Recent commentaries have largely focused on the negative aspects of the falling birth rate in many of the richer countries of the world, especially in Europe. A report by Robert Cuffe and Harriet Agerholm for the BBC thus emphasises the standard concerns over the implications for pensions, health and social care with the following words,
The growing ageing population “will add to pressure on the NHS, the state pension and the wider public finances”, said Stuart McDonald, head of longevity and demographic insights at pension consultants LCP.
“For the NHS, the challenge is not simply a larger population, but a larger population at ages associated with greater healthcare need.”
He added: “But for pensions, the projections will intensify an already difficult debate about whether people can realistically and fairly be expected to work longer.”
Sarah Scobie, Deputy Director of Research at the Nuffield Trust, warned end-of-life care services are “ill-prepared for an increase in deaths as the population ages overall”.
“Hospital care accounts for over 80% of public expenditure on health care for people in the last year of life, and most of that is spent on emergency care,” she said.
However, as I have argued elsewhere in 2023 in a slightly different context, there are many very positive aspects to declining population levels. Four factors stand out as being particularly important, especially in the UK:
First, and most obviously, falling populations place less pressure on our natural environment. All else being equal, falling populations place less demand for energy, for housing, for mining, and for transport, all of which are increasingly harming our precious environmental and landscape heritage.
Second, contrary to popular economic belief, it is not necessarily detrimental for the welfare of a state’s citizens if its economic growth rate falls. For too long, the success of countries has tended to be measured in terms of economic growth (often measured in GDP per capita), rather than human well-being. Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness Index is nevertheless an important reminder that there are indeed alternative measures. The reasons for the linkages between economic and demographic growth are clear, in that an increasing population provides both more labour (and thus production) and greater consumption (thus demand) (see Unwin, 2023) which benefits private sector companies that are the engines of growth. Focusing on equity rather than growth would lead to a completely different, and much fairer society.
Third, the development of new digital technologies, especially robotics and AI, and in the longer term CyborgAIns (see my Digital Inclusion in an Unequal World, 2026) is often decried as being detrimental to employment, but with falling populations that is exactly what we need. If these technologies are used significantly to increase productivity levels, then wise choices in their deployment (especially if they are used to deliver the roles that people are currently disinclined to perform) can readily counteract falling population levels.
Fourth, the apparent fetish for longevity amongst some of the Digital Barons, who are sinking fortunes into finding ways to extend their lives (see Varanasi, 2025), seems utterly misplaced. Death is the only certainty in Human life, and we need to focus instead on ensuring that the fewer lives being lived are indeed lived well.
We should be welcoming a decline in population with open arms rather than decrying it. A focus instead on Life, on Equity, on Nature, and on Technology (LENT) can transform the lived experiences of all our citizens for the better. The UK had the eighth highest population density in the world in 2025 among countries with populations over 50 million, at 285 people/sq km. In Europe, by contrast, Germany had 43 people/sq km fewer than the UK, Italy had 84 people/sq km fewer, France had 163 people/sq km fewer, and Spain had 188 people/sq km fewer, only about one-third the population density of the UK.
It is high time we had a completely different approach to demographic transition. We need to welcome declining populations as a golden opportunity to build fairer and better societies that are more in harmony with Nature.
I had the enormous privilege of leading Imfundo: Partnership for IT in Education based in what was then the UK’s Department for International Development between 2001 and 2004. This initiative created by the UK’s Prime Minister, Tony Blair, was one of the first multi-sector projects in the then new field of ICT4D specifically designed to use digital tech in support of some of the most marginalised people and communities in Africa. Our partnership network of some 40 organisations worked in eight countries and the images below show members of the Imfundo team between 2001 and 2004, and our partners (taken from my 2004 farewell presentation)
People who worked on the Imfundo team within DFID (2001-2004)
Imfundo’s partners (2001-2004)
I remain immensely pleased that the African entities with which we worked closely during those years appreciated the work of all the members of our team, as reflected in these comments noted in our output to purpose review in 2004.
“Imfundo’s emphasis on working with the poorest of the poor communities, and collaborating with black SMMEs is exemplary. It is making a difference already, and could have much greater impact as the networks grow.”
“Best networkers in the donor community. We like the networking and partnership approach – and they are less geopolitical.”
“Imfundo has proved more accessible … and highly knowledgeable regarding the technology and education issues. It has been a learning experience to work with them”.
“Strategic partnership approach and transparent, participative, networking processes are excellent, as is direct involvement of Imfundo with relevant expertise. Most other donors don’t work like this.”
I’ve never written in detail about Imfundo, not least because my contract had said I could only do so with the Department’s permission, and despite seeking that permission during the remainder of DFID’s life and then following its merger with the FCO in 2020, I never received a confirmatory reply! However, I have included some reflections about my time at Imfundo in my latest book Digital Inclusion in an Unequal World: An Emancipatory Manifesto (Routledge, 2026), and along with the other vignettes in the book I have also recorded this as an audio file accessible below and on our podcast:
It was great to be able to hold a launch event for my latest book Digital Inclusion in an Unequal World: An Emancipatory Manifesto on 2nd June in Accra on the evening before this year’s eLearning Africa conference and exhibition. Godfred Bonnah Nkansah from the Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Centre opened the discussions, and David Hollow and Tom Wambeke also reflected on their contributions to the book. We enjoyed discussing a wide range of issues relating to the use of digital tech by the world’s poorest and most marginalised people and communities, and I am most grateful to the staff at the Beach Bar of the Labadi Beach Hotel in Accra for ensuring that the Star (beer) as well as other beverages flowed throughout!
Copies of the book are available from Routledge and Amazon, as well as good bookshops!
It was a great pleasure to participate in this year’s 19th eLearning Africa gathering held in Accra from 3rd to 5th June. Enormous thanks are due to Rebecca Stromeyer and her team for bringing us together at the Labadi Beach Hotel in Accra, as well as to Ghana’s Ministry of Education who co-hosted this year’s event. This was the eighth time I have been fortunate enough to participate in these conferences, and it has been fascinating witnessing how eLearning Africa has evolved since its inaugural event in Addis Ababa in 2006. Over the last 20 years, the use of digital tech for learning and education has deepened and widened very considerably across the continent, but many of the challenges and opportunities that we discussed together in the mid-2000s still remain evident today.
This year’s plenary addressed the theme of “Africa’s Time, Africa’s Terms: Learning for Sovereignty, Strength and Solidarity”, and this focus underlay many of the subsequent sessions. There was certainly a vibrancy in the presentations and considerable confidence in the rhetoric that Africans can indeed use and innovate technologies, and especially AI, to serve their interests. The reality of US and China’s dominance of the global digital tech sector, particularly now in the design and control of AI systems (see, for example, Netcorp’s recent AI-Generated Code Statistics 2026) nevertheless suggests that such optimism may be challenged in practice on the ground. More importantly, it is no long possible for isolationism to flourish in an increasingly interconnected world, and it is crucial for African countries to look beyond the continent’s boundaries to forge strategic and mutually beneficial partnerships with other states and companies. This, however, also requires those outside the continent to recognise Africa’s richness and potential, something I wrote about at length in the late 2000s, and to treat this with respect.
I hope that the images in the slideshow below capture something of the vibrancy and energy of eLearning Africa 2026
I was especially pleased to moderate a session on the final day on “Inclusive Digital Education: African Led Innovations for Learners with Disabilities”, which began with presentations from two main speakers:
Daniel Atuah, KNUST E-Learning Centre, Ghana Inclusive Digital Education Toolkit: Accessibility in KNUST Virtual Classrooms and Online Exams
Bridget Longla, Cameroon Baptist Convention Health Services, Cameroon Inclusive Digital Learning in Low-Resource Settings: Lessons from Cameroon’s First Accessible Digital Library
Following these, there was a wide-ranging discussion that emphasised in particular the importance of invisible disabilities such as dyslexia in its many different guises. Sessions on and with people with disabilities at large international conferences are often poorly attended, but it was excellent that a large and engaged group of participants chose to contribute to our session.
Image from The Times, well captures the lunacy and danger of the UK government’s Making Tax Digital scheme
The UK Government’s shift to digital tax returns is yet another example of how ridiculous, expensive and time-consuming for the end user the drive to digitalisation is by governments. The Times has recently summarised the changes clearly and succinctly in an excellent article by Alice Wright entitled “Why your tax-return headache is about to become a nightmare”. As of April this year the Making Tax Digital scheme means that:
“landlords and the self-employed with a gross income above £50,000 a year will have to pay for commercial software so that they can file their tax returns” (“HMRC said it will cost an average of £320 to switch to government-approved software, then £110 a year after that, but experts said it could be four times that much”);
this has to be done every three months, not anually as at present. People “will also have to file quarterly, rather than annual, updates to HMRC on their income and expenses. Anyone missing the deadlines will be fined under a new points-based system, although the penalties will be waived for the first year”
the financial cost of this is very significant: “HMRC has estimated that the introduction of Making Tax Digital will cost about £4.3 billion — with £1.4 billion being government spending and £2.9 billion the cost to taxpayers and small businesses of buying software and employing accountants”.
How have we let this happen? It seems totally stupid with the only ones really to benefit being the companies selling the software – which is guaranteed to have glitches and take taxpayers far longer to complete (four times a year) than the previous paper based systems.
Just because it is possible to use digital tech to do something does not mean it is wise to do so!
