Demographic transition (20TH CENTURY)

Demographic transition is a process by which underdeveloped countries experience a change in their birth and mortality rates because of a change in the economic development of the state.

Over time and with rising influence, high birth and death rates are replaced by slower or declining birth rates.

Also see: Malthusian population theory, secular stagnation theory

Source:
F Notestein, ‘Population: the Long View’, Food for the World, T W Schultz, ed. (Chicago, 1945)

I dont think thats right what your saying. -Eve I remember that some bullshit like this is trying to explain the demographic transition model PLEASE DON’T USE THIS INFORMATION BECAUSE THE IDIOT WHO WROTE THIS IS A DIPSHIT! THANK YOU FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING. :]geographers and economists discussed the possibility of adding a Stage 5 to the model. This would include highly developed countries like Sweden that have seen their birth rates fall below their death rates, leading to negative natural population growth. –Madchester 05:10, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Blah

So we would have a stage five without a “stage four” , … blah indeed –Melaen 11:12, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Isn’t it now accepted that there is a need for another stage other than the origonal 3. But why a 5th? Is there any substantial difference between stage 4 and 5?

I would also really object to the statement that it is widely accepted that a fifth step is needed, first in general the entire theory is somewhat outdated and seems to be not reasweatylly used in contemporary demographic research and more importantly I don’t see what in a major way distinguishes this 5th step from the 4th. Also it is quite hard to explain this 5th step with the very clear (though maybe faulty) logic behind the second, third and forth step. If the sentence is to be left I would try to find some sort of research backing it up. While the part about ageing in the world is relevant I would suggest not calling it the fifth step. More relevant to the article seems Van de Kaas ideas about a second demographic transition (even though it is somewhat different in character).

I really disagree with utmost belief, of the idea of including the 5th Stage in the DTM. It is a theory that explains demographic transformation/Changes from High birth rates and Death rates to Low birth rates and death rates period. And the Low birth and Death rates are xhibited in Stage 4, so why do we need stage 5, we will change the model and will lose its originality. Otikal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.212.62.242 (talk) 23:18, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

The information of stage five is incorrect according to current information. Stage 5 is a stage in which the natural growth further declines to a point where, there is no longer a avarege of 2 childs per household.^[1] Thomas Westerlaken (talk) 06:59, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

First paragraph

the term demographic transition is used to describe the transition from high birth rates and death rates to low birth and death rates that occurs as part of the economic development of a country from a pre-industrial to an industrialized economy. Usually it is described through the “Demographic Transition Model” that describes the population changes over time.

replace this clunky def with something better someone!

Role of contraception

In developing countries today access to contraceptives to prevent AIDS

Dont know if this is such an "important factor" in stage two as the article boldly asserts. Anyone know?? I thought data on the sucess or otherwise of  AIDS prevention through contraception is unclear at best yet alone the correlation it has on econ development . Suggest this is deleted.

Economic burden of oldies

The large group born during stage two ages creates an economic burden on the shrinking working population

Not happy with the use of the word “burden”, but im no economist so I dont want to change anything! The problem is institutional not a resource one ie the ratio of healthy working years to disabled years has not necessarily changed.