Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Population aging, health care, and growth

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Population Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper constructs a small open two-sector (health care and non-health care) overlapping generations model and investigates how changes in the demand for health care induced by population aging influence the economy’s employment structure and per capita income growth rate. We show that population aging induces a shift in labor from the non-health care sector to the health care sector and lowers the per capita income growth rate. This paper also investigates public policy for child care and demonstrates the existence of an intergenerational conflict between current and future generations concerning public policy on child care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Source: The World Population Prospects: The 2004 Revision Population Database. The more developed regions include all countries in Europe plus North America, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan.

  2. See, e.g., World Bank (1993). However, Newhouse (1992) provides some skeptical evidence concerning this argument. Newhouse (1992) shows that population aging can explain only 4% of the health care expenditure increase in the USA from 1950 to 1987.

  3. Source: OECD Health data 2006 and World Bank Development Indicators 2006.

  4. The World Bank Development Indicators 2006 are used to calculate the old-age dependency ratio and the per capita output growth rate. We use data for 108 countries over the period 1975–2004.

  5. This description of agents’ health care service demand is influenced by Bednarek and Pecchenino (2002), while they explicitly consider the aspect of health care service as “investment goods.”

  6. Provided that agents demand health care in both youth and old age purely for consumption, the implications of the model remain mostly unchanged.

  7. The relationship between the mortality rate at different ages and fertility remains poorly understood. Therefore, there is an ongoing empirical debate on this relationship. Contrary to Lorentzen et al. (2008), Acemoglu and Johnson (2006) find the positive effect of life expectancy on fertility. Moreover, Hazan and Zoabi (2006) provide theoretical insight into this question and show under which assumptions a standard model a là Barro–Becker yields each of the observed empirical cases.

  8. Empirical work by Lorentzen et al. (2008) concludes that the impact of adult mortality on the investment in human capital is inconclusive. Therefore, this paper is partly consistent with their empirical results.

  9. Because the level of \(A_{t}^{N}\) is irreversible, the relation \(G_{t}^{N} \ge 1\) holds. Thus, the incomplete specialization assumptions \(l_{t}^{H} \in (0,1)\) are summarized as the following parameter restrictions: \(l_{1}^{H}= \frac{(1-\gamma)R}{n_{0}}\frac{1+\phi+p}{1+p}\frac{V_{1}}{\bar{w}A_{1}h_{1}} \le 1\) and \(l^{H}(1,p)=\frac{(1-\gamma)R}{n_{t-1}(p)}\frac{p}{1+p} \le 1\).

  10. See, e.g., Atoh and Akachi (2003).

  11. Empirical studies by Winegarden and Bracy (1995) and Averett and Whittington (2001) conclude that the fertility effect of maternity leave is positive. On the other hand, Gauthier and Hatzius (1997) show that maternity leave has no significant effect on fertility, while family allowances have a positive and significant effect.

  12. In the numerical simulation, we specify the production function of the non-health care sector as \(Y_{t}^{N}=K_{t}^{\alpha }(A_{t}^{N}L_{t}^{N})^{1-\alpha}\). In addition, the law of motion of the sector-specific labor productivity index \(A_{t}^{i}\) is given by \( A_{t+1}^{i}=[1+\beta^{i}(h_{t})^{\lambda ^{i}}(l_{t}^{N})^{\xi ^{i}}]A_{t}^{i}\). Then, in order to consider the case where the labor productivity growth rate of the non-health care sector is higher than that of the health care sector, we assume β N > β H. Rigorous explanations for the parameter values of our numerical simulation are available from the authors upon request.

References

  • Acemoglu D, Johnson S (2006) Disease and development: the effect of life expectancy on economic growth. NBER Working Paper, 12269

  • Atoh M, Akachi M (2003) Low fertility and family policy in Japan: in an international comparative perspective. J Popul Soc Secur Popul Stud 1:1–30 (Suppl)

    Google Scholar 

  • Averett SL, Whittington LA (2001) Does maternity leave induce births? South Econ J 68(2):403–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker GS (1965) A theory of the allocation of time. Econ J 75(299):493–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker GS, Tomes N (1986) Human capital and the rise and fall of families. J Labor Econ 4(3):1–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bednarek HL, Pecchenino RA (2002) A macroeconomic analysis of publicly funded health care. J Public Econ Theory 4(2):243–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corrigan P, Glomm G, Mendez F (2005) AIDS crisis and growth. J Dev Econ 77(1):107–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier AH, Hatzius J (1997) Family benefits and fertility: an econometric analysis. Popul Stud 51(3):295–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman M (2000) The human capital model. In: Culyer AJ, Newhouse JP (eds) Handbook of health economics 1A. North-Holland, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp 347–408

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazan M, Zoabi H (2006) Does longevity cause growth? A theoretical critique. J Econ Growth 11(4):363–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lagerlöf NP (2003) From malthus to modern growth: can epidemics explain the three regimes? Int Econ Rev 44(2):755–777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindh T, Malmberg B (1999) Age structure effects and growth in the OECD, 1950–1990. J Popul Econ 12(3):431–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorentzen P, MacMillan P, Wacziarg R (2008) Death and development. J Econ Growth 13(2):81–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maclean D (1997) Lagging productivity growth in the service sector: mismeasurement, mismanagement of misinformation? Bank of Canada Working Paper, 97-6

  • Mankiw N, Romer D, Weil D (1992) A contribution to the empirics of economic growth. Q J Econ 107(2):407–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald S, Roberts J (2006) AIDS and economic growth: a human capital approach. J Dev Econ 80(1):228–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mountford A (1997) Can a brain drain be good for growth in the source economy? J Dev Econ 53(2):287–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newhouse JP (1992) Medical care costs: how much welfare loss? J Econ Perspect 6(3):3–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanso M, Aisa RM (2006) Endogenous longevity, biological deterioration and economic growth. J Health Econ 25(3):555–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Zon A, Muysken J (2001) Health and endogenous growth. J Health Econ 20(2):169–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winegarden CR, Bracy PM (1995) Demographic consequences of maternal-leave programs in industrial countries: evidence from fixed-effects models. South Econ J 61(4):1020–1035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank (1993) Investing in health: world development report 1993. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank two anonymous referees, Noritsugu Nakanishi, Yoshiyasu Ono, Koji Shimomura, and participants of IEFS Japan Conference 2005 held at Kobe University for helpful comments and suggestions. All remaining errors are our own. We also acknowledge the financial support from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan under the Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B): (No. 20730132) and (No. 20730217).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ken-ichi Hashimoto.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Junsen Zhang

Appendix

Appendix

The derivation of \(l_{t}^{H}\)

By substituting Eq. 3, \(w_{t}=\bar{w}A_{t}^{N}\), h t  = h into Eq. 22, we obtain

$$ z_{t}=\frac{(1-\gamma)R}{1+\phi+p}\frac{(1-\tau_{t-1})}{G_{t-1}^{N}} A_{t}^{H}h. $$

In addition, by substituting Eqs. 7, 10, and 21 and h t  = h into L t  = h t η t N t , we obtain

$$ N_{t}h=\frac{1+\phi+p}{1+p-\frac{\theta}{1-\theta}\phi}L_{t}. $$

Moreover, from substituting Eqs. 7, 10, and 21 into Eq. 19, we have

$$ \tau_{t}=\frac{\phi}{1+p}\frac{\theta}{1-\theta}. $$

Using N t  = n t − 1(θ)N t − 1, \(z_{t}=\frac{(1-\gamma)R}{1+\phi+p} \frac{(1-\tau_{t-1})}{G_{t-1}^{N}}A_{t}^{H}h\), \(N_{t}h=\frac{1+\phi+p}{1+p- \frac{\theta}{1-\theta}\phi}L_{t}\), and \(\tau_{t}=\frac{\phi}{1+p}\frac{\theta }{1-\theta}\), Eq. 12 is written as

$$ l_{t}^{H}=\frac{(1-\gamma)R}{n_{t-1}(\theta)}\frac{p}{1+p}\frac{1}{ G_{t-1}^{N}} \equiv l^{H}\left(G_{t-1}^{N},n_{t-1}(\theta)\right). $$

Here, it corresponds to Eq. 23 when θ > 0 and Eq. 15 when θ = 0.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hashimoto, Ki., Tabata, K. Population aging, health care, and growth. J Popul Econ 23, 571–593 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-008-0216-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-008-0216-5

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation