The latest numbers on Japanese population make for a dismal reading — the number of people who died in 2022 (1.56 million) was roughly twice as big as the number of newborn children (771,000). Based on residency registrations, the country’s Internal Ministry estimates a total population loss of some 800,000 last year. This is the largest total drop in population since comparable statistics were first collated in 1968.

Japan now has 122.4 million nationals, down from a peak of over 128 million some 15 years ago.

But the issue of Japan’s shrinking population goes much further into the past. Since the 1990s, successive Japanese governments have been aware that the population would start to decline and tried to offer solutions. And yet, the speed of the contraction has caught even the experts by surprise. In 2017, for example, the Tokyo-based National Institute of Population and Social Security Research forecast that the annual number of births would not fall below the 800,000 threshold until 2030.

With the news on Japan’s population decline growing ever more grim, the government of Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has announced a series of efforts to encourage more people to have children.

Japan ‘on the brink’

In January, Kishida warned that the nation is “on the brink” of a crisis and that his government would spend around 20 trillion yen (around €128 billion, $140 billion) on measures to support young couples who wish to have more children. This corresponds to around 4% of Japan’s GDP, and is nearly double the amount that the government had earmarked for the same goal in fiscal 2021.

The prime minister also set up a panel to devise ways to spend the extra funds. He also hosted an event in Tokyo in late July to mark the launch of a nationwide campaign to support children and families. The government has agreed on increasing child allowances and putting in additional effort to eradicate child poverty and abuse. New fathers will also be encouraged to take paternity leave and additional funding will go into pre-school facilities so that working parents are able to return to work. Parents will also get greater tax breaks.

Kishida said he aims to win the support of society for children and parents.

“We hope that a social circle friendly to child-rearing will spread nationwide,” he said at the launch event.

Critics, however, are not entirely convinced by the latest proposals. They warn that the previous government had also tried to use spending to encourage a baby boom, but Japanese society has failed to respond.

The population is rapidly aging, and the number of people over 65 is already at close to 30% in Japan. Japan’s neighbors China and South Korea are facing similar troubles, and the number of senior citizens is expected to continue climbing in the next three decades.

Will funding be effective?

“The government is focusing very much on the economic aspect and while the budget they are allocating to the problem is very large and it sounds positive, we will have to see whether it can truly be effective,” said Masataka Nakagawa, senior researcher with the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research.

Nakagawa agreed that the latest population statistics were worrying, but warned there are other factors that need to be considered, such as the falling number of marriages. People in Japan are typically getting married later in life and opting to have fewer children, primarily a result of financial pressures, he said.

Chisato Kitanaka, an associate professor of sociology at Hiroshima University, said governments have failed to devise effective policies to solve the population problem, despite knowing that a decline was inevitable.

“There have long been a lot of hurdles for young people who want to have children to overcome,” she told DW. Those include financial and educational concerns, she said, but arguably the biggest problem is social attitudes.

“In Japan, having a child means that a couple has to get married,” she said. “Only 2% of children are born out of wedlock in Japan, but other countries take a far more ‘flexible’ approach to the concept of a family.”

“This is what is considered socially acceptable here and that makes raising a child as a single mother difficult because she has to work and earn money, while at the same time she is singled out by society,” she added.

More foreigners in Japan

Kitanaka believes the government should dramatically increase welfare payments to families to help them raise their children and reduce the substantial costs of education, particularly at the tertiary level.

While looking into the population statistics, Japanese officials also found that nearly 3 million foreign residents were living in Japan, up by more than 289,000, or over 10%, from the previous year. The increase puts the number of foreigners in the Asian country at record high.

And yet, many Japanese are unwilling to seriously contemplate large-scale immigration as a way to solve Japan’s population problem and provide a stable supply of workers.

“It is difficult,” Kitanaka admitted. “There are clearly more foreign residents of Japan now but we as a society are not really thinking about it as a long-term issue. And there are many in Japan who are still not ready to accept foreigners. We need to discuss the sort of Japan that we want to live in for the future.”

26 points

Japan being a super racist country will now lead to their old ones rotting away without any care or help, and their social security system falling apart for the rest.

Apart from that a decreasing population is 100% positive for the planet. Especially in the case of such a wasteful and polluting country per capita like Japan.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

Source on the last point?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Climate change and global warming. Less people = less warming.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

Hope you’re first to go! 🤞

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

The feedback loop is already positive so no the warming will only keep incrementing. For what you say to happen the whole world population should be decimated to about 8 million people over a night. And it better be in a miraculous way, because if not, with the rotting bodies we will get disease levels that will make the black death a cakewalk.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

I’m not the person you are responding to, and in general I don’t agree with their post, but there are some rather strange practices in Japan which are absolutely wasteful.

Years back I used to work in the tradeshow industry. Think CES, FABTECH, SEMA and a ton of smaller industry shows. There are tradeshows all over the world but Japan was different. Japan has a “build and burn” policy. Most booths are designed to come apart, get stored in the off season in a warehouse, and are typically used many of times. They’d be used for a few years and then reskinned to cha ge their look and keep them fresh.

That’s not what would happen in Japan. After every show, they would burn the booths for that show. Every. Single. Show. It was wildly inefficient. Some of these shows are massive - a little mini city put up a few weeks prior to an event, then the event runs for about a week, and then in Japan they’d take all those booths and just burn them. It’s wild and I can’t imagine the environmental impact of doing that after every show.

Now this was years back, so things might be different, but with how slow Japan is to change, I’d be surprised if that is the case.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Jeez, that’s interesting!

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I think similar with their houses. While most houses in the US can last up to hundred years. It is common in Japan for houses to depreciate to worthless in a matter of a decade. So it’s common there to buy old house, demolish, and rebuild from scratch. Repeat after every 10 to 20 years.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Not the one you asked. I don’t have any statistics, but from what I’ve seen of YouTubers living or visiting Japan is an obscene amount of plastic on the food wrapping/packaging. You open a cardboard box and then there’s a plastic bag inside with small individual portions wrapped in plastic for instance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

While being an environment issue, the plastic wrappings have a practical purpose: protect food from roaches. In many japanese cities you cannot have food open without attracting gokiburi within a few hours. This is also why the japanese keep everything as clean as possible. Even in the shadiest places there is someone with a vaccuum and a stickytape floor roller(!) to prevent the smallest crumb from staying on the floor too long. Eating on the move in the streets is frowned upon, because fallen down crumbs attract roaches. Public trashcans are rare, because - you guessed it - roaches. You are expected to carry any trash back home and put it in a sealed bag in your trashbin. The typical size of japanese houses and flats does not offer much space for storing large food containers, so you buy your food in small portions.

Of course a more environment-friendly wrapping would be better, but it has to be able to withstand a roach nibbling on it, which is not the case for various organic-based polymers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Sad to see nazis finding their way to Lemmy, it was so nice without you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points

Super racist with the lowest crime and safest streets

Nah no correlation, let’s continue to flee blue states for no reason

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Why would we want to stop population decline when the world is already overpopulated?

permalink
report
reply
16 points

We don’t have an overpopulation problem. We have with resources being hoarded by a small handful of billionaires.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Yes, we have an overpopulation problem. This has nothing to do with resources being hoarded by a small handful of billionaires. I mean thats a problem, but that’s and additional problem to overpopulation.

We cant continue generating trash the way we do, nor consuming earth resources, generating toxic gases. We are destroying the earth and populating the earth more is just going to accelerate that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

No, it’s just a waste of resources problem. Have a look at all the stuff packaged in plastic in a supermarket, as someone else further up the comments mentioned.

Imagine all these things just not being packaged in plastic, like it was just a few decades ago.

People in the global south are consuming mere percentages of what people in the global north consume, per capita. If we were to actually cut down on the resources we waste for convenience, fun and sheer negligence, Earth could easily support much more than the current population.

At the current rate we consume ~1.7x the resources that the Earth is able to provide each year. Cut the per capita consumption by 80% (which is easily possible) and we can fit much more people onto this planet.

Not saying we shoud fit more people here, but currently we don’t have overpopulation, we have overconsumption.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Population isn’t the issue. It’s bad management of resources and the creation of too many not-truly-disposable resources that is the issue.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Because it’s not good for productive economies that can produce solutions to current problems to stagnate and die. Japan should make moves to encourage a sustainable population growth rate.

Overpopulation is a problem mostly in struggling economies.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

What the hell to you think an overpopulation problem looks like? Jesus, talk about not understanding the problem

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

I walk around the supermarket. Look at the amount of plastic. Then multiply that by all supermarkets in the world. We have many problems. Many.

permalink
report
parent
reply
59 points

What good could possibly come from unlimited population growth?
From 1973 to 2023 the world population doubled. If that trend continues, doubling every 50 years, by the year 2123 there will be 32 Billion people on Earth.
We can’t even house and feed the 8 billion we have now, not to mention the ecological damage that would be inevitable due to expansion and urbanization.
Even if we just double the current population to 16 billion people 100 years from now it won’t be sustainable. We need to find a new system that isn’t reliant on the next generation being bigger than the previous generation because we’re less than a century from it collapsing anyway. We have finite space on this planet and infinite growth will fill that up very quickly.

permalink
report
reply
28 points

The main problem in Japan is the birth rate basically doesn’t even replenish the outgoing population. Japan also have one of the longest life expectancy. Tell me how can you take care of 10 seniors in a retirement home if there’s only 1 working age person to take care of them?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-20 points

The easiest way is to make sure it’s not a 10:1 ratio to begin with. And, You don’t need 1 nurse per person, if you give a nurse 2 patients for the day for a 2:1 ratio it’s better care than most people get right now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

“The easiest solution is to simply not have a problem”

Wow thanks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Robots!

Half the people are hand-wringing about robots taking all the jobs. The other half are hand-wringing about population decline leaving too few working-age people to do all the jobs.

Seems like these 2 problems cancel each other out.😎

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That sounds like a pyramid scheme.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

We can house and feed everyone, but we don’t because it is not profitable to do so. Destroying the planet by selling and using fossil fuels makes a lot more money.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I won’t, but maybe a homeless person will take every opportunity they can to get out of the cold streets, you know?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Well, a lot of people would rather live somewhere other than where they live. Most people might not want to live in the middle of nowhere, but if the house were available, there would be some people who want it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
48 points

Why do these people always want to promote unlimited growth? Oh wait, higher profits

permalink
report
reply
24 points

The problem with Japan right now is that it’s in and heading toward decline. They can’t even sustain. Wage are low, price are high. They seriously need to relax on the immigration policy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Yep, with 0.8 birth rate there’s no way to sustain the population. IIRC you need to have a birth rate of 2.1 to maintain the population.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

0.8 population growth is what the earth needs. It isn’t what bankers want so it isn’t what we will get.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

It seems stupid to be concerned with maintaining growth given the abysmal outlook of the sustainability of human society if it continues on it’s current course.

But social/medical security for the elderly is also funded by workers, so I can see why population decline warrants concern.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I don’t think anyone here is proposing continued growth. We’re concerned about not maintaining current society. We’re concerned about rapid (relatively) drops in population in places like Japan

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

If by “we” you mean people on Lemmy, then perhaps. If by “we” you mean human society then there is definitely a financial reliance on the idea of yearly GDP and company growth sheerly through population growth and corresponding efforts to maintain those growth levels.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/billconerly/2023/01/18/how-population-growth-matters-for-business/?sh=4254119f347c

We need to be careful to balance avoiding population decline with unchecked growth because there are definitely powerful entities that have a vested interest in promoting the latter with little regard for the consequences.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

It just seems to me that we should be focusing on things like automation and healthcare to actually solve the problem rather than trying to brute force it by increasing population everywhere. That’s just not sustainable in the long term, for us nor the planet. But I am not an expert on this subject

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Hospitals need workers too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Because economics, and more specifically fractional reserve banking, require continuous growth. Without growth the whole system comes crashing down. So politics have the option to reform the financial system from the ground up but bankers have historically a tendency to assassinate those that try this, or to force the country into more growth. So they go for the second option.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

This problem will fix itself once all these geriatric morons die off. That goes for basically all problems in the whole world.

permalink
report
reply
-12 points

nice ageism.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Remind me again what age group has more captive wealth? Twenty somethings or the elderly? Who is banned from public office? Twenty somethings or the elderly?

Give me a fucking break.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

Are you looking forward to the day when you’re elderly and future generations blame you for events you lived through but didn’t personally cause?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

There are sadly plenty of people who are both old and poor.

Your real issue is with capitalism, not the elderly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

New geriatric morons are created daily.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 279K

    Comments