288 POPULATIONS 



of almost universal adoption by civilized below to illustrate the range that this sta- 

 countries. tistic can take. A series of countries is 



i~ -I D- ll D 1 listed along with the respective birth rates 



Crude Birth Rate ,°. , ,„^f , ^, 



computed rrom the 1931 data. The coun- 

 The crude birth rate is defined as fol- ^j.-^^ ^^^ purposely widely chosen geograph- 



^^^* ically to present both extreme and mean 



_ B conditions. (The reader should ignore for 



P the time being the right-hand column on 



where R^ is the crude birth rate; B, the ^^ath rate. We return to that several pages 



number of births (exclusive of stillbirths) hence.) 



in a given time, as a year; and P, the total From this tabulation we note that a rate 



living population. The crude birth rate is of fifty births per 1000 population per an- 



usually expressed per 1000 or per 10,000 «""» is excessively high, while a rate below 



persons. Pearl (1940, p. 194) has this co- fifteen births is unusually low, and that 



gent comment about this statistic: there is a tendency for countries populated 



with caucasoids to have lower birth rates 



"This rate is obviously a most crude measure ^j^an those populated by noncaucasoids, al- 



of the reproductive capacity of a population. ^^^^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ j ^^^^ 



To begm with, not all uvmg persons are ex- ^, ^.-v. , , ^,. c 



posed to the risk of having a baby. Only ^^^ diflFerences are caused by genetic fac- 



females, and those between certain ages tors. 



(roughly from ten to sixty outside limits) are The birth rate is also frequently apphed 



liable to this occurrence. . . . [Crude birth to the long-time history of a population, 



rates] can be used for comparison of diflFerent This furnishes, wherever data are available, 



places only with the utmost caution, because an interesting illustration of the trend of 



differences in the age and sex constitution of natahty. One of the best examples is set 



the populations compared quite regardless of £0^.^^ j^ a paper by Lotka (1936) describ- 



their true forces of natality, may have most . ^^^ birth trends for Sweden, England 

 proiound ertects upon the rates. °, ,,, , i .1 tt -^ i o. . rr.i 



^ ^ and Wales, and the United States. The 



Several examples of crude birth rates Swedish data are particularly exemplary, 

 taken from human demography are given Since they extend back to 1750, it is possi- 



Births per 1000 Deaths per 1000 



Country Population Population 



North America: 



Guatemala 50.8 22.8 



Canada 24.5 11.9 



United States 18.0 11.1 



South America: 



Chile 39.8 24.7 



Venezuela 29.6 16.9 



Uruguay 24.0 10.5 



Europe: 



U.S.S.R 40.8 21.8 



Poland 32.8 15.8 



Italy 26.2 13.8 



France 18.1 15.7 



Germany 17.5 11.1 



England and Wales 16.3 11.4 



Sweden 15.4 11.7 



Asia: 



Formosa 43.2 21.7 



India 36.0 26.9 



Japan 33.0 20.0 



Oceania: 



Philippine Islands 33.5 17.3 



Australia 19.9 8.6 



New Zealand 18.8 8.6 



Africa : 



Egypt 43.7 27.3 



Union of South Africa 26.6 9.7 



