JAPAN'S population is in decline. As of last October 1st, the government announced last week, giving the results of its latest five-yearly census, Japan's 127m-odd population was 19,000 fewer than a year earlier. Deaths had outstripped births for the first time in a period of peace since records have been kept. A falling population, the Yomiuri Shimbun duly wailed, meant that national survival was at stake. It may have a point: with no change in the current fertility rate—below 1.3 children per woman of child-bearing age—the last Japanese will die as soon as 2800.

Such are the perils of extrapolation. The more immediate demographic issue, though, is not so much the predicted fall in Japan's population, to as low as 100m in 2050, some say, but rather a shift in its composition. For as well as a low birth rate, life expectancy continues to lengthen (if that were not so, Japan's population would have started to fall some time ago).

Japan is greying at an unprecedented rate. Half a century ago, the proportion of the population over 65 stood at around 5%, well below that in America, Britain, France or Germany. Today, Japan's proportion of elderly, at 19%, is the highest in the world, and is forecast to reach almost 30% by 2025. In particular, an exceptionally large group of Japanese, the baby-boom generation, is making its way towards retirement. After the second world war, returning Japanese soldiers married, settled down and produced children in large numbers. Between 1947 and 1949, an average of 2.7m children were born a year (with another 2.3m in 1950). That was 30-40% more than in the succeeding years. It made for a more defined population pyramid than, say, America, where the baby-boomers were born over several more years. Today, the country's demographic profile looks something like a Japanese lantern. Soon, it will look more like a narrow-based urn (see chart).

From next year, the baby-boomers start to retire (60 being the minimum mandatory retirement age for now). The prospect is causing some anguish among policymakers. As youngsters, these people were the shock troops during the golden period of Japan's post-war economic transformation. Today, they are the custodians of years of accumulated technical and management skills. Their absence, some suggest, will lead to a shortage of skilled workers and mentors, a loss of productivity and even a surplus of office space. Mama-san in her bar in Ginza will miss this lot.

A less noticed aspect of the greying of Japan is the coming sharp decline in the population of the youngest workers. At present, some 16m Japanese are in their 20s, many of them children of baby-boomer parents. But the number in this age bracket will shrink by about 3m over the next decade. The consequence of all this is, first, that fewer workers will support an ever growing number of non-workers, other things being equal; and, second, that the demographic shape of the workforce is assuming that of an inverted pyramid, with fewer young workers at the base where once there were many. These factors combined lead some commentators to speak of dire consequences: of a national malaise led by a decline in living and even educational standards (soon, for instance, you will be able to gain a place at university simply by sitting the exam), accompanied by a government bankrupted by retirement obligations.

Yet this is all far from inevitable. Atsushi Seike, a labour economist at Keio University, argues that, since the great bulk of older workers are company employees, the solution lies in fixing the corporate employment and retirement systems to allow people more easily to work for longer. Those systems were designed for the age of the pyramid. When lots of young people were coming into the workforce, mandatory retirement was adopted by companies who wanted to make room for them. The policy was also useful for getting rid of surplus workers that employment-protection laws otherwise stopped from being laid off. As a result, nine-tenths of companies with more than 30 employees today set a mandatory retirement age, usually 60, the legal minimum.

The government and some companies are starting to respond to the new circumstances. Already, eligibility for the fixed part of the state's two-tier pension benefit has been raised to 62; it will be 65 by 2013. Eligibility for the bigger, earnings-related part still stands at 60 till 2013, but rises to 65 by 2025. To bring corporate practices into line, a law passed in 2004 takes effect in April requiring companies to raise the minimum mandatory retirement age to 65 by 2013—or, if that is not feasible, to provide employment until they are eligible for the fixed part of the state pension.

These adjustments, Mr Seike thinks, are just tinkering at the edges of an outdated system. Since life expectancy has leapt by nearly 30 years since the war, to 82 on average, then the minimum age for pensions should be raised swiftly at least to 67 and preferably to 70. Moreover, he believes, mandatory retirement—forcing people to stop when they are keen to work longer and capable of doing so—“has no place in a society that hopes to make full use of its older citizens.” It should be scrapped altogether. So should age discrimination in hiring: many job advertisements are closed to anyone over 45.

Certainly, most older Japanese want to work. Indeed, the average working man finally leaves the labour market when he is approaching 70. The problem is that he is given jobs that do not always match his abilities. A system of pay based on seniority rather than merit, which once ensured employee loyalty, now imposes a financial burden on companies, making them unwilling to keep even good workers in their former jobs. So getting rid of mandatory retirement would also put welcome pressure on companies to revise pay scales better to reflect ability rather than length of service. That, surely, would suit ambitious younger people too.

From Economist.com

no japanese in the world. i wonder how that will be like??

no kiddie porn that's for sure

JAPAN'S population is in decline
not to sound insensitive I think the land is reaching it's limits of how many people it can support while growing in other areas

example: more industural areas=less living areas

oh and also less raw resources to support life

wich also = less jobs

Japan needs to stop being xenophobic and allow and accept foreign immigration.

Japan's heading into population decline because more people see children as a liability... it's no longer economical to have children. It's basically the opposite of a long time ago when parents would have like 4 or 5 children to help with the farm. Japan's in a stage where the jobs are all paperwork.

Other countries more industrialized are looking to see how Japan deals with this problem because all industrialized countries will reach the stage Japan is in. Japan can also help with it's population decline if it allowed more immigrants into the country since it has a strict immigration policy.

I'm sure it'll be ressolved before there are "no Japanese" left. They have already begun to talk about using benifits to pesuade the Japanese not to be wary of having children. Not only is it cramped for space in Japan but the Kanto Plain, or Tokyo area, is the only real major flat land useable to build on. Furthermore, Japan is an expensive place to live. Even if you have enough space, Japan is a very competitive country when it comes to education. (Japan's literacy rate is nearly 100%). If you don't hire a private tutor you're already behind. These little things all add up I believe.

No more weird news from Kim Jung Il



Yes, Chinese...............................................................soldiers.

that would be a dream come true wouldn't it??

Maybe it's from all those crazy parents that kill their kids for stupid reasons.

Things don't go stagnant forever. The cultural behaviours of Japanese will change. Life tends to bounce back and forth between two extremes. You work really hard at some point then you realize life is not all about work and money. Japan is all hard work at present time and this philosophy is driven by the older generation. While the younger generations are brought up in such philosophy, things may turn around anytime by a small group. The influence of the smaller group's lifestyle may be very viral and next thing you know, it will shift Japanese attitudes and behaviours.

Unfortunately, it won't happen, given the fact that the LDP (FYI, it's the post-WWII remains of the Militarists) still propagate the "Wara Wara Nihonjin" mentality, which I believe embodies the xenophobia in Japan.

Japan works very hard but the US actually works the hardest of any country. I think Japan comes in second...and I think Europeons are among teh laziest, haha.

omg japan's got 127 million people on an island the size of california (an American State)!!! that's like taking half of america and putting it in... California! crazy crazy. decline? thank goodness. honestly, it's for the best. i mean, not to be mean of course. in fact i'm never ever mean. but seriously, that's so many people it's unrealistic, unheard of, unimmaginable.

A friend of mine came back from Japan. She lived there for 3 years and noticed that Japanese men put their work first before their family and themselves, and women decidedly choose work over marriage.

Well I think it's just a different way of thinking in Japan, they are very serious when it comes to working. I think all industrial countries face this problem overall. And seeing how the US is the work-o-holic of the world, perhaps this is another reason why the US also has the most divorces? I think it's just a combination of Japan being very into working and also Japan being hard to live in since it's expensive to live their. Can't raise a family without the money.

I also don't think the Japanese population should decline further despite being one of the most densely populated countries.