Population
Kenya started to go through stage three of the demographic transition from 1980 and is yet to
complete the demographic transition. Kenya’s birth rate remained consistently higher than the
world’s, US’, Japan’s and all developing countries’ birth rates. Kenya’s birth rate fell below
developing Sub-Saharan African countries in the late 1980’s and then continued to follow closely the
other Sub-Saharan African countries’ trend. Kenya’s birth rate pattern was typical of her region,
developing Sub-Saharan Africa. Kenya’s birth rate started to decline considerably from 1980. Kenya’s
birth rate dropped greatly from 49.4 in 1980 to 42.4 in 1990. The birth rate fell greatly again from
39.8 in 2000 to 35.1 in 2010. Similarly, Kenya’s fertility rate remained much higher than that of the
US’, Japan’s and the world’s rate. However, Kenya’s fertility rate saw a steady decline from 1980.
The high birth rate and fertility rate which followed Sub-Saharan Africa’s pattern indicates the
probable causes. Poor access to and awareness of contraception due to poor education and
transport systems affected many regions within Kenya and more broadly across Sub-Saharan Africa
and explain the high fertility rates. Also, personal Kenyan values, like other Sub-Saharan African
values may also have contributed to the generally higher fertility rate compared to the world rate.
These values include many children as a masculinity sign and gender relations which diminish
women’s choice to have children. Foreign aid with contraception and infrastructure improvements
might explain the fertility rate decline from 1980. Changing attitudes about children, greater access
to family planning, improved women’s employment and greater infant survival could explain the
declining birth rates. Kenya’s demographic transition is incomplete with relatively high birth rates
remaining. Reluctance to contraception, relatively little education and few women’s job
opportunities could explain this.
This accompanied a generally falling death rate over the period, which remained below that of
developing Sub-Saharan Africa. There was a large reduction in death rate between the 1960 rate of
20.2 deaths and the 1970 rate of 15.4, and again between 1970 and the 1980 rate of 11.5. 2000 saw
a spike in the death rate to 12.4. This fell to 7.3 by 2010. For the first time Kenya’s death rate fell
below but remained close to the world’s rate of 7.9, Japan’s slightly higher 9.5 rate and the US’ rate
of 8. Diseases of poverty such as malaria explain the very high death rates between 1960 and 1980.
A falling mean population age and improvements in health care facilities, especially for children,
explain the general death rate reduction. Kenya is a relatively richer area within the developing Sub-
Saharan African countries and so has better medical facilities. Kenya’s private healthcare sector is
one of the most advanced in sub-Saharan Africa, is comparable to developed countries’ hospitals
and is highly accessible to even the poorest 20% of Kenyans, according to a World Bank report. 1 This
perhaps explains why Kenya’s death rate stayed below that of the average Sub-Saharan African
countries and fell below that of developed countries by 2010. A malaria or HIV epidemic may have
caused the 2000 death rate spike.
Japan fully completed the demographic transition, exhibiting low birth and death rates. Japan
followed the worldwide pattern of decreasing fertility and birth rates after 1970. Japan’s birth rate
remained unusually low over the period compared to the developed US rate. Generally, except in
1970, Japan’s birth rate was lower than the US’. The US’ fertility rate was slightly higher than a
typical developed country’s rate. Regional variations with high income inequality and low education
levels had high fertility levels. Nonetheless, Japan’s birth rates were generally lower than and
followed the declining pattern of developed countries. Japan’s birth rate was lower than Kenya’s and
the world’s birth rates over the period. Japan’s birth rate was also atypical of the experience of the
rest of East Asia. From the graph, Japan’s birth rates remained lower than that of East Asia’s. Japan’s
1
Barnes, ‘Private Health Sector Assessment in Kenya’, World Bank Working Paper no.193
, birth rate fell from 18.7 in 1970 to 13.5 in 1980, followed by a further significant fall in 1990 to a rate
of 10 and further reductions. Japan’s fertility rate decreased steadily over the period, falling from the
replacement rate of 2 in 1960 to 1.4 in 2010. Japan’s fertility rate remained lower than other
developed countries such as the United States, the world rate and that of underdeveloped countries
such as Kenya. Urbanisation and women prioritising their education and careers over a family could
explain the low fertility and thus, low birth rates. Indeed, Engelke emphasised the role of
urbanisation.2 Also, increasing child-rearing costs could have limited family sizes, not out of choice
but practicality.
Japan’s death rate remained lower than that of the US, Kenya and Japan consistently throughout the
period. Nonetheless, Japan’s death rate at first decreased, then increased after 1980. Japan’s death
rate fell from 7.6 in 1960 to 6.1 in 1980, and then increased by 2010 to 9.5. Until the late 1980’s
Japan’s death rate remained lower than that of East Asia. Japan’s death rate overtook East Asia’s and
increased, whilst East Asia saw a declining pattern. Japan’s low and generally declining death rate
reflected other developed countries’ experiences. Wealthier countries had better education for
preventive measures, better healthcare facilities and food and drug availability and so saw a decline
in death rates. Perhaps the increasing death rate from the 1980’s was due to Japan’s high elderly
population, as Cain highlighted.3 The 1990’s economic crash in Japan and economic stagnation may
have caused a decline in healthcare. Declining healthcare capacity coupled with the aging population
may have caused the increases in death rate.
Historians have debated the importance of personal choice in reducing fertility rates during the
demographic transition. Coale referred to a ‘rational decision-making process’ about family size,
suggesting a level of autonomy causing the fertility rates’ reduction. 4 Montgomery and Cohen
concurred, acknowledging changing economic conditions and referring to a greater preference for
birth planning as a ‘natural response’ to lowering infant mortality rates. 5 This suggests that
improving public health directed people’s choices, with some guidance from economic conditions.
Taussig discussed a multitude of causes, including improving healthcare and greater social
opportunities. However, Taussig stressed that changing ‘economic pressure’, such as increasing
consumption and increasing costs of children such as in education quality, ‘favoured smaller
families’.6 In this way, people chose to cut their fertility rate. For Taussig, economic changes
primarily directed people to have fewer children due to economic viability. Perhaps people had less
freedom or autonomy to choose their number of children than Coale suggested. Perhaps in
developed countries such as Japan, the economy dictated that people reduced their fertility rate.
Increasing child-rearing costs invalidated having many children. Others made choices based on work
commitments or the wish to sustain consumerist lifestyles. Conversely in underdeveloped countries,
people made different choices about children due to greater access to contraception facilities,
improvements in infant healthcare and women’s work opportunities. It seems the economic burden
of children primarily dictated a reduction in fertility for people in developed countries. However, in
underdeveloped countries such as Kenya, having access through contraception and having greater
security with child health care meant that people could make new choices about fertility levels
increasingly from the 1960’s.
Growth rates
2
Engelke, ‘Into the Anthropocene’, Global Interdependence.
3
Cain, ‘Historical Setting’, Children of Eve.
4
Coale, Decline of Fertility.
5
Cohen, From Death to Birth, pp.393.
6
Taussig, Principles of Economics.
Kenya started to go through stage three of the demographic transition from 1980 and is yet to
complete the demographic transition. Kenya’s birth rate remained consistently higher than the
world’s, US’, Japan’s and all developing countries’ birth rates. Kenya’s birth rate fell below
developing Sub-Saharan African countries in the late 1980’s and then continued to follow closely the
other Sub-Saharan African countries’ trend. Kenya’s birth rate pattern was typical of her region,
developing Sub-Saharan Africa. Kenya’s birth rate started to decline considerably from 1980. Kenya’s
birth rate dropped greatly from 49.4 in 1980 to 42.4 in 1990. The birth rate fell greatly again from
39.8 in 2000 to 35.1 in 2010. Similarly, Kenya’s fertility rate remained much higher than that of the
US’, Japan’s and the world’s rate. However, Kenya’s fertility rate saw a steady decline from 1980.
The high birth rate and fertility rate which followed Sub-Saharan Africa’s pattern indicates the
probable causes. Poor access to and awareness of contraception due to poor education and
transport systems affected many regions within Kenya and more broadly across Sub-Saharan Africa
and explain the high fertility rates. Also, personal Kenyan values, like other Sub-Saharan African
values may also have contributed to the generally higher fertility rate compared to the world rate.
These values include many children as a masculinity sign and gender relations which diminish
women’s choice to have children. Foreign aid with contraception and infrastructure improvements
might explain the fertility rate decline from 1980. Changing attitudes about children, greater access
to family planning, improved women’s employment and greater infant survival could explain the
declining birth rates. Kenya’s demographic transition is incomplete with relatively high birth rates
remaining. Reluctance to contraception, relatively little education and few women’s job
opportunities could explain this.
This accompanied a generally falling death rate over the period, which remained below that of
developing Sub-Saharan Africa. There was a large reduction in death rate between the 1960 rate of
20.2 deaths and the 1970 rate of 15.4, and again between 1970 and the 1980 rate of 11.5. 2000 saw
a spike in the death rate to 12.4. This fell to 7.3 by 2010. For the first time Kenya’s death rate fell
below but remained close to the world’s rate of 7.9, Japan’s slightly higher 9.5 rate and the US’ rate
of 8. Diseases of poverty such as malaria explain the very high death rates between 1960 and 1980.
A falling mean population age and improvements in health care facilities, especially for children,
explain the general death rate reduction. Kenya is a relatively richer area within the developing Sub-
Saharan African countries and so has better medical facilities. Kenya’s private healthcare sector is
one of the most advanced in sub-Saharan Africa, is comparable to developed countries’ hospitals
and is highly accessible to even the poorest 20% of Kenyans, according to a World Bank report. 1 This
perhaps explains why Kenya’s death rate stayed below that of the average Sub-Saharan African
countries and fell below that of developed countries by 2010. A malaria or HIV epidemic may have
caused the 2000 death rate spike.
Japan fully completed the demographic transition, exhibiting low birth and death rates. Japan
followed the worldwide pattern of decreasing fertility and birth rates after 1970. Japan’s birth rate
remained unusually low over the period compared to the developed US rate. Generally, except in
1970, Japan’s birth rate was lower than the US’. The US’ fertility rate was slightly higher than a
typical developed country’s rate. Regional variations with high income inequality and low education
levels had high fertility levels. Nonetheless, Japan’s birth rates were generally lower than and
followed the declining pattern of developed countries. Japan’s birth rate was lower than Kenya’s and
the world’s birth rates over the period. Japan’s birth rate was also atypical of the experience of the
rest of East Asia. From the graph, Japan’s birth rates remained lower than that of East Asia’s. Japan’s
1
Barnes, ‘Private Health Sector Assessment in Kenya’, World Bank Working Paper no.193
, birth rate fell from 18.7 in 1970 to 13.5 in 1980, followed by a further significant fall in 1990 to a rate
of 10 and further reductions. Japan’s fertility rate decreased steadily over the period, falling from the
replacement rate of 2 in 1960 to 1.4 in 2010. Japan’s fertility rate remained lower than other
developed countries such as the United States, the world rate and that of underdeveloped countries
such as Kenya. Urbanisation and women prioritising their education and careers over a family could
explain the low fertility and thus, low birth rates. Indeed, Engelke emphasised the role of
urbanisation.2 Also, increasing child-rearing costs could have limited family sizes, not out of choice
but practicality.
Japan’s death rate remained lower than that of the US, Kenya and Japan consistently throughout the
period. Nonetheless, Japan’s death rate at first decreased, then increased after 1980. Japan’s death
rate fell from 7.6 in 1960 to 6.1 in 1980, and then increased by 2010 to 9.5. Until the late 1980’s
Japan’s death rate remained lower than that of East Asia. Japan’s death rate overtook East Asia’s and
increased, whilst East Asia saw a declining pattern. Japan’s low and generally declining death rate
reflected other developed countries’ experiences. Wealthier countries had better education for
preventive measures, better healthcare facilities and food and drug availability and so saw a decline
in death rates. Perhaps the increasing death rate from the 1980’s was due to Japan’s high elderly
population, as Cain highlighted.3 The 1990’s economic crash in Japan and economic stagnation may
have caused a decline in healthcare. Declining healthcare capacity coupled with the aging population
may have caused the increases in death rate.
Historians have debated the importance of personal choice in reducing fertility rates during the
demographic transition. Coale referred to a ‘rational decision-making process’ about family size,
suggesting a level of autonomy causing the fertility rates’ reduction. 4 Montgomery and Cohen
concurred, acknowledging changing economic conditions and referring to a greater preference for
birth planning as a ‘natural response’ to lowering infant mortality rates. 5 This suggests that
improving public health directed people’s choices, with some guidance from economic conditions.
Taussig discussed a multitude of causes, including improving healthcare and greater social
opportunities. However, Taussig stressed that changing ‘economic pressure’, such as increasing
consumption and increasing costs of children such as in education quality, ‘favoured smaller
families’.6 In this way, people chose to cut their fertility rate. For Taussig, economic changes
primarily directed people to have fewer children due to economic viability. Perhaps people had less
freedom or autonomy to choose their number of children than Coale suggested. Perhaps in
developed countries such as Japan, the economy dictated that people reduced their fertility rate.
Increasing child-rearing costs invalidated having many children. Others made choices based on work
commitments or the wish to sustain consumerist lifestyles. Conversely in underdeveloped countries,
people made different choices about children due to greater access to contraception facilities,
improvements in infant healthcare and women’s work opportunities. It seems the economic burden
of children primarily dictated a reduction in fertility for people in developed countries. However, in
underdeveloped countries such as Kenya, having access through contraception and having greater
security with child health care meant that people could make new choices about fertility levels
increasingly from the 1960’s.
Growth rates
2
Engelke, ‘Into the Anthropocene’, Global Interdependence.
3
Cain, ‘Historical Setting’, Children of Eve.
4
Coale, Decline of Fertility.
5
Cohen, From Death to Birth, pp.393.
6
Taussig, Principles of Economics.
