Singapore's Population Will Shrink Without Immigrants

[webfact]

Singapore's population will shrink without immigrants

Li Xueying

The Straits Times

Singapore's population will start shrinking in 24 years if it shuts the door on immigrants.

This decline is inevitable even if the country produces significantly more babies, boosting its total fertility rate (TFR) to 1.85 - up from the current 1.15.

The grim picture is painted in a study the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) did from 2007 to early this year - one that will have ramifications for economic growth and social relations.

Spearheaded by demographer Yap Mui Teng, the study generated 48 scenarios of Singapore's future population based on different TFRs - the number of children a woman is expected to have in her lifetime - and migration levels.

Among them is one that assumes the TFR will rise gradually to 1.85 by 2025 before stabilising at that level, and that net migration (the inflow of migrants minus those who leave) is zero.

The outcome is a decline in the resident population - comprising citizens and permanent residents (PRs) - from today's 3.77 million to 3.37 million in 2050.

At a briefing yesterday, IPS director Janadas Devan said: "What it shows is there is no way you can keep your population from declining without migration."

Dr Yap presented four scenarios, based on 'realistic' assumptions that reflect Singapore's conditions. In three of them, Singapore maintains a TFR of 1.24 - the rate in 2005 and one it could conceivably re-attain in the coming years.

The result shows if net migration is zero, the resident population will start declining in 14 years, reaching 3.03 million by 2050. But if Singapore lets in a net total of 60,000 migrants a year, the resident population will burgeon to 6.78 million by 2050.

At the peak of Singapore's liberalisation of immigration rules, in 2008, PR status was given to 79,200 foreigners. Last year, the Government tightened the inflow, accepting 29,265 new PRs.

In the final scenario, which mirrors most closely the current situation, it is assumed that Singapore accepts 30,000 net migrants a year. With this, there will be 4.89 million residents in 2050.

In making these projections, researchers assumed that people live longer; that immigrants are of working age; and that they reproduce at the same rate as the local population.

Another finding: The population will age across all four scenarios. Even though the absolute number of residents aged 15 to 64 increases when there is a net inflow of migrants, they will make up an ever-smaller proportion of the total population. This means there will be fewer working-age residents supporting the elderly.

Last year, 8.2 working-age residents supported one elderly resident (8.2:1). The ratio falls to 1.7:1 by 2050, if there are no migrants and the TFR stays at 1.24. Raising the TFR to 1.85 would have 'little effect' as the ratio goes up only marginally to 1.9:1, said the study.

"However, in-migration would ameliorate this decline," it said, projecting that the ratio will be 2.7:1 if there were 30,000 net migrants a year, and 3.5:1 if there were 60,000.

Singapore, which has one of the lowest TFRs in the world, has struggled with population woes for the past 20 years. Despite incentives including cash bonuses and longer maternity leave, the TFR slumped to a historic low of 1.15 last year.

To mitigate against this, the Government eased immigration rules in 2006. This, however, led to resentment in the face of overcrowding and increased competition for jobs, housing and public transport - a sore point aired during the general election this year.

In view of the sentiment, the first scenario of zero migration may be politically attractive.

But bank economist Nizam Idris said a shrinking population - and workforce - will affect economic growth, especially as much of it is driven by the labour-intensive services sector.

The smaller workforce can be partially offset by improving productivity, he said. However, he noted, the scenerio's assumption of a 1.85 TFR in tandem is 'optimistic', and so Singapore should continue welcoming immigrants.

But, he stressed, the policy should be "strict in allowing just highly skilled individuals to be PRs or citizens".

Responding last night, the National Population and Talent Division said the Government "continues to encourage marriage and parenthood and has committed significant resources to this end".

"Nevertheless, as shown in IPS' projections, even if the TFR improves, immigrants are required to sustain the population," it said. "We will continue to manage the pace of immigration to ensure that immigrants are of good quality and can be well integrated into Singapore society."

At a forum on Monday, former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew said 20,000 to 25,000 immigrants a year is 'digestible' politically.

Tampines GRC MP Baey Yam Keng told The Straits Times "it will be a tough call" for Singapore to return to the 2009 situation and take in 60,000 immigrants a year. Singaporeans, however, would be willing to accept "maybe 30,000 to 35,000" - if the infrastructure gets up to speed.

-- ANN 2011-09-08

[PattayaParent]

So they need to breed with immigrants to make their population taller?

[Orac]

Aging populations and decreasing fertility is hardly specific to Singapore and a similar problem is happening in most of the rest of the developed world and will have a greater effect on those with large welfare systems.

[veryruay]

I have a Singapore friend telling me, this country is very stressful to live in. Whenever she has the chance, she will cut her Identity card into pieces and get out of the country.

I do not know the reasons though.

[MaiChai]

Reminded me of Alcatraz when I lived there. People definitly get island fever and the need to get off the island. You feel like an ant most of the time. Everything is streamlined to process lots of people. I did like the variety of food and nautiness can be had. Actually immigration encourage visiting ladies for 'working holidays'.

[Briggsy]

These articles make me so mad.

"Grim picture" "Desperate situation" "Problem"

The world is grossly overpopulated. We are battling for resources. Population growth still continues unchecked. And yet a reduction in population is a "grim picture". It is not! It is most welcome. The downside is we have to work longer to ensure we have enough taxpayers in the system to fund the economy. This is a result of the fact that we now live longer and the temporary high number of post war baby boomers now in retirement.

This journalist needs to lay off the hyperbole and change the editorial line.

[soihok]

Like most countries, Singapore evolves around its ecomomy. I do think that the writer speaks in a negative tone also.

I live in Singapore and have worked here ( not PR or Citizen ) for almost 10 years now and although taking both is an option, I can't see myself making Singapore my permanent home when there ain't no job to go to.

The competition and pressure that most Singaporeans are under is rather intense, the place is very small and everything is very expensive ( taking into account the average wage of your average Singaporean ).Most parents with young kids have to work, so they hire foreign helpers. The pressure on the kids to do well is extreme and this expectation of the parents is something I wouldn't like to go through.

Singapore's economy and general daily running of the country would not survive without foreigners and everyone here understands this.

So, in the end of the day, everyones's a winner. Can't see what the fuss is about.

There are a lot of jobs here that most Singaporeans wouldn't dream of doing, so they hire foreigners to do it for them.

Next.

[soihok]

I have a Singapore friend telling me, this country is very stressful to live in. Whenever she has the chance, she will cut her Identity card into pieces and get out of the country.

I do not know the reasons though.

So shut up then.

[soihok]

Reminded me of Alcatraz when I lived there. People definitly get island fever and the need to get off the island. You feel like an ant most of the time. Everything is streamlined to process lots of people. I did like the variety of food and nautiness can be had. Actually immigration encourage visiting ladies for 'working holidays'.

Obviously not for you then. Everyone to their own.

I'm here for the money, not the lifestyle. Saying that, I can't think of an easier place to live in.

Good schools for the kids to.

[poanoi]

These articles make me so mad.

"Grim picture" "Desperate situation" "Problem"

The world is grossly overpopulated. We are battling for resources. Population growth still continues unchecked. And yet a reduction in population is a "grim picture". It is not! It is most welcome. The downside is we have to work longer to ensure we have enough taxpayers in the system to fund the economy. This is a result of the fact that we now live longer and the temporary high number of post war baby boomers now in retirement.

This journalist needs to lay off the hyperbole and change the editorial line.

+1

[veryruay]

Hey what is wrong with you Lane6 .... why ask me shut up? Am I making any fuss in here? I cannot comment or ask anything that I do not understand? Or is this forum belongs to you and only you can comment?

I am not trying to be sarcastic even though I am a new member in TV. But your comment is very rudE!!!

I have a Singapore friend telling me, this country is very stressful to live in. Whenever she has the chance, she will cut her Identity card into pieces and get out of the country.

I do not know the reasons though.

So shut up then.

Edited September 9, 2011 by veryruay

[Captain Chaos]

Singapore's economy and general daily running of the country would not survive without foreigners and everyone here understands this.

So, in the end of the day, everyones's a winner. Can't see what the fuss is about.

There are a lot of jobs here that most Singaporeans wouldn't dream of doing, so they hire foreigners to do it for them.

Next.

Absolutely right. Immigration in this context is mainly talking about PRs. As the numbers quoted show, the number of PR applications being approved has been reduced by two thirds or so. I got my PR last year and it was a bit of a grim, slow grind through the process. 7 months in total, start to finish.

But, the Singapore Ministry of Manpower that issues work permits is outside of that debate and I see no slowdown at all in them issuing "Employment Passes" to either well paid and well qualified foreigners, or to (mainly) Asians coming in to do labouring, domestic, nursing jobs that the locals consider beneath them these days. Employment Passes don't let you put down any deep roots in the country so apparently they don't consider that as an issue, despite the impact it definitely has on public transport, low cost housing rentals ( I use that term relatively!) etc etc

CC

[lazygourmet]

I have a Singapore friend telling me, this country is very stressful to live in. Whenever she has the chance, she will cut her Identity card into pieces and get out of the country.

I do not know the reasons though.

The only South-East Asia nanny state...

[Captain Chaos]

The only South-East Asia nanny state...

No, not really ... you can have a lot more "fun" in Singers than you can in most European / Australasian / North American countries without any fear of government "nannying". Of course, it's a nice lazy stereotype to trot out though...

CC

[Awohalitsiktoli]

These articles make me so mad.

"Grim picture" "Desperate situation" "Problem"

The world is grossly overpopulated. We are battling for resources. Population growth still continues unchecked. And yet a reduction in population is a "grim picture". It is not! It is most welcome. The downside is we have to work longer to ensure we have enough taxpayers in the system to fund the economy. This is a result of the fact that we now live longer and the temporary high number of post war baby boomers now in retirement.

This journalist needs to lay off the hyperbole and change the editorial line.

Agreed, and here is a good article that explains the other side: www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-harte-population-20110721,0,715317.story It was also posted in the Bangkok Post a couple of weeks ago. People rarely talk about the negative side of continuing to allow the population to increase. What we need is a huge decrease in human numbers, down to around 2-3 billion.

[jeanelie]

Be wise, don't fill Singapore up with Muslims or" Relax lah" will be gone forever.

[markprotti]

for all those in Singapore think about India and china ..

[londoedan]

[What we need is a huge decrease in human numbers, down to around 2-3 billion.

I'm sure that you're right in theory, however I can't see it happenning in practise.

As a poster mentioned above, Singapore is a great place to go as an introduction to working in Asia. Safe, clean, fantastic transportation, very good range of food outlets, lots of bars etc. etc..

However its become frighteningly expensive over the last few years. Apartment rentals anywhere near Orchard or desirable places like Marina Bay seem to be creeping towards 10K S$ a month, which to me seems excessive.

Loads of work there though, at all levels apparently, I think the unemployment rate when I was there in the summer was about 2.5%.

I've worked there a few times, for up to about a year, and it makes a great base to visit neighbouring countries. I did 5 months there this summer and spent only 2 or 3 week-ends there. You can use the cheap and safe planes, trains, boats and automobiles to travel to your hearts content.

Londo