Demographics of Europe

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

So it doesn't appear that Paris is "Blacker" than London, but it would be interesting to figure out where those distorted perceptions come from (Black immigration in London has accelerated exponentially in the 2000s, so obviously if people base their observations from their last visit to London in the early 2000s, the comparison with Paris will be distorted).

Yeah, I have no reason to not believe your numbers, so maybe Paris isn't "blacker" than London.

To me, it "seems" blacker, but obviously I defer to official govt. stats. And yeah, I'm probably getting distorted views from where I am in either city.

Paris seems very "black" compared to London in Gare du Nord, Gare del Est, Arrondissements 17-20, the area north of Chatelet, and pretty much all the RER lines, esp. North and East.

And when I took the Metro to the fantastic cathedral in St. Denis; I think that was the first time in France it felt like a foreign country. That metro line and St. Denis itself appears to be overwhelmingly black.

Also, "black culture" as you define it, seems to be more intertwined into images of Paris, at least to me. The Harlem Renaissance affected Paris, too, then you have Josephine Baker and all the black artists who fled to Paris between the wars. I realize that African American culture isn't the same as Sub-Saharan black or Carribean black culture, but it's still relevant to the Paris image.

Maybe blacks in London just aren't as "visible" in the core neighborhoods and main transit hubs/rail lines? Or maybe I'm just ignorant of the two cities, and need to spend more time in both.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Paris seems very "black" compared to London in Gare du Nord, Gare del Est, Arrondissements 17-20, the area north of Chatelet, and pretty much all the RER lines, esp. North and East.

And when I took the Metro to the fantastic cathedral in St. Denis; I think that was the first time in France it felt like a foreign country.

But those are precisely the areas with the highest concentrations of Black people, so any observation drawn from these places can only lead to a distorted vision of the situation in Paris overall.

Originally Posted by Crawford

That metro line and St. Denis itself appears to be overwhelmingly black.

Let's not exaggerate. Saint-Denis itself has only 10,974 non-Maghreban African immigrants, whereas it has 15,797 Maghreban immigrants, 6,627 European immigrants, 5,694 immigrants from other continents, and 67,693 non-immigrants (including the children of immigrants born on French soil and the people from the French West Indies). The number of people from the French West Indies in Saint-Denis is unknown, but at the 1999 census it was 3,616.

All things considered, using the same ratios that I have detailed in a previous post, there can't be more than 28% of the population in Saint-Denis who are Black and mixed White/Black people. There are more Maghrebans in Saint-Denis than Black people.

In London, 3 boroughs have highers concentrations of Black and mixed White/Black people than Saint-Denis:
- Lewisham: 31.5% of the population are Black and mixed White/Black people
- Southwark: 30.1%
- Lambeth: 30.1%

You should visit these boroughs next time you're in London, and see how they compare to Saint-Denis.

[New Brisavoine]

The French statistical office, INSEE, has just published the detailed demographics results of France for 2011. There are lots of data. I will only talk of fertility rates here. If you're interested in other data, let me know.

In 2011, the total fertility rate (TFR) of France was 2.01, the highest of any large Western country. In Metropolitan France (the European part of France), the TFR was 1.99. The TFR of Greater Paris was 2.03.

In Metropolitan France, the departments outside of Greater Paris with the highest TFR were:
- Tarn-et-Garonne (in the South-West, a department becoming year after year ever more integrated with the Toulouse metropolitan area): 2.24
- Vaucluse (in Provence): 2.23
- Eure (in Normandy): 2.20
- Aisne (in Picardy): 2.19
- Mayenne (in Maine): 2.19

The departments outside of Greater Paris with the lowest TFR were:
- Pyrénées-Atlantiques (in the South-West): 1.75
- Moselle (the "Lorraine" part of Alsace-Lorraine): 1.74
- Cantal (in Auvergne): 1.72
- Upper Corsica: 1.67
- Southern Corsica: 1.64

If we take the administrative territoires which correspond more or less to the largest French metropolitan areas, we find the following TFR:
- Nord (Lille metro area + Valenciennes, Douai and Dunkirk metro areas): 2.09
- Rhône (Lyon metro area): 2.07
- Bouches-du-Rhône (Marseille metro area): 2.07
- Greater Paris (Paris metro area): 2.03
- Loire-Atlantique (Nantes metro area): 2.03
- Ille-et-Vilaine (Rennes metro area): 2.02
- Alpes-Maritimes (Nice metro area): 1.89
- Haute-Garonne (Toulouse metro area): 1.82 (but Tarn-et-Garonne, which is becoming more and more part of the Toulouse metro area, with young couples from Toulouse moving there because land is cheaper, had a TFR of 2.24)
- Bas-Rhin (Strasbourg metro area): 1.78
- Gironde (Bordeaux metro area): 1.78

Overseas, French Guiana kept the crown of French fertility in 2011, with a TFR of 3.44. Martinique, in the French West Indies, has now fallen below Metropolitan France, with a TFR of only 1.88, while the sister overseas department of Guadeloupe has managed to keep a TFR of 2.17. Réunion, in the Indian Ocean, keeps a robust TFR of 2.36 and is on course to reach 1 million inhabitants and even pass Mauritius population-wise (fertility has crashed dramatically in Mauritius). Figures for Mayotte have not been released.

PS: In the Pacific, French Polynesia had a TFR of 2.13 in 2010, and New Caledonia had a TFR of 2.17 in 2010. Figures for 2011 haven't been released yet.

[New Brisavoine]

The Spanish statistical office has also published the 2011 TFR regional figures for Spain, based on the results of the 2011 Spanish census. Spain's fertility was already quite low, but it has reached new lows since the economic crisis started in 2008. Spain's TFR declined from 1.44 in 2008 to 1.34. in 2011, and even 1.32 in 2012, but the 2012 TFR is available only at the national level.

In 2011, 2 Spanish provinces saw their TFR decline below 1, which is possibly the lowest TFR for any administrative area anywhere in the world:
- province of Lugo: 0.98
- province of Ourense: 0.97

These two provinces are in Galicia, a region that is sooner or later going to become extinct if it keeps those dramatically low TFRs.

6 provinces had a super-low TFR between 1.0 and 1.1 in 2011:
- province of La Coruña (in Galicia): 1.09
- province of Las Palmas (in the Canary Islands): 1.07
- province of Santa Cruz de Tenerife (in the Canary Islands): 1.07
- province of Asturias: 1.05
- province of León: 1.05
- province of Zamora: 1.01

A map showing the TFR in the departments of Metropolitan France and in the provinces of Spain in 2011. Only the greenest areas had a TFR ensuring the full replacement of generations (replacement rate), i.e. above 2.075 in the developed world.

[New Brisavoine]

+ the US states and Canadian provinces for comparison. In the US, the TFR has declined from 2.12 in 2007 to 1.89 in 2011 due to the economic crisis. The TFR in the US is now lower than in France (and the UK, not shown on the map). In Canada, the TFR has declined from 1.68 in 2008 to 1.61 in 2011.

8 US states with a population totaling 12.7 million people have a TFR above replacement rate. 31 French departments with a population totaling 24.3 million people have a TFR above replacement rate.

[New Brisavoine]

+ England and Wales, based on the results of the 2011 census.

In 2011, the TFR of England and Wales was 1.93. This is a bit lower than had previously been estimated (previous estimates were in the upper 1.90s), because the 2011 UK census revealed that the population of England and Wales was higher than previously estimated, which therefore automatically decreased the TFR of England and Wales. Nonetheless, the TFR of England and Wales in 2011 was higher than the TFR of the USA (1.89).

Regarding the largest English cities, here are the TFR which correspond more or less to their metropolitan areas (as of 2011):
- West Midlands county (Birmingham metro area): 2.09
- West Yorkshire (Leeds-Bradford metro area): 1.98
- Greater Manchester: 1.96
- South Yorkshire (Sheffield metro area): 1.85
- Greater London: 1.84 (this figure in particular was significantly revised down in light of the results of the 2011 census)
- Merseyside (Liverpool metro area): 1.83
- Tyne and Wear (Newcastle metro area): 1.76

[Crawford]

I wonder if Galicia has the lowest birth rate on earth.

Perhaps areas in Southern Italy or Eastern Europe, or rural parts of Japan, S. Korea or Taiwan have even lower birth rates?

[Minato Ku]

I know that Hong Kong has a very low fertility rate.

[New Brisavoine]

According to the Italian statistical website, the Italian province with the lowest fertility is Carbonia-Iglesias, in Sardinia. The TFR in that province was 1.01 in 2011. Two Galician provinces had a lower TFR in 2011. Overall, the TFR of Galicia was 1.08 in 2011, wheras the TFR of Sardinia was 1.11. The TFR of the Canary Islands and Asturias was even lower than Galicia. The Canary Islands had a TFR of 1.07 and Asturias a TFR of 1.05 in 2011.

I don't know whether the Italian TFR figures take into account the new population figures from the 2011 Italian census though. Given that the 2011 census found less inhabitants in Italy than previously estimated, this would increase the Italian TFR in any case.

[New Brisavoine]

In Hong Kong, the TFR was 1.20 in 2011, having rebounded from a low of 0.90 in 2003. This is still catastrophically low of course, although it might not really matter for a city (it's more problematic for a country or a region).

In Singapore, the TFR was also 1.20 in 2011.

In Japan, the lowest TFRs in 2011 were in the prefecture of Tokyo (1.06), in the prefecture of Kyoto (1.25), in the prefecture of Miyagi (the Sendai area, in the north of Honshu) (1.25), and in Hokkaido (1.25).

In South Korea, the lowest TFRs in 2011 were in the city of Seoul (1.01), in the city of Busan (1.08), and in the city of Deagu (1.15). For entire provinces, the province with the lowest TFR was that of Gyeonggi (the province surrounding the city of Seoul), with 1.31 in 2011.

At the sub-provincial level, the lowest TFRs were in Ulleung County (North Gyeongsang Province), where TFR was 1.00 in 2011, Goesan County (North Chungcheong Province), where TFR was 1.01, and Pyeongchang County (Gangwon Province), where TFR was 1.08.

A few city districts had even lower TFR, the lowest being the (now world famous) Gangnam District, in the city of Seoul, where TFR was only 0.86 in 2011, but these are just some parts of larger cities, so they can't be compared with the TFR of provinces or regions.

In Taiwan, the TFR was 1.07 in 2011. 7 counties/cities had a TFR lower than the two Galician provinces at the bottom of Spanish TFR:
- Tainan City: 0.95
- Kaohsiung City: 0.95
- Chiayi County: 0.93
- Nantou County: 0.92
- Chiayi City: 0.90
- Pingtung County: 0.84
- Keelung City: 0.69

The TFR of Taiwan sharply rebounded in 2012 though (whereas the TFR of Spain continued to decline), and rose back to 1.27. All Taiwanese counties and cities had a TFR higher than 1.00 in 2012, except Keelung City, where the TFR was 0.89.

In Eastern and Central Europe, the TFR is low, but usually not as super low as in the North-Western Spanish regions. I'll add the other countries of Europe one by one anyway, when the TFRs based on the 2011 censuses are published.

So it looks like Galicia, Asturias, and the Canary Islands now have the lowest TFR in the Western world (with the exception of Keelung City and a few city districts in South Korea, but these are not comparable to entire provinces or regions). Outside of the Western world, some municipalities in northern China (which have the size of European regions) may have lower TFR than Galicia, Asturias, and the Canary Islands.

[New Brisavoine]

Summary of the lowest lows.

Hong Kong, Japan, Macao, Singapore
Italy
South Korea
Spain
Taiwan

TFR in 2011 (2012 figures for Taiwan):
- Buyeo County (South Chungcheong Province): 1.20
- Guri City (Gyeonggi Province): 1.20
- Hoengseong County (Gangwon Province): 1.20
- Hong Kong: 1.20
- Rovigo Province (Venetia): 1.20
- Singapore: 1.20
- Anyang City (Gyeonggi Province): 1.19
- Cosenza Province (Calabria): 1.19
- Campobasso Province (Molise): 1.18
- Danyang County (North Chungcheong Province): 1.18
- Jeongseon County (Gangwon Province): 1.18
- Lecce Province (Apulia): 1.18
- Yilan County: 1.18
- Goyang City (Gyeonggi Province): 1.17
- Hanam City (Gyeonggi Province): 1.17
- Hualien County: 1.17
- Salamanca Province (Castile and León): 1.17
- Seongnam City (Gyeonggi Province): 1.17
- Avellino Province (Campania): 1.16
- Bucheon City (Gyeonggi Province): 1.16
- Gwacheon City (Gyeonggi Province): 1.16
- Deagu Metropolitan City: 1.15
- Macao: 1.15
- Sassari Province (Sardinia): 1.15
- Kaohsiung City: 1.14
- Potenza Province (Basilicata): 1.14
- Cheongdo County (North Gyeongsang Province): 1.13
- Pontevedra Province (Galicia): 1.13
- Uijeongbu City (Gyeonggi Province): 1.13
- Nantou County: 1.12
- Palencia Province (Castile and León): 1.12
- Namhae County (South Gyeongsang Province): 1.11
- Cagliari Province (Sardinia): 1.10
- Isernia Province (Molise): 1.10
- La Coruña Province (Galicia): 1.09
- Medio Campidano Province (Sardinia): 1.09
- Miryang City (South Gyeongsang Province): 1.09
- Busan Metropolitan City: 1.08
- Pyeongchang County (Gangwon Province): 1.08
- Canary Islands: 1.07
- Chiayi County: 1.06
- Tokyo Prefecture: 1.06
- Asturias: 1.05
- León Province (Castile and León): 1.05
- Carbonia-Iglesias Province (Sardinia): 1.03
- Chiayi City: 1.03
- Oristano Province (Sardinia): 1.03
- Goesan County (North Chungcheong Province): 1.01
- Pingtung County: 1.01
- Seoul Special City: 1.01
- Zamora Province (Castile and León): 1.01
- Ulleung Island (off the eastern coast of South Korea): 1.00
- Lugo Province (Galicia): 0.98
- Ourense Province (Galicia): 0.97
- Keelung City: 0.89

[Chrissib]

The census 2011 of India found out that Calcutta's fertility rate is at 1.2 children per woman.

The metropolitan area of Bangkok is also clearly below 1.2 children/woman, the city, if I remember correctly is even below 1 child per woman.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Chrissib

The census 2011 of India found out that Calcutta's fertility rate is at 1.2 children per woman.

North or south of 1.2?

Originally Posted by Chrissib

The metropolitan area of Bangkok is also clearly below 1.2 children/woman, the city, if I remember correctly is even below 1 child per woman.

Are there any official TFR data for Thailand's provinces? This is typically the sort of country where regional TFR data are hard to get, and in order to calculate the TFR ourselves, we would need the number of births per year of age of the mothers, which is usually never available for developing countries.

[New Brisavoine]

Here are the TFR that we have for the large European and Asian cities so far. I'm listing the TFR of the administrative units that correspond the most to the metropolitan areas. These are official figures, not calculated by myself, which is why I don't aggregate the data from several administrative units, but list them separately as they appear in official statistics.

TFR in 2011 (2012 for Taiwan):
- Paris: Greater Paris (Île-de-France): 2.03
- London: Greater London: 1.84
- Montréal: Montréal CMA: 1.59
- Nagoya: Aichi Prefecture: 1.46; Gifu Prefecture: 1.44
- Rome: Rome Province: 1.44
- Naples: Naples Province: 1.46; Caserta Province: 1.39
- Barcelona: Barcelona Province: 1.40
- Madrid: Madrid Province: 1.35
- Milan: Milan Province: 1.42; Monza e Brianza Province: 1.31; Varese Province: 1.31; Como Province: 1.30; Lecco Province: 1.39
- Taipei-Keelung: Taipei City: 1.41; Keelung City: 0.89; New Taipei City (former Taipei County): 1.27
- Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto: Osaka Prefecture: 1.30; Hyogo (Kobe) Prefecture: 1.40; Kyoto Prefecture: 1.25
- Tokyo: Tokyo Prefecture: 1.06; Kanagawa Prefecture: 1.27; Saitama Prefecture: 1.28: Chiba Prefecture: 1.31
- Busan-Ulsan: Busan Metropolitan City: 1.08; Ulsan Metropolitan City: 1.39; South Gyeongsang Province: 1.45
- Hong Kong: Hong Kong SAR: 1.20
- Singapore: 1.20
- Seoul-Incheon: Seoul Special City: 1.01; Incheon Metropolitan City: 1.23; Gyeonggi Province: 1.31

PS: I'm also adding Montréal, whose TFR for the metropolitan area is provided by the statistical office of Québec. There are no TFR figures for the other North American metropolitan areas unfortunately.

[Chrissib]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

North or south of 1.2?

Are there any official TFR data for Thailand's provinces? This is typically the sort of country where regional TFR data are hard to get, and in order to calculate the TFR ourselves, we would need the number of births per year of age of the mothers, which is usually never available for developing countries.

The source (http://www.ceped.org/IMG/pdf/ceped_wp30.pdf) only says 1.2, which means that it's somewhere between 1.15 and 1.25.

For Bangkok the last figures I found so far are from the 2005-2006 survey of population change in Thailand (http://web.nso.go.th/en/survey/popch...%20Results.pdf). Unfortunately there are no provincial figures, but at least regional ones.

It gives a fertility rate of 0.88 for the city of Bangkok in 2005/06.

The central region (excluding the city of Bangkok) had a fertility rate of only 1.19, so it is also below 1.2. The central region doesn't only include the suburbs of Bangkok but also the booming region around Pattaya and the surrounding rural areas:



That survey listed Thailand's fertility at 1.47. We now know, thanks to the UN, that it has slid further to 1.4, which should also mean that the fertility of Bangkok and the Central region is now even lower than the figures I wrote above.

[New Brisavoine]

^^The TFR in Thailand may have rebounded since 2005-2006 though. It has rebounded in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong.

Japan 2005: 1.26 >> Japan 2011: 1.39
Taiwan 2005: 1.12 >> Taiwan 2012: 1.27
South Korea 2005: 1.08 >> South Korea 2011: 1.24
HK 2005: 0.96 >> HK 2011: 1.20

Not in Singapore though, although there is apparently progress in 2012.

Singapore 2005: 1.26 >> Singapore 2011: 1.20 >> Singapore 2012: 1.29 (preliminary)

[Chrissib]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

^^The TFR in Thailand may have rebounded since 2005-2006 though. It has rebounded in Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore.

Japan 2005: 1.26 >> Japan 2011: 1.39
Taiwan 2005: 1.12 >> Taiwan 2012: 1.27
HK 2005: 0.96 >> HK 2011: 1.20

That is a possibility, but I don't think that Thailand has already bottomed out. After all, it is still a developing country which means that family values are still changing from traditional to modern, especially in rural areas.

Another possibility is that fertility has fallen strongly in the rural areas but have risen a bit in the cities. Hard to tell without proper data.

[New Brisavoine]

TFR in the 4 Asian tigers + Japan compared to Spain and Italy since 1980. Interesting to note the peaks on dragon years and the troughs on tiger years in the countries belonging to the Chinese cultural sphere. Japan seems to pay no attention to those tiger and dragon years though, although they paid great attention to the fire horse year in 1966 (the worst year in the 60-year Chinese zodiac cycle to have children). The TFR of Japan collapsed in 1966 (it went from 2.14 in 1965 to 1.58 in 1966), then recovered in 1967 (2.23).

We can see that the recent recovery in the 4 Asian tigers is probably due to the dragon year of 2012, and may therefore not last. That's especially true for Taiwan and Singapore.

[mousquet]

The replacement fertility rate is somewhere between 2.05 and 2.1 in developed countries. Except for France and Ireland, no European country makes it. The US barely does, just about like France. Canada doesn't at all.

[New Brisavoine]

The US doesn't make it either. They were at 1.89 in 2011.