Russian Healthcare and Social Development Minister Tatiana Golikova spoke at a recent government meeting about the initial results of the implementation of the country’s demographic policy concept. I should note right away that these results had to be convincing for the mere fact that the concept was aligned with the program to increase the birth rate and the Health national project. It is unpopular here to have such big budgets and no visible success. So basically the minister needed figures so that she would not be ashamed of her report. The figures matched up, but there was a mismatch with their interpretation.

This is what the report stated:
“The goal of the concept’s first stage was to create the conditions needed to reduce the severity of the demographic crisis and reinforce positive trends. We set the goal of lowering the natural population decline… The goal has been achieved and the main task has been completed.” If the minister is to be believed, it took only three years to adjust these complicated demographic processes, which are not overly favourable even in the most prosperous of countries.

As a result, “the size of the population has stabilized at around 141.9m people. Each year an increase in births was registered while a reduction was seen in mortality and natural population decline. The overall birth rate grew 21.2%. The number of children born in 2010 exceeded the 2006 figures by almost 310,000. The overall mortality rate fell by 5.9%. There were almost 136,000 fewer deaths in 2010 than in 2006. The average life expectancy increased by 2.38 years during this period and is currently 63 years for men and 74 years for women. The natural population decline fell almost two-thirds to 241,000 people per year from 687,000 in 2006.”

For those who are not experts in the scientific intricacies of demographics, the results probably sound rather inspiring. This optimism diminishes, however, if you look at the calculations of professional and independent experts who compiled a report on the development of human potential in Russia back in 2009 based on a United Nations initiative.

The experts confirmed that the number of women of reproductive age is steadily falling in Russia. This figure will decline by more than 7m by 2025. That means it would be a utopia to expect births to ever exceed deaths in Russia. Demographic analysts argue that giving bonuses for motherhood in the form of federal subsidies for multiple-child families could produce a short-lived spike in births, particularly among the underprivileged. Scandinavian countries and France have succeeded in increasing the birth rate. These countries, however, did not buy off the mothers but rather did everything possible to keep them employed, including flexible work schedules, daycare centres and adequate benefits. At the same time, experience has shown that such a model needs to operate effectively for at least two decades before it actually works.

The mortality rate in Russia is also quite distinct. The atypical Russian mortality rate (a term used by demographic analysts) is best reflected in statistics on mortality from external factors. The number of deaths caused by suicide, poisoning, accidents or murder is three times higher here than it is in the West. People also drink themselves to death here. Research conducted in Izhevsk, a medium-sized city, showed that alcohol was responsible for 40% of the deaths of the city’s working age men. This is the most powerful resource for improving the mortality rate, but it would also be a utopia to expect the mental habit of drinking to quickly disappear because of a clampdown on alcohol substitutes.

Anatoly Vishnevsky, director of the Institute of Demography at the Russian Higher School of Economics, said the figures presented in the report are normal fluctuations for the most part and do not reflect an actual trend.

“The main trouble we’re expecting is related to shortcomings in the age structure, which is something we cannot influence in any way,” Vishnevsky told Novaya Gazeta. “Even if the birth and mortality rates improved a little, the structure would still remain the same. It is true that natural population decline has decreased by over 50%, but this can be attributed to age differences and not the government’s decisive measures. In addition, the issue of migration was omitted and we can’t analyze population decline with migration.

“The birth rate here is also not the direct result of measures aimed at increasing it, rather the number of women of reproductive age. The higher birth rate seen in recent years is directly related to this. What has been kept quiet is that this growth has already slowed down and soon will stop altogether.

“As concerns the increase in life expectancy, I do not see any reason for particular optimism here either. We have an extremely low life expectancy in this country. Sure, it has increased a little bit, but so what? These figures are within the margins of fluctuation seen over the last ten years and nevertheless remain much lower than they were in the mid-1960s,” Vishnevsky said.