A country worrying of population reduction

July 11 was World Population Day, as designated by the United Nations Development Programme. It began in 1987, when the global population surpassed 5 billion for the first time. The UN marked the day to draw global attention to the rapidly increasing world population at the time. The world population then went up to 7 billion in October 2011 and then to 8 billion in November last year. According to the UN, the global population is projected to exceed 9 billion in 2037 and 10.4 billion in 2086.

But Korea has a different worry. After its total fertility rate (TFR) — the average number of children born to a woman in her reproductive years — hit 0.78 — the world’ lowest — in 2022, Koreans have been worrying about the possibility of their country disappearing from the map. If the trend continues following the country’s population peaking at 51.84 million in 2020, the Korean people will completely disappear by 2750.

The rapid population decrease from the ultralow birthrate poses serious challenges to Korea. Reduced consumption will certainly diminish economic vitality, including production. It will also worsen its shaking national pension and force colleges to shut down due to a lack of students. As pediatrics and obstetrics and gynecology departments are increasingly shunned by medical students, small and mid-sized cities will begin to disappear. We have seen it already.

How have we come this far? The primary reason for population reduction is people’s tough livelihoods from overheated competition. Population experts say the turning point was in 2015, when the country’s TFR started declining from 1.24. At the time, the young population also started to move to the Seoul metropolitan area en masse to find better opportunities. Apartment prices in Seoul also showed signs of a sharp rise around that time. More people in the median income group had to bear a higher burden than before to pay back the debt they owed to banks for housing loans.

Solutions can be found in the signs for population decrease at the inflection point. They include a drastic increase in cheap — yet good quality — public apartments for rent, a revitalization of universities outside Seoul, and increased jobs in regions other than the capital city. If the pitiful TFR resulted from the overcompetition and poor housing environment in Seoul, the government’s policy focus must be on the problems.