Home
News
In Focus
Business
Metro
Nation
World
Sports
Feature
Opinion
View more »Opinion Columns
Wan LixinOpinion deputy editor of Shanghai Daily
Forum emphasizes BRI cooperation between China and Arab countries
Rights to lower sleeper berths should be softened by empathy for fellow passengers
Sunday
- Subscribe
Related News
Home » Opinion » Foreign Views
Redefining 'old age': 60 is the new 40
By Linda G. Martin |
April 27, 2009, Monday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
CHINA'S population is aging quickly.
To address the issue, there are basically two options: try to slow it down; develop policies and programs to deal with whatever negative consequences there might be.
Options for slowing population aging include increasing mortality and increasing fertility.
Raising mortality is not a serious option. The alternative is to raise fertility, but that potentially leads to problems for population growth and size.
What can be done in the short run to slow population aging? One way to slow population aging fairly quickly is to change the definition of "old age."
Nowadays, some countries use age 60 to define old age, and some use 65 or older. Typically, these ages were chosen at a time when average life expectancy was lower.
For example, in the United States, age 65 was chosen as the age of eligibility for public pensions in 1935, when life expectancy was about 61 years.
Life expectancy has gone up a lot since then, and the US and other countries have begun to adjust upward their ages of eligibility for public pensions and their definitions of old age.
In China, life expectancy has also increased dramatically from about 42 years in the early 1950s to about 72 years today - an increase of 30 years of life expectancy in a period of just 50 years, according to the United Nation's Population Database.
That's an amazing accomplishment. Life expectancy in the US has increased only about 10 years (68.9 to 78.3) over the same 50 years.
As a result, what it means to be age 60 or 65 in China has changed dramatically.
If you were age 65 in 1950 in China, you were unusual and likely would die soon. If you are age 65 in China today, you are quite normal and will likely live an additional 15 years.
So perhaps we should consider an alternative way of measuring "old age."
When it comes to developing policies and programs for population aging, I would like to focus on two broad questions in particular.
One is if eligibility for programs should be based on age or need.
In designing policies and programs in response to population aging, I would argue that it is most important to think about need rather than age.
Given the limited resources available to deal with population aging and given the speed at which it is occurring, most countries cannot afford to finance programs to which all older people are entitled just because they have reached a certain age.
Politically it may be easiest to focus on age, but for financial reasons we may need to focus on need.
In China, as in all other countries, there is a great deal of diversity among the older population, and many older people do not need assistance. In short, age does not tell us everything. The challenge is to identify those who need help versus those who do not.
That brings me to the final question that I want to raise: How will the elderly of the future be different from the elderly of today?
There is considerable research around the world, including in China, which shows that our early-life experiences have important implications for the quality of our lives in old age.
So we should not expect that the elderly of the future will be just like the elderly of today. They will have lived quite different lives.
Therefore, it will be important to take a dynamic approach to planning for meeting their future needs.
(The author is a senior fellow with RAND Corporation, a non-profit US research institute. The article is adapted from her speech at a forum held by the Oriental Rostrum in Shanghai on April 20. The views are her own.)
To address the issue, there are basically two options: try to slow it down; develop policies and programs to deal with whatever negative consequences there might be.
Options for slowing population aging include increasing mortality and increasing fertility.
Raising mortality is not a serious option. The alternative is to raise fertility, but that potentially leads to problems for population growth and size.
What can be done in the short run to slow population aging? One way to slow population aging fairly quickly is to change the definition of "old age."
Nowadays, some countries use age 60 to define old age, and some use 65 or older. Typically, these ages were chosen at a time when average life expectancy was lower.
For example, in the United States, age 65 was chosen as the age of eligibility for public pensions in 1935, when life expectancy was about 61 years.
Life expectancy has gone up a lot since then, and the US and other countries have begun to adjust upward their ages of eligibility for public pensions and their definitions of old age.
In China, life expectancy has also increased dramatically from about 42 years in the early 1950s to about 72 years today - an increase of 30 years of life expectancy in a period of just 50 years, according to the United Nation's Population Database.
That's an amazing accomplishment. Life expectancy in the US has increased only about 10 years (68.9 to 78.3) over the same 50 years.
As a result, what it means to be age 60 or 65 in China has changed dramatically.
If you were age 65 in 1950 in China, you were unusual and likely would die soon. If you are age 65 in China today, you are quite normal and will likely live an additional 15 years.
So perhaps we should consider an alternative way of measuring "old age."
When it comes to developing policies and programs for population aging, I would like to focus on two broad questions in particular.
One is if eligibility for programs should be based on age or need.
In designing policies and programs in response to population aging, I would argue that it is most important to think about need rather than age.
Given the limited resources available to deal with population aging and given the speed at which it is occurring, most countries cannot afford to finance programs to which all older people are entitled just because they have reached a certain age.
Politically it may be easiest to focus on age, but for financial reasons we may need to focus on need.
In China, as in all other countries, there is a great deal of diversity among the older population, and many older people do not need assistance. In short, age does not tell us everything. The challenge is to identify those who need help versus those who do not.
That brings me to the final question that I want to raise: How will the elderly of the future be different from the elderly of today?
There is considerable research around the world, including in China, which shows that our early-life experiences have important implications for the quality of our lives in old age.
So we should not expect that the elderly of the future will be just like the elderly of today. They will have lived quite different lives.
Therefore, it will be important to take a dynamic approach to planning for meeting their future needs.
(The author is a senior fellow with RAND Corporation, a non-profit US research institute. The article is adapted from her speech at a forum held by the Oriental Rostrum in Shanghai on April 20. The views are her own.)
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
