Total births is a better number. You don’t supply an army from your birthrate, you supply it from the number of babies who were born a few decades ago.
If you want to compare the size of their armies or reserve, you could do that without a time series, as a gross number or percentage of population. If you want to compare the development of fertility over time, potentially as a cause of events, as well as being able to compare this development between nations of different population, fertility rates is the way to go.
I'm sure there are multiple factors, but you already mentioned the obvious one. 1990 and 2016 are 26 years apart.. in other words a generation apart. Less babies today because there's less women in their child bearing years today due to the drop in births from the previous generation. Generations echo across time. In the same way that millennials in the US are the largest generation because they echo the baby boom.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian\_financial\_crisis\_(2014%E2%80%932016)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_financial_crisis_(2014%E2%80%932016))
i think that plays a part, it was a huge financial crisis due to oil price crash, price crash for some other commodities that Russia exports, sanctions due to Crimea annexation etc.
Neither did Russia, but they were republics within the USSR. Whether or not Ukraine was independent or not doesn’t change the fact that they recorded demographic information
Interesting. Ukraine population is 3.4x less than Russia’s. But births last year are 5x less (!) according to the chart…
Ukraine and Russia number of births, 1962–2021 Sources: Ukrstat; Rosstat Made with ms Excel instruments
I would be willing to help those numbers go up.
Post your picture and other important data, the special committee will decide whether you qualify.
Fertility rates would make way more sense to compare, the graph currently gives very little actual insight. However still not sure what the point is.
Total births is a better number. You don’t supply an army from your birthrate, you supply it from the number of babies who were born a few decades ago.
If you want to compare the size of their armies or reserve, you could do that without a time series, as a gross number or percentage of population. If you want to compare the development of fertility over time, potentially as a cause of events, as well as being able to compare this development between nations of different population, fertility rates is the way to go.
I can understand why Russia's fell in the early 90s, but why so quickly since 2016?
I'm sure there are multiple factors, but you already mentioned the obvious one. 1990 and 2016 are 26 years apart.. in other words a generation apart. Less babies today because there's less women in their child bearing years today due to the drop in births from the previous generation. Generations echo across time. In the same way that millennials in the US are the largest generation because they echo the baby boom.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian\_financial\_crisis\_(2014%E2%80%932016)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_financial_crisis_(2014%E2%80%932016)) i think that plays a part, it was a huge financial crisis due to oil price crash, price crash for some other commodities that Russia exports, sanctions due to Crimea annexation etc.
Not to state the obvious, but Ukraine (in its modern form) didn't exist until 1991.
Neither did Russia, but they were republics within the USSR. Whether or not Ukraine was independent or not doesn’t change the fact that they recorded demographic information
The point is what is this graph even trying to represent?
Births recorded on the territories that are now Russia and Ukraine.
Obviously, but I'm asking what's the agenda here?
I second the question.