2023 FUTURE OBSERVATORY
2023 FUTURE OBSERVATORY
Not least of the major demographic changes facing governments around the world - and especially in the West (and Japan) - are those resulting from increased longevity. People are living longer, even without major advances in medicine; and the indications are that by the middle of the 21st century the average lifespan expected of healthy adults might reach 100 years - again without major break-throughs in medicine. With the break-throughs which are possible, in the light of recent research into the ageing process, this lifespan, again for healthy adults (which excludes factors such as infant mortality, which drag averages down), could rise beyond 120 years.
This is no abstract concept, for many of those who are children now are likely to see not just the dawn of the 21st century but that of the 22nd as well - and perhaps even some of their parents will do so as well!
The response of most governments to even the start of this process has been something approaching panic - especially where, from the 1960s onwards, they had often promised that the retirement age would be gradually reduced. They, abetted by their actuaries, could only see the rapidly escalating cost of providing pensions for such a large proportion of the population - an even bigger problem when it is realised that, unlike the providers of private pensions, most governments have traditionally funded payments from current (tax) income rather than from investments set aside for the purpose. This, however, only becomes an insuperable problem if you assume the only factor to change is the lifespan; and, in particular, that the retirement age is immutable.
This assumption is, of course, false. The Japanese, as so often leading the field, have already increased their retirement age. It seems inevitable that other governments will be forced to follow suit; with retirement ages, perhaps, increasing to 70 years by 2010, and to 75 by 2030.
Both the European Commission (DG5) and the DfEE in the UK assume that the official age of retirement may rise to 70 years before the end of the next decade - a major change where the unofficial age has recently fallen to the mid-fifties. The result will be significant extra funding available for society in general, and the welfare state in particular.
This increase in retirement age will, though, pose other problems for the governments who were looking to a reduction in it as a way of reducing unemployment - and to those organisations, following a similar line, which have been persuading their staff to take retirement at 55 years or earlier. Both will need to find alternative solutions! Norman Macrae suggests that one solution will be euthanasia, but I suspect this is an unduly alarmist view! A quarter of our groups mentioned the legalisation of euthanasia, but this was typically in the (medical) context of the irretrievable deterioration of the individual's quality of life rather than as a solution to economic problems!
The increasing longevity will mean that, by mid 21st century, adults - already born - will expect an average lifespan of 100 years or more. This will inevitably result in the retirement age increasing to 75 years or beyond.
Most futurologists do recognise the likely increase in longevity, as did our own groups. Few, however, recognise the management of life-stages which will be needed to handle this.
According to Jeffrey Kluger "Researchers are staring to talk about the likelihood of people living well into their second centuries with the smooth skin, firm muscles, clear vision, high energy and vigorous sexual capabilities they once could enjoy only in youth."
McGlone & Cronin, for instance, point out that "There are more than 68 million people aged 60 and over in the European Union representing about one in five of the total population...by the year 2020 more than a quarter of the Union's population will have reached their sixtieth birthday." Norman Macrae - former editor of the Economist - makes a related point, about the Third World, when he couples longevity with falling birth rates to say "There will thus be bred a shortage of active young people, but a dreadful surplus of ignorant old people, in today's poor countries in a century's time."
Joseph Coates goes even further to predict the end of retirement because "...the emotional needs of seniors to feel useful...the financial needs of those who didn’t save enough...the improved mental and physical health of older people..." and, from the other side of the equation, "...the need in businesses for skilled, experienced workers." he also makes the separate point, against the current trends, that "...elderly parents in the twenty-first century may increasingly move into the homes of their grown children. ‘Granny flats’ will be common additions to houses." Indeed, my own house has a separate four room flat for my widowed mother - a solution to these problems which works remarkably well, but which is, as yet, available to few families.
Norman Macrae suggests that one solution will be euthanasia, but I suspect this is an unduly alarmist view! A quarter of our groups mentioned the legalisation of euthanasia - and four fifths of individuals expect this to become legal within two decades - but this was typically in the (medical) context of the irretrievable deterioration of the individual's quality of life rather than as a solution to economic problems! John Petersen correctly highlights the wider problem when he says "All of our systems of work, education, economics and recreation - our very sense of self - are based on an average length of life of about 70 years. On the other hand, William Davis - ex-financial editor of a number of UK newspapers - points out that "The idea that sixty-five is the appropriate age to retire began with the German Chancellor Otto Von Bismarck...in 1884. When he did so few people lived that long. Life expectancy at birth was about thirty-seven. In some cases the change would be catastrophic. The insurance industry, for example...." Though Barbara Beck adds the important final caveat - about raising the retirement age - that it should be questioned if "...would-be pensioners would hate to wait for their benefits and labour markets remain hostile to older workers..."
16 May 2003
Other pages you might like to consider are:
hits
Copyright © 2005 Future Observatory