British demography, c1850-c2000: how and why was Scotland different?

Michael AndersonUniversity of Edinburgh

[m.anderson@ed.ac.uk]

Please note: the material in this file is still provisional and must not be cited without the author’s permission

Background to the paper

A comparative ‘book-length work’ Scotland’s population histories: from the mid-nineteenth to the early twenty-first centuries’:

•Main focus contrasts different parts of Scotland (I’ll say rather little on this today)•Scotland compared with RUK and elsewhere – are there persistent and pervasive ‘Scotland-effects’?

Start with overall population changes

Scotland compared with other parts of UK

Scotland compared with small countries in NW Europe

Comparisons across more manufacturing areas

Comparisons across less manufacturing areas

Components of change 1: Fertility and mortality

• Overall crude birth rates: – Scottish very similar to

E&W to 1890s– then fell more slowly and

stayed higher to 1960s, – but below E&W from mid-

1970s • Overall crude death rates

– Scottish similar to E&W to 1890s

– Then fell more slowly and stayed higher to present day

Components of change 2Natural increase and net migration 1861-1911

(see handout)

Components of change 2Natural increase and migration

• Natural increase– E&W slightly higher to World War One– Scottish higher to 1960s– E&W higher since 1980s

• Net migration– Scottish emigration always higher, especially in 1860s,

1880s, 1900s, 1920s, 1950s and 1960s– Scottish emigration pervasive: emigration involved

people born in all counties

More on fertility and nuptiality

Roughly age-standardised measures of OVERALL FERTILITY diverge only slowly

[Princeton If is approx proportion of potential fertility (minimal breastfeeding, no

contraception, no abstinence) that women actually ‘delivered’]

.

BUTScottish MARITAL FERTILITY was markedly higher from 1860s to early 1980s

.

AND

NUPTIALITY was persistently lower through to early 1980s

These contrasts spatially pervasive over time(and hold even across areas with similar economies)

(see handout)

These contrasts spatially pervasive over time

Mortality

• Scottish CDR similar to E&W to 1890s

• Fell thereafter more slowly and stayed higher to present day

• Reflected clearly in expectation of life at birth (next slide)

Expectation of life at birth

Mortality

• And differences were highly pervasive, especially if control for types of community (example on next slide)

Local authority death rates 1950-53 and 1990-92

Age components of mortality

BUT•Similar overall death rates conceal a major difference in the 19th century•Scottish infant mortality was much lower (next slide) – and the differences were spatially pervasive

Infant mortality 1850-2000

More on mortality

BUT•Crude nearly similar death rates conceal a major difference in the 19th century•Infant mortality was much lower •AND all other death rates higher (next slide);

[very different picture even for expectation of life at age 1]

Age-specific death rates (females) 1860-2010

Mortality: conclusion

• Scottish death rate only exceeded E&W when Scottish infant mortality fell more slowly from 1900s

Summarising Scotland/E&W differences:

Marked and pervasive spatially, and persisting over time:

• Higher net and gross emigration through to end 20th century

• Lower nuptiality to 1970s; little difference thereafter• Higher marital fertility to late 1960s – but fell faster

and further thereafter• Generally higher mortality (except for infants to

early 20th century)• Why these differences and how much were they

interlinked? – At this point we move into a degree of speculation!!!

Migration and emigration 1

• Net outmigration was pervasive across Scotland at least to 1970s

Net migration, per 1000 population per annum, 1861-1871

Migration and emigration 2

• Rural outmigration also high (but mostly less high) in E&W in 19th century – And large swathes of south-east and midland

England saw net inflows from the 1920s; • By contrast, NO Scottish county did so in 1920s, and

only 3 in 1950s and 6 in 1960s

Migration and emigration 3

• Crucially, in Scotland, there were earlier, larger, and more widespread net outflows, even from towns and cities:– Net (Scottish) outflows: from Glasgow in 1870s and

after 1880s (>90K people in 1900s); from Dundee from 1880s, and from Edinburgh from 1900s;

– Contrast net (English) inflows into 8 largest cities outside London up to 1890s: outflows only from 3 cities in single decades before 1900s (in 1900s outflows from 7, but their total net outflow was 90K; Manchester had small net inflow)

• With Scottish population outflows this large and pervasive, large-scale emigration was inevitable

Who went when?

• See handout for age-cohort depletions, adjusted for mortality, 1860s to 1920s

Male age cohort depletion (after mortality)

Scotland England and Wales

Female age cohort depletion (after mortality)

Scotland England and Wales

Why the differences? 1NOT mainly, post-1850:•Highlanders/islanders (actually below most other Scottish rural and many urban areas)•The unskilled: compared with E&W high proportions of people from industrial areas emigrated, many highly skilled•Probably not mainly because of lower wages or worse living conditions – can debate here, but how much worse (if at all) were Scottish areas comparable to E&W is unclear

AND note immigration to Scotland•very substantial English immigration in good years into the industrial areas – they weren’t put off

Why the differences? 2

How about a more recession-prone occupational structure?•Yes: at all periods, a higher per cent of Scots men employed in mining, metal manufacturing, shipbuilding and textiles•But, in 1900s and 1920s and post World War Two, rate of contraction in jobs in staple industries roughly as big in E&W as in Scotland

Why the differences? 3Lack of opportunities?•Marked over-production of professionals and literates•Number of young adults looking for work grew much faster than job opportunities. Rapid industrial expansion -> high BRs -> major excess of young adults in next generation:

e.g. without emigration, - In 1891: there would have been c190K more males aged 20-29 looking for work than males who would have died or reached age 65 since 1881 (excess is c23% of males of that age group).-1921->31 excess would have been c200K (17%) while employment fell by at least 250K. Also a problem in E&W but % excess lower in most decades and employment growth faster

Why the differences? 4

More constrained alternatives encouraging emigration?•More limited new industries in Scotland (contrast midlands and south-east England); from 1880s to 1960s, Scotland had about half English level in e.g. chemicals, vehicles, electrical engineering•Up to 1921 only transient (at best) Poor Law fallback for able-bodied even with families•In rural areas most houses for agricultural workers went with job/plot – so had to move if no job•But why go overseas?

• New jobs in England spatially far away? • New jobs in England culturally far away – similar problem for

north-east England?• Also employer resistance [and maybe more so for Scots

especially after World War One (‘Red Clydeside’ etc)]?

Why the differences? 5

Within (but only within?) this demographic/employment/welfare context, the English/Scots differences in diaspora are important:

• Culturally : Scots had long traditions of mass international emigration – and also of movement to England

• Contacts : Scots had already well developed networks of contacts – but only in selected areas (e.g. not to any great degree in the English midlands) – emigration overseas was often easier

• And this persisted even more post-1950 as many Scottish industries went into terminal decline

Nuptiality to 1960s (minimal differences from 1970s)

Scottish marriage lower and later: WHY?•Severely constrained marriage opportunities in rural areas •Too many people seeking too few jobs in industrial areas•Major medium term standard of living uncertainties especially with no Poor Law support until 1921 – marriage was a risk •Perhaps, a greater sense of insecurity persisted in Scotland right through to 1960s at least (significantly higher unemployment and tendency to slower recovery from slumps – and recession areas covered almost all of Central Belt)? •Also much worse housing shortages (e.g. absolute 110K in 1917; including slums = 500K in 1947)

Fertility to 1930s: 1

• Published individual-level data show that more Scottish women had large families, and fewer had zero or one

(see handout)

Family size by year of birth pre-1882 to 1917-21

Fertility to 1930s: Why the differences?

• Contraceptive technology almost irrelevant for most of this period

• Aspirations important: but given Scottish housing conditions maybe what was there for many to aspire for?

• Because of higher insecurity, did the more cautious not marry at all in Scotland – or maybe did they emigrate?

• And/or did greater insecurity inhibit more groups from any form of planning including ‘family planning’? [cf Askham on Aberdeen in 1960s/1970s and Bechhofer, Anderson, McCrone, Jamieson et al on Kirkcaldy in 1990s]

Fertility from 1950s

• 1970s are key period of change: Scottish fertility fell faster and stayed lower thereafter.

• So focus on the change period:

• What factors may have operated more in Scotland in 1970s?

Why did the change take place in the 1970s?

•Probably not due to differential access to abortion or contraception•Much more important may have been the Scottish aspects of changes in living standards, expectations and security (c.f. Hobcraft):

– In baby boom period, dramatic expansion of local authority housing in Scotland (656K 1945-65): very wide social group occupancy, low rents, families with children got priority

– BUT ending of council house subsidies in 1974, and shortage of cheap rented houses in a society where owner-occupancy was low until the 1970s, put serious financial pressure on new and older couples alike

– Major recessions and lack of new job opportunities after 1973 (male employment fell by 234K 1979-1994)

Infant mortality• Why was Scottish IMR so relatively low until 1890s,

then failed to fall as fast as most other NW European countries?

Infant mortality: why lower pre-1890s?

We don’t know but, BEFORE the change: •Not lower overcrowding (Lee’s argument) because Scottish housing had always been much more overcrowded•Did Scottish women in the 19th century breastfeed for longer? [some contemporary views: but if so their fertility should have been lower]•Were more Scottish babies weaned on buttermilk (more acid) [Mitchison] (cf Sweden and Norway with low IMRs??)?

Infant mortality: why did Scottish fall more slowly?We don’t know, but in key change period from 1890s up to WW1: •Health visiting and maternal education started more slowly in Scotland•Slower Scottish fall in family sizes•Bottled and canned milk was probably less available as early in urban areas in Scotland•Did the arrival of canned milk encourage women to stop breastfeeding earlier, while living in overcrowded and poor quality tenements with inadequate water supplies?

•Thereafter, from 1900s, worse housing, poor maternal nutrition, perhaps more widespread deprivation could operate to keep Scottish IMR higher

Why, at all other ages has Scotland’s mortality been persistently higher?

• Even between Scottish and English areas with similar economies - and especially in Greater Glasgow?

•Especially up to 1950s, almost certainly a role for poor high density overcrowded housing•Overcrowding had clear link with child mortality in Scottish large burghs (see graph)

Why Scottish mortality higher 2

Were there differences in causes of death?• Yes, but even to 1930s it is very difficult to know which

are ‘real’• From 1950s, picture is much clearer

Scots were more likely to die from all the big killers, e.g.: •Cancers: see graph•Circulatory: 1950-2000 Scotland near highest in NW EuropeALSO•Drugs/alcohol: if we believe the figures, Scottish mortality lower than E&W until 1970s, then Scottish rates surge

Older age mortality 3Why?

• Poorer diet, higher smoking, more excess alcohol and drugs were all significant – but should these be seen as intervening variables not fundamental causes?

• Deprivation indexes appear to ‘explain’ much of variation:

• BUT, after controlling for deprivation, there is a clear ‘Glasgow effect’ compared with Liverpool, Manchester or Belfast,

• What has been the role of selective high rates of out-migration and emigration? Did the fittest in each generation leave?

• Inter-generational transmission of epigenetic adaptations to insecurity and deprivation?

Conclusions: why the differences?

• There are major differences on all demographic variables, especially to 1960s

• Highly pervasive across areas even with similar economies and persistent over time

• Much of what we see seems to be genuine national level effects: legal, cultural or political (e.g. Poor Law or health visiting or diet or council housing policies),

• National economic context is also important: rapid but uneven economic development (NB especially failure to develop new industries), punctuated by periodic downturns with higher unemployment and wider insecurities

• Out-migration and emigration as a constant cultural availability for all sections of the population