The Graying Of The World

THE latest projections on international population patterns make a compelling case for concerted action to meet the challenges posed by ageing in developed as well as developing nations. By 2005, according to a recent United Nations report, the planet's population is expected to cross the nine billion mark from the current 6.7 billion.
That the bulk of the 2.5 billion increase would take place in the developing world is hardly news. What is new is the urgency the United Nations attaches to the graying of the developing world and to appropriate and timely policy interventions.
A rise in the number of men and women aged 60 years or over is expected to comprise half of the world's population growth by 2050. In developed countries, where fertility has been declining amid improved life expectancy, 20 per cent of the population is already over 60. The proportion is projected to rise to 33 per cent by 2050. In several of these countries, senior citizens already outnumber children.
The perceptible shift in demographic patterns has led governments to review economic and social policies that have worked well for decades. Health care, pensions, and social services that traditionally depended on tax contributions of a younger work force are no longer considered so viable. Many countries are introducing family friendly policies to make careers and parenthood more compatible. Others are exploring the politically charged option of inviting temporary or seasonal skilled and unskilled workers.
The onset of ageing is comparatively slow in developing countries, where eight per cent of the population is 60 years or older. The United Nations estimates that the number of children in the developing world - currently about two billion - would remain intact until the middle of the century. Much of the focus of governments thus continues to fall on education, health care, and social services for the young.
By 2050, in terms of aging, Asian, Latin American and Caribbean nations would be in the position Europe and North America are today. The challenge for governments in the developing world to come up with the requisite vision and commitment therefore becomes doubly daunting.

A Rare Bright Spot Along Pennsylvania Ave.

With each week, the prospect of a divided government is looming larger in the United States, after Democrats took control of both houses of Congress in January. From the war in Iraq to oversight of the White House, Congress is in a robust mood for action. Yet one important issue is likely to draw the White House and Capitol Hill closer: immigration.
Now that Senator Edward M. Kennedy sees the Bush plan, unveiled by the president in Arizona earlier this month, as “encouraging,” the logjam can be expected to be broken.
An ardent supporter of comprehensive immigration reform, President George W. Bush had sought to address the issue early in his first term by, among other things, instituting a “guest worker” program and securing US borders. However, the 9/11 attacks shifted the nation’s focus and resources. Two years ago, when Bush revived his effort to regularize the 12 million illegal immigrants that run US farms, factories and other key sectors, he ran into strong opposition from his own Republican Party. They wanted Bush to construct a fence along the border with Mexico first.
A nation of immigrants, America’s views on the subject traditionally has been influenced by the economic cycle. When unemployment is low and voters feel they are doing well, immigration recedes in importance as a political issue. At around four per cent, unemployment in the United States remains lower than in many industrialized nations. Yet the decline in the quality of jobs available has changed perceptions. Traditional manufacturing jobs have been either outsourced or made redundant by technological advances. Those being created tend to pay less in terms of wages and benefits. Businesses claim they are forced to employ illegal immigrants because Americans are not available or willing to perform those jobs. A skeptical public sees this as an excuse to suppress wages.
Before last November’s congressional elections, Bush signed into law a measure aimed at fencing part of the Mexican border, but that did not help his party. The victorious Democrats insist that reform must address the reality that illegal foreign workers are key to many sectors of the economy. They support a path to legal residency and eventual citizenship for illegal immigrants who meet strict conditions, such as learning English and paying fines and back taxes. In a highly polarized political environment, the promise of bipartisanship on even one vital national issue does offer some reassurance.

Buying The Best And Brightest?

THE average earnings of top company executives in Britain are a record 98 times more than those of a typical employee. Since 2000, the earnings of FTSE 100 chief executives had grown 102.2 per cent while the average employee had seen their pay rise 28.6 per cent in that period, new research shows. Admittedly, such disparities mean little to those who believe talent, amid today’s cutthroat competition, should be rewarded above all else.
Caps are worth considering, their argument goes, only if brilliance could be clearly quantified. Britain is not quite in the league of the United States, where the average CEO earned 821 times as much as a minimum wage worker last year. Yet the British have been steadily climbing the compensation ladder; ten years ago, the pay differential was 39:1.
With corporations around the world scrambling to recruit and retain the best and the brightest, how far do pay differentials go towards improving performance? The answer would obviously vary with corporate balance sheets. Few shareholders would begrudge the idea of compensating exceptional executives as long as profit margins remain impressive. Outside the boardroom, the celebrity status of some CEOs is truly astounding. Yet envy among ordinary people tends to dissipate once the volatility of the job becomes more apparent. A series of successful years could suddenly collide with a set of variables outside the control of the chief executive. For every corporate boss destroyed by greed and graft, upright ones simply succumb to circumstances.
Gone are the days when top corporations were associated with lifelong job security. Some employees displaced by harsh business environment can still expect a respectable exit. They soon discover that ‘golden handshakes’ do not glitter. The scandals surrounding Enron, Worldcom and other organisations have tarnished the image of big business and precipitated sporadic reforms. The compensation conundrum becomes starker when companies seem capable of continuing to pay astronomical bonuses while cutting back on employee health benefits and other perks if not perpetrating massive layoffs. The rush to boost corporate performance through lucrative compensation packages alone must not obscure the other precious commodity that continues to sustain organisations: employee morale.

Let’s Sleep On It

It took elderly mice to suggest that jetlag or working irregular shifts could damage health. The scientific community is not about to lose sleep over the recent finding. But what about the rest of us?
Researchers from the University of Virginia compared how old and young mice were affected by changes to the usual balance of day and night. Elderly mice subjected to changes like those experienced by humans with jetlag or who work unusual shift patterns died earlier than the others did.
Younger animals appeared unaffected by alterations to their schedule. Writing in the journal Current Biology, the American researchers concluded that the results raised concerns for humans affected by time disruption. As more and more people find themselves living in 24-hour societies or traveling across several time zones, the study becomes highly relevant.
Over the years, everything from decline in productivity to inter-personal conflicts at the workplace have been blamed on disrupted sleep patterns and the resulting fatigue. Some experts now may be tempted to factor in the latest findings in their macroeconomic calculations and observations of cultural dynamics. Each new study tends to create new uncertainties concerning attitudes and behavior. Should people stop all but essential long-distance travel or should those working the night shift demand regular hours backed by the threat of resignation?
Not so fast, according to an expert in physiology and biochemistry at the University of Surrey. The body’s response to the circadian rhythm — the natural cycle of light and dark — remains to be fully understood. Greater research may have to be conducted on humans to properly understand the impact of such disruptions and to assess the true nature and extent of the risks. Amid such uncertainties, one cannot but wonder whether night and day may, after all, have their specific purposes.
Of course, this work was carried out on mice, who are nocturnal animals, while humans are diurnal. Still, let’s sleep on it.