DESPITE the continuing increase in the number of people in the world, with all the stress put on resources and the environment, planners in developed countries are these days more likely to worry about shrinking populations. More precisely, they fret about projections that show a steady fall in the proportion of the working age population compared to those beyond the present retirement age. Without any changes in policy, this would result in the young bearing a steadily increasing burden of supporting the elderly through taxation and personal, intra-familial spending, leaving them resentful and with reduced disposable income to use for their own benefit.

Discussion tends to focus on what may happen by the mid-21st century, but the problem might look less alarming in a longer-term perspective.

A surge in the elderly population is occurring in the West as a result of the retirement of the "baby boom" generation - those born during the early years following World War II. This generation - my own, I should add - are not only increasing the tally of elderly people because they were born in greater numbers than people in the years immediately before or after, but also because they are beneficiaries of improved social standards and medical care that allow them to live well beyond the customary retirement age. Life expectancy figures that include the early years of life don't tell the whole story: in today's world, people who retire healthy at the age of 60 or 65 have a very good chance of living at least into their mid-80s, and being in pretty good shape for most of that time too.