300 SPSS UN Population Divis

Similar documents

高齢化による影響と波及効果

- March

縺・・縺。謔縲・シ冗ャャ・難シ仙捷

Vol.3.indb

de facto GDP 10 2 IMF remittance ODA FDI % ,701 2, ,620 2,

160_cov.indd

評論・社会科学 116号(P)Y☆/1.郭

,.,,.,. NIRA,.,.,,, GDP.,., 1%, 2.0% 3).,,.,,., 1, 4).,,.,, GDP,.,,.,,,.,,., 2002.,,., 3), Q&A Q16 (

オランダの高齢者向け住宅

07-245_25.indd

石井/石井

老いても美しく輝くために

GDP OECD GDP 1 3, /3 GNI2 7,45 282/3199 GDP GNI 215 3, 25, 2, 15, 1, 5, ,3 11,63 12,47 13,36 1,75

目次はじめに 1. 中国の少子高齢化 人口ボーナス論と中国経済 中国の人口ボーナスの課題 人口ボーナスと地域間経済格差 はじめに , demographic dividend 15 6

国際比較からみた介護システムの役割分担


shikokunote.pdf

 

1

bc0710_010_015.indd

JAPAN MARKETING JOURNAL 111 Vol.28 No.32008

JAPAN MARKETING JOURNAL 113 Vol.29 No.12009

JAPAN MARKETING JOURNAL 110 Vol.28 No.22008


NO. 19, Yamashita Komisarof 2012 Kofman 2004 Benson and O Reilly Findlay et al Fin


奄美地域の自然資源の保全・活用に関する基本的な考え方(案)


untitled


看護・介護分野における外国人労働者の受け入れ問題


評論・社会科学 97号(P)☆/3.郭

和RIM62 大泉氏.indd

GDP TFR No

第Ⅰ章

Journal of International and Advanced Japanese Studies Volume 4 / March

448 Vol. 44 No 図



JAPAN MARKETING JOURNAL 123 Vol.31 No.32012

JAPAN MARKETING JOURNAL 115 Vol.29 No.32010

JAPAN MARKETING JOURNAL 110 Vol.28 No.22008

<95DB8C9288E397C389C88A E696E6462>

Challenge of Social Care in Asia An Over view of social Security For Long-Term Caring in Japan (Ngoh Tiong Tan and S.Vasoo eds.) Marshall Cavendish Ac

韓国における少子化の進展と子育て支援策の展開

和RIM25_三浦氏.indd

292 Vol. 44 No refundable tax credit Mirrlees 1971 Friedman

1: 合計特殊出生率 出生率の推移 暦年 アメリカドイツフランス スウェーデン日本 Apps and Re

関 志雄  81‐106

Making Democracy Work Making Democracy Work

”Лï−wŁfl‰IŠv‚æ89“ƒ/‚qfic“NŸH

高齢化とマクロ投資比率―国際パネルデータを用いた分析―

第1回土地改良研修会

untitled

アジア国際文化学会2016_6

第1章Word版.PDF

FDI2 22 BRICs 22 ODA 22 PF SSA FDI International Finance Corporation 29

名称未設定-1

高齢者のQuality of Lifeに関する研究

JAPAN MARKETING JOURNAL 123 Vol.31 No.32012

<928696EC28967B95B6292E696E6464>

Autumn EU 22 CD P RR 9 7 EU EU 2003 OECD 8 EU OECD OECD EC Included in Society 2003 EC OECD EU

橡同居選択における所得の影響(DP原稿).PDF

GDPギャップと潜在成長率


74% , China Labor Watch ,

......,,,,,,... a OECDa IS Islamic State

◆ニュースレターNo55ファイルサイズ圧縮:ウェブ用個人情報省略版

04-北沢.indd

SNAと家計調査における貯蓄率の乖離-日本の貯蓄率低下の要因-

目 次. 一 人 っ 子 政 策 の 緩 和 を 発 表. 期 待 薄 な 一 人 っ 子 政 策 の 効 果. 労 働 力 年 齢 人 口 の 推 移. 生 産 年 齢 人 口 の 変 化 と 経 済 成 長. 高 齢 化 への 影 響 6. 強 制 的 な 都 市 化 はかえって 高 齢 社 会

46 RIM 2007 Vol.7 No HSBC WTO 2006

02-本文.indd

ミレニアム開発目標の現状と課題

Walter et al. 2009: 1 Helleiner 1994 Strange 1971: Gilpin 1987: -65 Strange b, 1998c,


74-2 岩間

DOUSHISYA-sports_R12339(高解像度).pdf

Policy

untitled

橡浅川美和子.PDF

物価変動の決定要因について ― 需給ギャップと物価変動の関係の国際比較を中心に―


生活設計と金融・保険に関する調査 VOL.6

53

目次 1. 安定成長を続ける経済 2. 顕在化した不動産市況悪化の影響 住宅問題とニュータウン開発 本格化する政府の対策と今後のリスク 1 2 結びに代えて RIM 211 Vol.11 No.41

調査レポート

金/金

公務員倫理問題への新アプローチ

ブック 1.indb

Phonetic Perception and Phonemic Percepition

名称未設定-1+

デフレ不況下の金融政策をめぐる政治過程

税制改正にともなう家計の所得弾性値 : 高齢者パネルデータによる実証分析

-February GDP GDP


- October KholerBillari Ortega. Stable Population.. Birth Cohort. World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision... Right of Abode. Hong Kong

Vol.2.indb

Transcription:

18 300 2000 filial piety

300 SPSS 1 1950 22.3 1995 39.7 1995 125.6 2005 127.7 2050 104.9 15-64 1995 87.2 2050 57.1 65 1995 18.3 14.62045 34.0 2050 33.3 31.8UN Population Division, 2000 : 49-54 1 1995 44.9 2035 53.0 2050 51.5 1950-1955 5.401955-1960 6.33 1990-1995 1.70 1950-1955 47.5 1990-1995 70.9 1950-1995 18.4 12.6 UN Population Division, 2000 : 55-60 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 1 21,422 28,530 35,281 40,806 44,949 100 96.1 100.1 101.5 101.7 101.5 0-4 15.6 16.5 12.7 9.1 7.7 60 5.6 5.1 5.8 6.8 8.9 65 3.7 3.3 3.6 4.3 5.6 19.8 18.7 19.9 24.5 29.2 216 288 356 412 454 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 89,815 98,881 111,524 120,837 125,472 100 96.5 96.4 96.9 96.7 96.2 0-4 10.6 8.3 8.9 6.2 4.8 60 8.1 9.6 11.7 14.8 20.5 65 5.3 6.2 7.9 10.3 14.6 23.6 27.3 30.4 35.2 39.7 238 262 295 320 332 United Nations Population Division, World Population Projects, The 1998 Revision

2 10 20 65-69 85 36 77 85 65-84 2 nursing home 11 16 Morginstin, 1989 : 123 60 60 70 46No.1900, 1996, p.46 2000 111,997 1 75.8 303,583 1 23.9 2002 409 1985-1998 5,830 9.7 16.6 280 1 4,910 53 1995 4.72000 17.42000b 402004224 Replacement Migration 3 2050 1 1 1995 4.8 2025 2.2 2050 1.7 1995 12.6 2020 5.7 2050 2.4 2 10 20 10 1984 2010 1951 1947 1971 20 2007 2032 2012 2011 2028 UN Population Division, 1999. 3 10 20 23 22 61 64 57 2050 1 65 70 75 80 2.40 1.71 3.55 2.40 5.61 3.64 UN Population Division, Replacement Migration, 2000 10.44 6.48

4.8 1995 77 1995 2020 82 UN Population Division, 2000 : 49-60 1 4 1998 1,111,778 1,065,391 495,631 (169,081) 53,716 2,726,565 40.8 39.1 18.2 (6.2) 1.97 100.00 5 1998 750,417 100.0(%) 378,061 109,443 15,101 954 503,559 67.1(%) http//www.ipss.go.jp/japanese/kyuhuhi-h11/2/no2.html 61 GDP 1 1995 1984 1978 1987 GDP 5.7 10.42 13.62 20.53 OECD, 1999, Social Expenditure Database 1980-1996 1977 24.49

4 67.1 5 GDP 1 GDP1 GDP 6 2 1973 5 2001 1 319.5 1 203.6 212.1 1975 30.1 2000 209.8 7 26.2 65.7200439 1988 2008 2000 32.5 3 formal sectorinformal sector

7OECD 0 64 100 1987 1993 1990 1993 1994 65 74 314 254 230 309 160 OECD1997200051 65 417 388 283 479 162 75 533 559 343 573 168 1993 602000 45199613 1/3 7 0 64 100 65 479 162 75 573168 18

300 16 / 7 multistage cluster sampling / / / / 312 500 500 3 94 50 10 500 30 270 1 8 2 8 147 (47.3%) 131 (48.7%) 278 (47.9%) 164 (52.7%) 138 (51.3%) 302 (52.1%) 311 (100.0%) 269 (100.0%) 580 (100.0%) 45 (14.6%) 35 (14.8%) 80 (14.7%) 204 (66.2%) 157 (66.5%) 361 (66.4%) 59 (19.2%) 44 (18.6%) 103 (18.9%) 308 (100.0%) 236 (100.0%) 544 (100.0%) 46 (14.7%) 39 (14.8%) 85 (14.8%) 134 (42.9%) 106 (40.3%) 240 (41.7%) 132 (42.3%) 118 (44.9%) 250 (43.5%) 312 (100.0%) 263 (100.0%) 575 (100.0%) 20 85 (27.2%) 32 (11.9%) 117 (20.1%) 30 81 (26.0%) 49 (18.1%) 130 (22.3%) 40 78 (25.0%) 61 (22.6%) 139 (23.9%) 50 45 (14.4%) 48 (17.8%) 93 (16.0%) 60 23 (7.4%) 80 (29.6%) 103 (17.7%) 312 (100.0%) 270 (100.0%) 582 (100.0%)

24.224.9 2.3 9 93.3 25.8 10 blame the victim 59.0 38.3 11 * 9 42 59 31 27 49 11 49 4 7 19 (14.1%) (19.8%)* (10.4%) ( 9.1%) (16.4%) ( 3.7%) (16.4%) ( 1.3%) ( 2.3%) ( 6.4%) 298 (100.0%) * 19.8% IMF 3 21 39 39 24 1 67 1 65 9 ( 1.1%) ( 7.8%) (14.5%) (14.5%) ( 8.9%) ( 0.4%) (24.9%) ( 0.4%) (24.2%) ( 3.3%) 269 (100.0%) 45 80 70 66 73 12 116 5 72 28 ( 7.9%) (14.1%) (12.3%) (11.6%) (12.9%) ( 2.1%) (20.5%) ( 0.9%) (12.7%) ( 4.9%) 567 (100.0%) 10 71 (22.9%) 82 (30.6%) 153 (26.5%) 158 (51.0%) 168 (62.7%) 326 (56.4%) 48 (15.5%) 9 ( 3.4%) 57 ( 9.9%) 32 (10.3%) 7 ( 2.6%) 39 ( 6.7%) 1 ( 0.3%) 2 ( 0.7%) 3 ( 0.5%) 310 (100.0%) 268 (100.0%) 578 (100.0%)

12 13 84.9 11 79 (23.3%) 115 (43.6%) 194 (33.7%) 34 (10.9%) 21 ( 8.0%) 55 ( 9.5%) 11 (3.5%) 6 ( 2.3%) 17 ( 3.0%) 116 (37.2%) 71 (26.9%) 187 (32.5%) 68 (21.8%) 30 (11.4%) 98 (17.0%) 4 ( 1.3%) 21 ( 8.0%) 25 ( 4.3%) 312 (100.0%) 264 (100.0%) 576 (100.0%) 12 43 (55.8%) 44 (61.1%) 41 (57.7%) 128 (58.2%) 34 (44.2%) 28 (38.9%) 30 (42.3%) 92 (41.8%) 77 (100.0%) 23 (69.7%) 72 (100.0%) 9 (37.5%) 71 (100.0%) 14 (40.0%) 220 (100.0%) 46 (50.0%) 10 (30.3%) 15 (62.5%) 21 (60.0%) 46 (50.0%) 33 (100.0%) 24 (100.0%) 35 (100.0%) 92 (100.0%) chi-square=.432df 2p.806 chi-square=8.021df 2p.018 33%

11.3 56 1 Decommodification Esping-Andersen, 1990 14 13 5 ( 1.9%) 5 ( 0.9%) 6 ( 1.9%) 25 ( 9.4%) 31 ( 5.4%) 41 (13.1%) 87 (32.7%) 128 (22.1%) 151 (48.4%) 117 (44.0%) 268 (46.4%) 114 (36.5%) 32 (12.0%) 146 (25.3%) 312 (100.0%) 266 (100.0%) 578 (100.0%) 14 19 (43.2%) 137 (67.8%) 44 (74.6%) 200 (65.6%) 25 (56.8%) 65 (32.2%) 15 (25.4%) 105 (34.4%) 44 (100.0%) 202 (100.0%) 59 (100.0%) 305 (100.0%) 17 (48.6%) 122 (77.7%) 36 (81.8%) 175 (74.2%) 18 (51.4%) 35 (22.3%) 8 (18.2%) 61 (25.8%) 35 (100.0%) 157 (100.0%) 44 (100.0%) 236 (100.0%) 15 29 (14.5%) 48 (25.7%) 77 (19.9%) 152 (76.0%) 127 (67.9%) 297 (72.1%) * 19 ( 9.5%) 12 ( 6.4%) 31 ( 8.0%) 200 (100.0%) 187 (100.0%) 387 (100.0%) *

65.6 74.2 74.667.8 43.2 81.8 77.7 48.6 15 14.5 25.7 10 76 67.9 3 16 40.1 47.3NPO 50 17 18 16 146 (46.8%) 104 (38.8%) 250 (43.1%) 128 (41.0%) 121 (45.1%) 249 (42.9%) 14 ( 4.5%) 24 ( 9.0%) 38 ( 6.6%) 24 ( 7.7%) 19 ( 7.1%) 43 ( 7.4%) 312 (100.0%) 268 (100.0%) 580 (100.0%) 17 124 (40.1%) 123 (47.3%) 247 (43.4%) NPO 81 (26.2%) 37 (14.2%) 118 (20.7%) 15 ( 4.9%) 24 ( 9.2%) 39 ( 6.9%) 79 (25.6%) 67 (25.8%) 146 (25.7%) 10 ( 3.2%) 9 ( 3.5%) 19 ( 3.3%) 309 (100.0%) 260 (100.0%) 569 (100.0%)

18 Constant R 2.133[.170]a(.057)b.0489[.086](.045).0164[.008](.150)*.224[.081](.211)**.200[.082](.214)* 6.571.064.002288[.279](.001).134[.150](.098).00320[.009](.040).112[.096](.124).251[.180](.156) 3.898.070 a=std.error, b=beta.05<p<.10, *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 4 9.0 32.3 67.7 57.8 90 66.8 19 20 21 13.5 9.9 30.3 16.0

12.6 1 13 2.9 52.6 48.5 22 p<.05 19 100 (32.3%) 24 (9.0%) 124 (21.5%) 1 ( 0.3%) 5 ( 1.9%) 6 ( 1.0%) 179 (57.7%) 155 (57.8%) 334 (57.8%) 23 ( 7.4%) 76 (28.4%) 99 (17.1%) 7 ( 2.3%) 8 ( 3.0%) 15 ( 2.6%) 310 (100.0%) 268 (100.0%) 578 (100.0%) 20 44.3% 25.4% 53.1% 65.5% 1.7% 3.8% 0.9% 5.3% 1998 21 42 (13.5%) 26 (9.9%) 68 (11.9%) 93 (30.3%) 42 (16.0%) 135 (23.6%) 3 ( 1.0%) 33 (12.6%) 36 ( 6.3%) 163 (52.6%) 127 (48.5%) 290 (50.7%) 9 ( 2.9%) 34 (13.0%) 43 ( 7.5%) 310 (100.0%) 262 (100.0%) 572 (100.0%)

23 22 Constant R 2.09773[.084]a(.083)b.00408[.004](.073).08498[.042](.154)*.0382[.040](.069).0690[.040](.144) 3.189.046.286[.109](.261).00426[.003](.155).104[.060](.174).02471[.038](.064).0704[.073](.099) 2.467 a=std.error, b=beta.05<p<.10, *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 = 22.107 23 Constant R 2.517[.156]a(.228)b***.01979[.008](.186)**.02865[.079](.027)*.0145[.074](.014).0859[.074](.094) 6.000.100.801[.244](.326)***.0163[.008](.212)*.04389[.139](.032).009515[.088](.011).236[.162](.148) 6.785.135 a=std.error, b=beta.05<p<.10, *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

90 3 2004,

1999, Vol. 35, No. 1. 1996, 66 1999, 5 2 2000, 2004, 1992, 2003, 1998, Esping Andersen, G.,1990, The Three World of Welfare Capitalism, Polity Press. Zeng Yi and and Linda George, 1999, Extreamly Rapid Ageing and the Living Arrangements of Older Persons ; The Case of China, UN Population Division. UN Population Division, 2000. 3. Replacement Migration : Is It a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations? Makoto Atoh, 2000, The Coming of a Hyper-aged and Depopulating Society and Population Policies : The Case of Japan, Expert Group Meeting on Policy Responses to Population Ageing and Population Decline, UN Population Division. Yukiko Katsumata, 2000, The Impact of Population Decline and Population Aging in Japan from the Perspectives of Social and Labor Policy, UN Population division. Namhoon Cho, 2000, Policy Responses to Population Ageing and Population Ageingin Korea, UN Population division. Ik Ki Kim, 2000, Policy Responses to low Fertility and Population Ageing in Korea, UN Population division. Sung-Jae Choi et al., 2000, A Comparative Study on Long-Term Care Policy for the Elderly in Korea and Japan, Journal of the Korea Gerontological Society, Vol. 20, No. 3. OECD, 1997, Ageing in OECD Countries : A Critical Policy Challenges. 2004 10 15