ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2020
The demographic dividend is more than an education dividend.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Capitalizing on Population Dynamics 30 Years on from the International Conference on Population and Development.Studies in family planning · 2025Article
- Quantifying the loss of healthy life expectancy due to population ageing: health benefit estimation from a global perspective.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Education as a Driver to the Demographic Dividend.Microbial biotechnology · 2025Article
- Health and Economic Growth: Reconciling the Micro and Macro Evidence.World development · 2024Article
- Urban scaling of opioid overdose deaths in the USA: a cross-sectional study in three periods between 2005 and 2017.BMJ open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The demographic dividend has long been viewed as an important factor for economic development and provided a rationale for policies aiming at a more balanced age structure through birth control and family planning. Assessing the relative importance of age structure and increases in human capital, recent work has argued that the demographic dividend is related to education and has suggested a dominance of improving education over age structure. Here we reconsider the empirical relevance of shifts in the age distribution for development for a panel of 159 countries over the period 1950 to 2015. Based on a flexible model of age-structured human capital endowments, the results document important interactions between age structure and human capital endowments, suggesting that arguments of clear dominance of education over age structure are unwarranted and lead to potentially misleading policy conclusions. An increase in the working-age population share has a strong and significant positive effect on growth, even conditional on human capital, in line with the conventional notion of a demographic dividend. An increase in human capital only has positive growth effects if combined with a suitable age structure. An increasing share of the most productive age groups has an additional positive effect on economic performance. Finally, the results show considerable heterogeneity in the effect of age structure and human capital for different levels of development. Successful policies for sustainable development should take this heterogeneity into account to avoid detrimental implications of a unidimensional focus on human capital without accounting for demography.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.