Population, territory and sustainable development
The purpose of this document is to provide an overview of current trends, contexts and issues in the spheres of population, territory and sustainable development and examine their public policy implications. Three themes run through the report. The first two are laid out in the empirical chapters (III through X); the third is taken up in the closing chapter. Using the most recent data available (including censuses conducted in the 2010s), the first theme describes and tracks location and spatial mobility patterns for the population of Latin America, focusing on certain kinds of territory. The second explores the linkages between these patterns and sustainable development in different kinds of territory in Latin America and the Caribbean. The third offers considerations and policy proposals for fostering a consistent, synergistic relationship between population location and spatial mobility, on the one hand, and sustainable development, on the other, in the kinds of territory studied.
The purpose of this document is to provide an overview of current trends, contexts and issues in the spheres of population, territory and sustainable development and examine their public policy implications. Three themes run through the report. The first two are laid out in the empirical chapters (III through X); the third is taken up in the closing chapter. Using the most recent data available (including censuses conducted in the 2010s), the first theme describes and tracks location and spatial mobility patterns for the population of Latin America, focusing on certain kinds of territory. The second explores the linkages between these patterns and sustainable development in different kinds of territory in Latin America and the Caribbean. The third offers considerations and policy proposals for fostering a consistent, synergistic relationship between population location and spatial mobility, on the one hand, and sustainable development, on the other, in the kinds of territory studied.
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
127<br />
urbanized; the rural population base that is the source of migration to the cities is still large in relative<br />
terms, while the urban population base on the receiving end is not, so that the final effect on the<br />
destination point is magnified. The Central American countries are examples, with the exception of<br />
Nicaragua. In highly urbanized countries, however, the net rural-urban transfer tends to represent less<br />
than 30% of urban population growth. Thus, the contribution of rural-urban transfer to the expansion of<br />
the urban population can be expected to drop as the urbanization process advances. This trend is<br />
illustrated in table VIII.2: the three countries for which 2010 census data are available record a substantial<br />
drop in this factor as a driver of population growth, both male <strong>and</strong> female.<br />
Obviously, this negative statistical relationship between the level of urbanization <strong>and</strong> the<br />
weight of rural-urban transfer in urban population growth is not irreversible. If fertility rates continue to<br />
fall in urban areas to the extent that they produce null or negative natural growth rates, <strong>and</strong> if net ruralurban<br />
population transfer continues, its contribution to urban population growth could increase sharply<br />
<strong>and</strong> significantly.<br />
It bears repeating that the decreasing impact of rural-urban transfer on urban population growth in<br />
no way invalidates the fact that this transfer continues to be the demographic explanation of the increase<br />
in the urban percentage (urbanization).<br />
Looking back to chapter IV, the fact that population transfer from rural to urban areas is<br />
contributing less <strong>and</strong> less to urban population growth should not obscure the sustained <strong>and</strong> significant<br />
impact it is having on rural population growth in the region, which has been stable or even negative for<br />
decades. As with any average, this average stability masks opposing trends. In rural areas where the trend<br />
is towards depopulation, the shift is concerning because it usually involves a loss or under-use of<br />
resources (infrastructure, facilities, l<strong>and</strong>) <strong>and</strong> can lead to food insecurity or even erosion of sovereignty in<br />
border areas.<br />
Rural-urban migration has an impact not only on population growth but also on population<br />
composition in both areas. As seen in Chapter IV, the dependency ratio of the rural population is higher<br />
because rural emigration is age-selective <strong>and</strong> mainly involves young working-age persons. The gender<br />
composition of the rural population is also affected by migration selectivity. Rural emigration in Latin<br />
America has generally been selective for females (although there are countries that follow a different<br />
pattern), so it is not unusual for the sex ratio to be higher in the rural areas of the region.<br />
The effects of rural-urban migration on the gender <strong>and</strong> age structure of rural <strong>and</strong> urban areas can be<br />
estimated more precisely using the procedures described <strong>and</strong> employed in chapter V. These procedures,<br />
however, can only be applied in a h<strong>and</strong>ful of countries whose censuses provide the necessary data for<br />
making direct estimates of rural-urban migration, that is, for building rural-urban migration matrices. These<br />
include Panama, whose 2010 census findings are presented in tables VIII.3, VIII.4 <strong>and</strong> VIII.5.<br />
Table VIII.3 highlights the marked disparity in the gender composition of urban <strong>and</strong> rural areas. 9<br />
The sex ratio for urban areas in 2010 was around 95, versus as much as 111 for rural areas. Rural-urban<br />
migration in the 2005-2010 period widened the gap, reducing the ratio of males to females in the urban<br />
population by 0.25% <strong>and</strong> increasing it by 1.1% in rural areas.<br />
9<br />
These figures are from an internal migration matrix for the 2005-2010 period. Some cases are therefore<br />
excluded, such as children under the age of five, international migrants during the period <strong>and</strong> people who did not<br />
answer some of the relevant questions (habitual place of residence, previous place of residence, duration of<br />
residence). Even so, the matrix considers over 90% of the population covered by the census, so the indicators are<br />
representative of the demographic reality of the two areas.