Berliner Boersenzeitung - Latin America’s age trap

EUR -
AED 4.231726
AFN 75.502746
ALL 92.965
AMD 422.064949
ANG 2.062582
AOA 1056.634887
ARS 1719.76132
AUD 1.634442
AWG 2.074092
AZN 1.965102
BAM 1.954686
BBD 2.321877
BDT 141.969088
BGN 1.955463
BHD 0.434754
BIF 3446.450739
BMD 1.152273
BND 1.475066
BOB 13.597251
BRL 5.977305
BSD 1.152843
BTN 109.840829
BWP 15.519088
BYN 3.443083
BYR 22584.55651
BZD 2.318579
CAD 1.607254
CDF 2621.422124
CHF 0.937777
CLF 0.02677
CLP 1053.580997
CNY 7.770758
CNH 7.773351
COP 3627.252616
CRC 523.703801
CUC 1.152273
CUP 30.535242
CVE 110.199804
CZK 24.227123
DJF 205.292999
DKK 7.475909
DOP 67.311929
DZD 153.326063
EGP 57.890902
ERN 17.284099
ETB 186.476931
FJD 2.553324
FKP 0.852914
GBP 0.854008
GEL 3.007425
GGP 0.852914
GHS 13.19942
GIP 0.852914
GMD 85.267943
GNF 10127.272165
GTQ 8.796101
GYD 241.23147
HKD 9.040431
HNL 30.900523
HRK 7.532992
HTG 150.797329
HUF 364.422547
IDR 20591.123716
ILS 3.438155
IMP 0.852914
INR 109.91944
IQD 1510.232728
IRR 1583943.672863
ISK 141.994931
JEP 0.852914
JMD 182.505194
JOD 0.81697
JPY 183.615869
KES 148.885092
KGS 100.766599
KHR 4668.440629
KMF 493.173008
KPW 1037.045738
KRW 1632.229249
KWD 0.356191
KYD 0.960748
KZT 536.781746
LAK 26011.062791
LBP 103237.306454
LKR 385.358702
LRD 209.239841
LSL 18.627726
LTL 3.402364
LVL 0.696999
LYD 7.352809
MAD 10.708151
MDL 19.98487
MGA 4961.150991
MKD 61.489955
MMK 2419.596483
MNT 4145.843888
MOP 9.318049
MRU 46.078938
MUR 54.329848
MVR 17.813799
MWK 1999.052017
MXN 19.658471
MYR 4.709914
MZN 73.633939
NAD 18.627403
NGN 1569.983733
NIO 42.426004
NOK 10.942298
NPR 175.743602
NZD 1.975492
OMR 0.443033
PAB 1.152843
PEN 3.896146
PGK 5.099116
PHP 70.705787
PKR 320.220551
PLN 4.307001
PYG 6879.079445
QAR 4.203059
RON 5.238469
RSD 117.308312
RUB 95.529629
RWF 1698.124829
SAR 4.342357
SBD 9.293016
SCR 15.893459
SDG 691.940947
SEK 11.044897
SGD 1.475192
SHP 0.85368
SLE 28.288052
SLL 24162.592104
SOS 658.821663
SRD 43.40595
STD 23849.730699
STN 24.486151
SVC 10.087207
SYP 14981.857107
SZL 18.608991
THB 38.147738
TJS 10.663676
TMT 4.032957
TND 3.385115
TOP 2.774397
TRY 55.049067
TTD 7.81851
TWD 37.08972
TZS 3053.521932
UAH 51.512019
UGX 4276.544136
USD 1.152273
UYU 46.403352
UZS 13785.023945
VES 881.936984
VND 30002.315822
VUV 136.653422
WST 3.146603
XAF 655.580524
XAG 0.017755
XAU 0.000263
XCD 3.114076
XCG 2.077707
XDR 0.815332
XOF 655.583367
XPF 119.331742
YER 273.261977
ZAR 18.626957
ZMK 10371.841681
ZMW 21.696635
ZWL 371.03153
  • CMSC

    0.0100

    21.45

    +0.05%

  • BTI

    -0.9700

    55.84

    -1.74%

  • CMSD

    -0.0400

    21.59

    -0.19%

  • BP

    -0.2300

    42.93

    -0.54%

  • NGG

    0.4100

    80.68

    +0.51%

  • BCC

    -1.2800

    84.25

    -1.52%

  • RIO

    0.2300

    101.22

    +0.23%

  • GSK

    -0.6000

    50.3

    -1.19%

  • BCE

    -0.2400

    23.13

    -1.04%

  • AZN

    -0.2500

    158.5

    -0.16%

  • RYCEF

    0.5500

    21.1

    +2.61%

  • RBGPF

    0.0000

    72.16

    0%

  • JRI

    -0.0200

    12.71

    -0.16%

  • VOD

    0.1900

    16.09

    +1.18%

  • RELX

    -0.8200

    34.55

    -2.37%


Latin America’s age trap




Latin America has spent generations thinking of demography as a problem of abundance. Governments built schools for swelling classes, cities spread to absorb millions of new residents, and economists worried about whether jobs, housing and food production could keep pace with a rapidly expanding population. That assumption now belongs to the past. The region is entering an era in which there will be fewer children, a slower-growing workforce and many more older people, and the transition is unfolding far faster than most political systems are prepared to admit.

The shift is already measurable. Fertility in Latin America has fallen to about 1.8 children per woman and has remained below the replacement level of 2.1 since 2015. The Caribbean is lower still, at roughly 1.5. In 2024, Latin America and the Caribbean had about 663 million inhabitants, nearly 26 million fewer than projections made at the beginning of the century had anticipated. The population is now expected to peak at about 730 million in 2053 before beginning a long decline.

A peak in the middle of the century does not sound like an immediate emergency. That is precisely why the risk is easy to underestimate. Demographic crises rarely arrive as a single shock. They emerge through thousands of local changes: maternity wards with fewer patients, primary schools with empty desks, small towns losing young adults, companies unable to recruit skilled staff, pension systems collecting too little and families trying to care for elderly relatives with fewer hands available.

Latin America does not yet have the lowest fertility in the world, and it is not yet the oldest region. Parts of East Asia have much lower birth rates, while Europe already has a substantially larger elderly population. The reason Latin America’s predicament could prove harsher is the sequence in which the change is occurring. The region is ageing before it has become broadly prosperous, before much of its workforce has entered formal employment and before durable welfare states have been built. Europe grew old after decades of industrialisation, capital accumulation and the expansion of tax-funded social protection. Several East Asian economies face extreme demographic contraction, but many entered it with high savings, advanced infrastructure, strong education systems and highly productive firms. Latin America is approaching the same pressure with weak productivity growth, deeply unequal access to public services, fragile fiscal positions and labour markets in which informality remains normal rather than exceptional.

The speed of the transformation leaves little room for complacency. In 1950, about 41 per cent of the region’s population was under the age of 15. By 2024, that share had fallen to 22.5 per cent. In the same year, roughly 65 million people were aged 65 or older, representing 9.9 per cent of the population. By 2050, that group is projected to reach about 138 million and almost 19 per cent of the total. The median age, just 18 in 1950, reached 31 in 2024 and is expected to approach 40 by mid-century.

This is not simply a story about people refusing to have children. Much of the fertility decline reflects social progress. Infant mortality has fallen, contraception has become more accessible, women have gained education and economic independence, and adolescent pregnancy has declined sharply. Families no longer need many births to ensure that several children survive to adulthood. Women are also more able to decide whether and when motherhood fits their lives.

The trouble is that institutions have not adapted to the freedom and expectations of modern adulthood. In many cities, secure housing is expensive, formal jobs are scarce, commuting is exhausting and childcare is limited. Parenthood can carry a severe career penalty, especially for women, while domestic and caring responsibilities remain distributed unequally. Young adults often spend years moving between temporary work, informal employment and dependence on relatives before they feel able to form a household.

Low fertility therefore reflects both choice and constraint. Some people do not want children. Others want fewer than previous generations. Many would like to become parents but postpone the decision because the economic and practical conditions never appear sufficiently stable. The postponement of first births explains part of the fall, but not all of it. Completed family size is also declining, meaning that later births are not fully compensating for those deferred in early adulthood.

Chile offers one of the clearest warnings. Its fertility rate fell to about 1.03 children per woman in 2024, below Japan’s level and dramatically lower than it had been only a decade earlier. Uruguay now records far fewer births than deaths. Cuba is losing population through the combined effects of low fertility, ageing and large-scale emigration. Brazil and Mexico still have enormous populations, but their national size conceals shrinking school cohorts and ageing communities across many states and municipalities. Central America remains younger on average, yet fertility there is falling rapidly as well.

The economic consequences will not be determined by headcounts alone. A smaller workforce can support a larger retired population if each worker becomes more productive, if more women enter well-paid employment, if healthy older people remain active and if technology raises output. Demographic decline is not an automatic sentence to recession. It becomes dangerous when productivity stagnates and institutions fail to mobilise the people who are already present.

Latin America enters this test with a serious structural weakness. Nearly 47 per cent of employed people were working informally in the first half of 2025. Among young workers, the share was about 56 per cent. Informal work often means low and unstable earnings, limited training, weak legal protection and irregular or nonexistent pension contributions. It also narrows the tax base from which governments must finance health care, pensions and long-term support. For decades, a relatively large working-age population offered the region a demographic dividend. There were more potential workers in relation to children and older dependants, creating an opportunity for faster growth and higher savings. Yet a dividend is only an opportunity, not a guarantee. Much of it was consumed during years of modest investment, unequal education and poor productivity. The favourable age structure is now beginning to close before the region has completed the economic transformation it was supposed to finance.

The labour force will continue to grow for some time at regional level, but more slowly and with an older profile. Young cohorts entering employment will become smaller. Employers will face recruitment problems in areas that require technical skills, health professionals, teachers and care workers. Rural districts and smaller cities may lose working-age residents even while major metropolitan areas remain crowded. National averages will therefore hide acute local decline.

Ageing will also expose the weaknesses of pension systems designed around continuous formal employment. The basic arithmetic is unforgiving. More people will draw benefits for longer periods, while growth in the number of contributors will slow. Yet raising contribution rates, reducing benefits or delaying retirement is politically difficult in societies where many people already receive inadequate support and where physically demanding work makes longer careers unrealistic.

Pension coverage has expanded, including through non-contributory schemes, but adequacy remains a major problem. Around 43 per cent of older people receive pension income that is insufficient to meet minimum consumption needs. Roughly a quarter of people aged 65 and over were still participating in the labour market in 2024. For some, work in later life is a welcome source of purpose and income. For many others, it is not active ageing but economic necessity.

Health systems face a related challenge. Longer lives are a major achievement, but longevity does not automatically mean more years in good health. Diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, dementia and disability will demand sustained treatment, rehabilitation and assistance with daily life. Systems that remain divided between public programmes, employment-based insurance and private provision often deliver fragmented care precisely when older patients need continuity.

The most immediate strain may appear not in hospitals or treasury accounts but inside homes. Long-term care remains limited or absent in much of the region, so families provide most assistance to elderly and disabled relatives. Women perform a disproportionate share of this work, often reducing paid hours or leaving employment altogether. That response becomes less viable as families become smaller, adult children migrate and more women participate in the labour market.

The region’s need for professional long-term care workers could nearly triple by 2050. Without planning, the result will be a severe shortage of trained staff, a larger burden on unpaid carers and widening inequality between households that can purchase private support and those that cannot. A demographic model built on the assumption that daughters and daughters-in-law will provide unlimited free care is already breaking down.

Migration complicates the picture. Latin America is simultaneously a region of emigration, immigration and large movements within its own borders. The departure of young adults can accelerate ageing in countries and communities of origin, leaving older relatives behind and draining scarce professional skills. Remittances may protect household incomes, but money sent from abroad cannot provide daily physical care.

For receiving countries, migration can slow workforce decline and bring younger taxpayers into the system. It is not, however, a demographic switch that governments can simply turn on. Migrants need legal status, housing, language support where relevant, recognition of qualifications and access to formal employment. Poor integration can reproduce the same informality that already weakens public finances. Migration can redistribute population across the region, but it cannot reverse low fertility everywhere at once.

Political incentives may make preparation harder. Older voters will form a growing share of electorates and will understandably defend pensions, health services and financial security. Younger households will demand affordable housing, education, childcare and better employment. Governments with limited revenue may present these needs as a competition between generations. That would be a costly mistake. Families span generations, and underinvestment in children today produces less productive workers and weaker pension finances tomorrow. The decline in the number of children also creates an opportunity. Smaller cohorts make it possible to spend more effectively on each child, improve early development, repair weak schools and expand technical education. A country with fewer young people cannot afford to waste their potential through poor teaching, malnutrition, violence or exclusion from employment. Human capital must replace population growth as the main engine of expansion.

Policy should begin by abandoning the illusion that a cash payment for each birth can restore the family patterns of the twentieth century. One-off bonuses may change the timing of some births, but they do not resolve insecure work, expensive housing, inadequate childcare or the unequal division of care. Coercive or moralising pronatalism is even more dangerous. It treats women’s autonomy as the problem while ignoring the economic conditions that make desired parenthood difficult.

A more credible family policy would make having children compatible with a modern life. That means reliable childcare, paid leave for both mothers and fathers, protection against workplace discrimination, predictable hours, affordable housing and reproductive health services. It also means reducing the burden of care that falls on women. Supporting families is not the same as demanding larger families. The objective should be to close the gap between the number of children people want and the number they believe they can responsibly raise.

The second priority is productivity and formalisation. Governments need tax and social insurance systems that make formal employment easier for small firms and portable for workers who change jobs. Better technical education, digital infrastructure, access to finance and competition can help productive businesses expand. Higher female employment would soften workforce decline, but only if jobs provide sufficient pay and if childcare and eldercare are available.

Pension reform must combine financial sustainability with social legitimacy. A universal floor can protect older people from poverty, while contributory benefits should reward formal work without excluding those whose careers were interrupted by unemployment, care or informality. Retirement ages may need gradual adjustment as healthy life expectancy rises, but rules should recognise differences in health, occupation and lifetime income. A construction worker and an office professional cannot be treated as though ageing affects them in the same way.

Health policy must move towards prevention, primary care and the management of chronic disease long before old age. Long-term care should be treated as essential social infrastructure rather than a private family matter. Training carers, setting quality standards, supporting home and community services and giving respite to family members would create employment while allowing more women to remain in paid work.

Older workers will also need a different labour market. Lifelong learning, flexible hours, anti-discrimination rules and adapted workplaces can help people remain productive voluntarily. The purpose is not to compel everyone to work indefinitely. It is to remove barriers that force capable people out while protecting those whose health or occupations make continued employment unreasonable.

Latin America still has time, but not much. The region remains younger than Europe, and its total labour force has not yet begun a broad decline. That creates a final window in which reforms can be introduced before fiscal pressure intensifies. Waiting until the 2040s would mean attempting to build care systems, repair pensions and raise productivity after the ratio of workers to older dependants has already deteriorated sharply. The demographic crisis could become the worst of all not because Latin America will necessarily have the fewest babies or the oldest citizens, but because it risks combining rapid ageing with unfinished development. The decisive variable is no longer fertility alone. It is institutional readiness.

A smaller and older population need not be poorer, lonelier or less dynamic. It can be healthier, more productive and better educated. Reaching that outcome requires governments to treat demography as a central economic issue rather than a distant social trend. Latin America does not need to force people to have children. It needs to make ordinary adulthood viable, parenthood compatible with aspiration and old age secure. Demography is not destiny, but prolonged political delay can make it feel like one.