Living Standards, Poverty and Population: Question 2

Worked solution

Step 1: Work out the dependent population, then and now

The dependency ratio compares everyone outside working age (children plus retired people) with everyone of working age.

Thirty years ago: dependants $= 30\% + 10\% = 40\%$ of the population; working age $= 60\%$. $\text{Dependency ratio} = \frac{40}{60} \approx 0.67$

Today: dependants $= 22\% + 26\% = 48\%$ of the population; working age $= 52\%$. $\text{Dependency ratio} = \frac{48}{52} \approx 0.92$

Step 2: Compare the two ratios

The dependency ratio has risen from about $0.67$ to about $0.92$. Although the under-16 share fell (from 30% to 22%), the 65-and-over share rose by even more (from 10% to 26%), so total dependants grew from 40% to 48% of the population, while the working-age share shrank from 60% to 52%. A smaller working-age population is therefore now supporting a larger dependent population, which is $\boxed{\text{option B}}$.

Why the other options are wrong

• A: a smaller working-age share does not by itself mean a lower dependency ratio. What matters is the size of the working-age population relative to dependants, and here dependants have grown faster than the working-age population has shrunk in proportion.
• C: the two changes do not cancel out. The fall in the under-16 share (8 percentage points) is smaller than the rise in the 65-and-over share (16 percentage points), so total dependants rise overall.
• D: fewer children being born reduces the under-16 share, but this is outweighed by the much larger rise in the elderly share, so the dependency ratio still rises rather than falls.

Final answer

• The dependency ratio has risen (from about 0.67 to about 0.92), option B.