California Population Analysis

Introduction

The State of California features the largest, youngest, and most diverse population in the United States that has attracted immigrants through much of its modern history. Indeed, 27% of its population is foreign-born, compared to the average 13% throughout the United States. In 2015, only 38% of the total population was represented by Whites, while Latinos represented 39%. However, most recently, 53% of immigrants originated from Asian countries whereas only 22% originated from Latin American countries. (Johnson, 2017; Hayes, 2017) According to California’s Department Finance, as of 2016, California’s population reached an estimated 39.3 million, representing just over 12% of the total population of the United States.

However, California has also experienced out-migration to other states. Top destinations include Texas, Arizona, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Florida, Utah, Georgia, and New York, in that order, largely attributed to costs of living and quality of life. (Gunderson & Sorenson, 2010). California boasts the sixth largest economy in the world, below the United Kingdom and above that of France (Taylor, M., Sisney, J., Kuhn, J., Simbol, A., & Newton, M., 2016), and has historically attracted immigrants for the same reasons, but with a growing cost of living, which in turn impacts quality of life, many Californians have been leaving the state, according to Gunderson and Sorenson (2010). It appears that many individuals may be finding that living in California is costly and seek to live elsewhere to minimize their costs of living and improve their quality of life.

Wilson (2016) devised a modified population pyramid model to examine how the size of age-specific groups were impacted by births, deaths, and migration. While this paper does not employ such a technique, in favor of those presented by Rowland (2003) and Santos (2017), it does inspire exploration of the California’s population and its changes in recent years, particularly because it does experience such a high level of migration into and out of the state relative to other states. Can we perceive the impact that migration may have on California’s population over time?

Methods and Analysis

To answer this question, this paper uses population by sex, age, mortality, births, and migration data, obtained from the State of California’s Department of Finance, and the CDC WONDER database. In this paper, age and sex composition, growth, mortality, and migration are explored. The techniques presented in Rowland (2003) and Santos (2017) are employed.

Population pyramids are employed “as a starting period [as they may] the history of a population and future prospects” (Rowland, 2003, p. 77), even though California population is not closed. Because it is not closed, one would expect that the pattern from one period is not quite reflected in subsequent patterns.

Sex ratios are important in describing how one sex’s population compares to the other. It is a ration of the male population over the female population. If the possibility that immigrants were disproportionately represented by one gender over the other, perhaps these ratios would be unusual.

Crude rates compare events such as births, deaths, and migration to the mid-year population at a particular point in time; that is, the event number divided by the mid-year population. Because migrants would represent such a small number of the overall population, these rates help highlight changes, particularly over time.

Like crude rates, Sex Ratios of Age Specific Death Rates compare the number of deaths within an age group by dividing that number by the mid-year population. If the results are not normal, this may indicate something that may be occurring in the population that may not be attributed to normal circumstances, eliminating the possibility that normal population dynamics may be responsible for changes in population structure.

Age and Sex Composition

California’s population is aging, but not as fast as the rest of the Unied States; the number of those 65 years and older sharply increased in 2010 (Johnson, 2017; Taylor, M., Sisney, J., Kuhn, J., Simbol, A., & Newton, M., 2016). We see from tables 1 and 2, and figures 1 and 2 how the population has shifted from 2000 to 2015, a 15-year period, but both resemble a mature population pattern, though they are undercut. Sex ratios in both tables show that males exceed the female population in younger groups, while the female population exceeds the male population in older groups, as expected. This is also represented in figures 1 and 2.

Population Growth

Figure 3. Population growth, 1970-2014

Figure 3 shows that California’s population continues to increase, and that females just slightly, consistently, outnumber males in most years. There is a slight curve to the population curve, but overall resembling arithmetic growth. We will see in the Migration section that when the time span is extended further near the beginning of the 20th century, this population curve appears to be geometric (see figure 5).

Mortality

Table 3. Female Deaths in 2010.

Table 4. Male Deaths in 2010

Table 5. Total Deaths in 2010

Figure 4. Sex Ratios and Crude Death Rates of Age-Specific Death Rates

Using tables 3-5, and figure 4, using 2010 as a representative sample year, we see a typical pattern, where the very young (< 1 year) experience higher mortality, as well as the increasingly older population. Here too, we see that males are at greater risk of mortality than females in their mid-teens to their mid-40’s, before leveling off.

Migration

Figure 5. Population and Birth, Death, and Migration Crude Rates

Perhaps the most interesting of all of the figures presented here, figure 5, shows an expanded population curve, starting from 1905 to 2016, in comparison with the different crude rates. We see here that the population curve looks geometric. We see how California’s population is transitioning: to the left, we see significant migration, but overall with a negative trend, we see a significant “bump” in births in the left half as well, and overall a steady decline in deaths, relative to the total population. It appears that migration has contributed to the overall growth of the state’s population, also fueled by natural increase and perhaps a steady decrease in deaths. Over time, one would expect that despite the decrease in migration, those that have already immigrated to California have contributed to the natural increase of the population.

To the right of the chart, we do we that all crude rates are lower and the population curve appears to slightly lean in a more negative fashion, though the trend remains positive.

Conclusion

One cannot draw a definitive conclusion about the impact of migration, but we can infer that it has had an impact, particularly early in the 20th century in California’s history. We would expect that figure 2 should resemble figure 1 where age groups shrink, but this doesn’t quite seem to be the case (though this is a very subjective perception of the population pyramids). Figure 5 tells us that mortality has been fairly steady so it may appear that something other may be responsible for some of the shift, but this is not very clear. Figures 3 and 4 show steady patterns over time and typical mortality pattern per age group, that don’t indicate anything unusual. It is only at figure 5 that we see any significant impact by much older generations to subsequent population growth but perhaps as a combination of all factors: migration, births and deaths. As we see all of these factors decline over time, the population curve appears to be begin to level off.

Taylor (2016) notes that California is “big,” “populous,” and “complex.” Perhaps exploring this topic further would benefit from the work of Wilson (2006).

 

---

References

CDC. (2017). Detailed Mortality, 1999–2015 [Database]. CDC WONDER. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Retrieved from https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D76

Gunderson, R. J., & Sorenson, D. J. (2010). An examination of domestic migration from California counties. Journal of Regional Analysis & Policy, 40(1), 34-52. Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/docview/856829807?accountid=13158

Hayes, J. (2017). Just the facts: Immigrants in California [Web page]. Public Policy Institute of California. Retrieved from http://www.ppic.org/publication/immigrants-in-california

Johnson, H. (2017). Just the facts: California’s population [Web page]. Public Policy Institute of California. Retrieved from http://www.ppic.org/publication/californias-population

Rowland, Donald T. (2003). Demographic methods and concepts. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc. (ISBN-13: 978-0-19-875263-9)

Santos, A. R. (2017). SOC 573—Demographic techniques [Course No. 28831, Fall semester, 2017]. University Park, PA: Department of Sociology and Criminology, The Pennsylvania State University. Retrieved October 30, 2017, from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1874715/

State of California (2016). California population estimates, with components of change and crude rates, July 1, 1900-2016 [Dataset]. Sacramento, CA: Department of Finance. Retrieved from http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-7

State of California (2017). Population estimates and projections by county, age, and sex: California, 1970-2050 [Dataset]. Sacramento, CA: Department of Finance. Retrieved from https://data.ca.gov/dataset/california-population-projection-county-age-gender-and-ethnicity

Taylor, M., Sisney, J., Kuhn, J., Simbol, A., & Newton, M. (2016). Cal facts [Web page]. Legislative Analyst’s Office, State of California. Retrived from http://www.lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/3511

Wilson, T. (2016). Visualising the demographic factors which shape population age structure. Demographic Research, 35(29), 867-890. Retrieved from https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol35/29

---

Flag of California. Vectorized by: Devin Cook. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California#/media/File:Flag_of_California.svg

•portfolio•