent in Nigeria and Pakistan. Indeed, it is not so much the level of population as its relentless growth that deeply troubles thoughtful scholars and observers of the global
7
situation. In 1950, for example, the world's population was 200 million less than the estimated population of the nine high-population countries alone in 1990. In the half- century from 1950 to 2000, the world's population is expected to more than double, growing from an estimated 2.5 thousand million in 1950 to a projected 6.3 thousand million in 2000. The figures give pause: 10,000 people are added to the world's population every hour, 250,000 every day and 100 million every year. One need not be an alarmist to observe that the finite space and resources of the planet cannot for long sustain the current rates of population growth.
The Summit is, of course, about EFA, not population; but, as already observed, there is a critical interaction between them. Population growth enormously complicates the achievement of Education for All. But education, once available, tends to reduce fertility rates and hence population growth. It is this relationship that makes it so crucial that EFA be achieved in the next decade in the nine high-population countries. If the countries cannot get over the 'demographic hump' early in the next century, population growth may prove inexorable. The consequences of such a development would be tragic. Education for All - a vision filled with hope for progress, justice and prosperity - could well begin to fade. To present the choice as 'now or never' may over-dramatize it, but not by much.
8