California Budget
Statewide Responsibilities
Bulletins and Reports
About Finance
Department of Finance
915 L Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Population Projections by Race / Ethnicity, Gender and Age for California and Its Counties 2000–2050
July 2007
Acknowledgments
Mary Heim and Melanie Martindale prepared this population projection series. Programming expertise was furnished by Iris Wang.
Suggested Citation
State of California, Department of Finance, Population Projections for California and Its Counties 2000-2050, by Age, Gender and Race/Ethnicity, Sacramento, California, July 2007.
Data Sources
The California Department of Health Services provided the vital statistics (births and deaths) used in this projection series. In response to a 2006 survey, planning experts of several counties and Councils of Government contributed assessments of future migration and population for their jurisdictions.
Authority
These population projections were prepared under the mandate of Government Code, Sections 13073 and 13073.5. In addition, the State Administrative Manual, Section 1100 on state plans, sets the general policy of . . . "(3) The use of the same population projections and demographic data that is provided by the State’s Demographic Research Unit."
Technical Notes
Basic Method
The Department of Finance uses a baseline cohort-component method to
project population by age, gender and race/ethnicity. For this projection
series, there are seven mutually exclusive race/ethnic groups: Hispanics
and non-Hispanic American Indians, Asians, Blacks, Multirace
persons, Pacific Islanders and Whites. A baseline projection
assumes people have the right to migrate where they choose and no major
natural catastrophes or war will befall the state or the nation. A
cohort-component method traces people born in a given year through
their lives. As each year passes, cohorts change as specified
in the mortality and migration assumptions. New cohorts are formed
by applying the fertility assumptions to women of childbearing age.
Special Populations
Special (institutionalized) populations are populations that do not age
normally. They are found primarily in prisons, college dorms,
and group housing on military installations. These populations
tend to remain static in age as people enter and leave the institutions. In
counties where special populations represent a significant proportion
of a specific race/ethnic group's population, they were removed from
the base and projected separately. For prison and military populations,
the determination was made based on an examination of sex ratios. Adjustments
to college dorm populations were based on an examination of age structure. Forecasts
from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and the various
college campuses were used to determine the opening/closing of facilities.
Survival Rates, Fertility Rates and Migration Proportions
Survival Rates
For the starting date, state-level survival rates were constructed separately
for men and women of seven race/ethnic groups. That is, life
tables were created for men and women of each race/ethnic group using
a five-year average of death data (CY 2000-2004), with the survival
rates being derived from each of these life tables.
Fertility Rates
A set of six 5-year age-specific fertility rates (ASFRs for the age range
15-44) for each of seven race/ethnic groups was calculated for each
county for each year of the period 2000-2004. For the numerators
of these rates, births to mothers under age 15 and births to mothers
of unknown age were added to the births of the youngest age group and
births to mothers over age 44 were added to births of the oldest age
group. Rate denominators were published E-3 2000-2004 estimates
by age, gender and race/ethnic group for each county. ASFRs were
then averaged for each race/ethnic group of each county to derive beginning
fertility rates for the projections. In San Luis Obispo and Yolo
counties adjustments to the E-3 populations were made for college students.
Migration Proportions
Migration proportions were developed for the decade of the 1990s by a
survived population method. The 1990 population was aged forward
in time to 2000 by adding recorded births to form new cohorts and subtracting
deaths from existing cohorts. The survived 1990 population was compared
to the 2000 population and differences were assumed to be migration.
The ten-year migration was annualized and divided by the total to derive
a proportion. Then a three-year moving average was used to smooth
the migration proportions.
Assumptions
Base Population: As the benchmark (or starting population), the Department of Finance has used the 2000 Census counts as modified by the Bureau of the Census to eliminate the “Other” race category. These counts represent a modification to the race distribution of the census count and not an adjustment for undercount to the total.
Fertility: Two fertility options were used. Depending on current levels and historical trends, local area fertility was either merged to the state norm or followed the state trends. The state fertility norms as expressed in terms of total fertility are as follows:
- Non-Hispanic Whites: 1.83
- Non-Hispanic Blacks: 1.80
- Non-Hispanic American Indians: 1.27
- Non-Hispanic Asians: 1.80
- Non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islanders: 2.10
- Non-Hispanic Multirace: 1.68
- Hispanics: 2.33
Mortality:
Evaluation
of the life tables by county, gender and race/ethnic group revealed
that the county tables contained many small data cells that could not
deliver consistent results. Therefore, statewide survival rates
by gender and race/ethnic group were used for all California counties.
State-level survival rates were merged to 2050 national-level race/ethnic-
and gender-specific survival rates published by the US Census Bureau.
It was assumed that the higher of the state rate or the national rate
for each race/ethnic-, age- and gender-specific group would be used
as the group's 2050 survival rate.
The implied life expectancies by race/ethnic group and gender were:
- Non-Hispanic White Females: 81.1
- Non-Hispanic White Males: 76.8
- Non-Hispanic Black Females: 75.7
- Non-Hispanic Black Males: 68.8
- Non-Hispanic American Indian Females: 81.6
- Non-Hispanic American Indian Males: 78.1
- Non-Hispanic Asian Females: 86.9
- Non-Hispanic Asian Males: 82.9
- Non-Hispanic Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders: 78.9
- Non-Hispanic Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders: 72.7
- Non-Hispanic Multirace Persons: 90.9
- Non-Hispanic Multirace Persons: 88.8
- Hispanic Females: 84.2
- Hispanic Males: 79.3
Migration:
The Department
of Finance relied on the expertise of local agencies to assist in the
development of local area migration assumptions. When local input was not available,
the migration assumptions were made by the Department of Finance based on historical
analysis of the county’s migration patterns. On a statewide basis,
net migration averages 177,000 over the 50-year period.
Demographic Model
The benchmark population was projected using the fertility, mortality and migration assumptions. Applying the fertility assumptions to the women of childbearing ages creates new cohorts. The population ages with time, as the gender-, race/ethnic-, and age-specific survival rates are applied to the population at risk. In addition, the overall migration assumptions by race/ethnicity are distributed using the assumed gender and age proportions. The process is carried forward for 50 years from 2000. Special populations are then added to produce total population projections.
Projection Series—See 'Viewing
Documents' for information on accessing the Excel files
- California (.xls, 291k)
|
|
|
- To view Microsoft Excel (.xls) documents: If you have Excel installed, you can configure your browser to view this document online. If you do not have Excel installed, you can view this document by downloading the free Microsoft Excel Viewer.
