206-447-1880 x 114
Senior Communications Associate
206-447-1880 x 111
The birthrate for the Pacific Northwest overall—and for British Columbia, Oregon, and Washington individually—hit a record low in 2002, due to a trend toward delayed childbirth and a scarcity of women of childbearing ages. That’s according to Population Reprieve: Births and Migration in the Pacific Northwest, a new analysis by Seattle-based research center Sightline Institute (formerly Northwest Environment Watch). BC is the most striking example of these trends; it has the region’s lowest birthrate, total fertility rate, and a teen birthrate that is one-third that of the Northwest states’. In 2002 low birthrates, along with slowed migration, contributed to the region’s lowest rate of population growth since 1986.
“This is generally welcome news,” says Sightline Institute executive director and lead author Alan Durning. “It gives us a chance to catch up from the rapid population growth of the 1990s and the impact it had on our schools, roads, and environment. Also, many of the causes of the declining birthrates—such as teens having fewer babies—are good for the region.”
“Population Reprieve” analyzes several critical population trends for the Pacific Northwest, a region that includes British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. Findings include:
- Population growth—slowed but not stopped: In 2002 the Northwest grew by 144,000 people—16 people per hour—the slowest pace of growth since 1986. The region saw its peak growth rate of 37 people per hour in 1992.
- Migration vs. natural increase: About 51 percent of the increase—74,000 people—was due to migration, a much lower number than in recent years but relatively high considering the region’s economic downturn. Natural increase—births minus deaths—accounted for about 49 percent of the increase in 2002, adding 70,000 people to the region. This breakdown is unusual for recent years, but typical over the long-term. Since 1950, natural increase has contributed 44 percent to the Northwest’s population growth. In Idaho, natural increase has contributed 69 percent to growth since 1950.
- Natural increase and birthrates at record lows—temporarily: Natural increase is at the lowest rate for the region since the 1930s, driven by a decades-long tapering of birthrates. The region’s birthrate declined to 12.3 births per 1,000 residents in 2002; BC, Oregon, and Washington also set individual birthrate records (9.7, 12.5, and 13.1, respectively). But the trend—driven largely by the aging of the baby boomers—was predictable. Birthrates in the Northwest states may rebound soon as children of the baby boom “echo” reach peak childbearing ages.
- Teen birthrates at an all-time low: Births to teenage women have declined to what are probably all-time lows in every state and province of the region. The teen birthrate in BC is the lowest by far, at 12 births per 1,000 teenage women in 2002; Oregon and Washington’s are tied at 36; Idaho’s is at 40.
- Having babies later: In general, northwestern women are postponing childbearing. Births to 20-somethings are waning across the region and births to women in their 30s and 40s are rising. In BC, births to women in their 30s are likely soon to exceed births to women in their 20s, and births to women in their 40s may soon overtake births to teens.
- The BC difference: BC also has the lowest total fertility rate in the region. Women now have an average of just 1.4 children each—similar to rates in Europe and Japan—compared to 1.9 children for Washington and Oregon and 2.3 for Idaho. Several factors contribute to BC’s birth trends: Canadian women—for whom prescription contraceptives are somewhat more affordable than for Americans—tend to use contraception with low failure rates; the province has less child poverty—an important driver of elevated fertility—than the Northwest states; and BC’s international immigrants tend to come from places where small families are the norm, such as China. In addition, a tough job market for young adults in BC may have caused some to delay childbearing.
- Why population matters: Population, along with consumption, is a key indicator of the region’s livability. Northwesterners consume their body weight in resources every day, and much of the environmental harm in the region results from that consumption. But because the region has stabilized many of its per capita impacts, increases in environmental harm caused by the Northwest come largely from population growth. As population increases so do energy use and waste generation, numbers of motor vehicles, and greenhouse gas emissions. Growth also worsens the contamination of drinking water supplies, augments air pollution, and strains already damaged forests and rivers.
- What to do: As BC’s example shows, natural increase can be slowed by steps that limit unplanned pregnancies; some 38 percent of births in the Northwest states result from unintended pregnancies. The report recommends that the region increase efforts to reduce child poverty and prevent sexual abuse (proven precursors to teen births); make contraceptive services more available and affordable; and expand access to emergency contraception.
Lead author Durning points out that such efforts will naturally help keep the birthrate low and thus limit the impacts of population growth. “We should focus efforts on curbing natural increase, since migration simply shuffles people around,” he says. “And as we can see from our rates of unplanned births, there’s lots of room for improvement.”
The report also notes that although many northwesterners equate a growing population with a growing economy, population growth and true prosperity are not necessarily linked. Since 1990, for example, the population of the Northwest states grew faster than that of the United States overall—yet so did the numbers of unemployed and poor people in the region.
Sightline Institute (formerly Northwest Environment Watch) is a Seattle-based nonprofit research and communication center that monitors progress toward a sustainable economy and way of life in the Pacific Northwest.