Oklahoma's population : growth, size, composition, and policy implications.

              C 3935.8 P831g 1990 c. 4
Oklahoma's Population:
Growth, Size, Composition,
and Policy Implications
Oklahoma Department of Commerce
June 1990
Oklahoma's Population:
Growth, Size, Composition,
and Policy Implications
Oklahoma Department of Commerce
Research and Planning Division
Principal Authors:
Mohammed Shahidullah,
Head of Demographic and Evaluation Research
Karen Selland,
Director, Oklahoma State Data Center
John McCraw, *
Demographic Analyst
•Currently with CEMR, University of Oklahoma.
This is a revised version of a chapter to be published in Oklahoma Resources, a Kerr
Foundation Report to the Governor, edited by Eisenhart, Spaeth, and Thompson.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the invaluable assistance of Jeff Wallace and
Virginia Cosby for preparing the basic tables and graphs in this report, and Mona
Zarecor for editing and preparing the report for publication. Harley Lingerfelt,
Research and Planning Division Director, offered valuable suggestions for the report.
This publication was printed and issued by the Oklahoma Department of Commerce as
authorized by Executive Director, Donald D. Paulsen. Three hundred copies have been
prepared and distributed at a cost of approximately $251.40. Copies have been deposited
with the Publications Clearinghouse of the Oklahoma Department of Libraries. 6190
Contents
List of Figures v
List of Tables vi
ExecutiveSummary vii
SectionL Introduction:DataSourcesandDatalimitations 1
Data Sources 1
Data Limitations 2
Section n. Oklahoma's Population: Growth, Size, Urban/Rural Residence,
and Race 3
Growth 3
Size 4
Urban/Rural Residence 5
Race 6
Section m. The Dynamics of Population Change: Natural Increase
and Migration 9
Section N. Migration Trends: 1950to 1989 15
Migration in the Region 15
Oklahoma Migration: 1975to 1986 16
Origin and Destination of Oklahoma Migrants 16
Section V. Future Growth: Oklahoma and Region 23
Oklahoma's Projected Growth 23
Region's Projected Growth 27
Section VI. Age Composition: Impact on Labor Force and
School Enrollment 29
Oklahoma's Age Composition 30
Oklahoma's Labor Force 33
Implications of a Changing Labor Force 36
Implications for School and College Enrollment 38
Implications of a Growing Elderly Population 40
Conclusion 43
Appendix 45
Endnotes 47 -Page iii
List of Figures and Tables
Figure
1 Percent Change in Population,
Oklahoma and Surrounding States: 1950 to 1989 4
2 Population of Counties, Oklahoma: 1988 5
3 Percentage of Urban Population by County: 1980 6
4 Oklahoma Population by Race, Oklahoma: 1980 7
5 Percentage of Minorities in Oklahoma by County: 1980 8
6 Components of Population Growth,
Oklahoma: 1920 to 1989 10
7 Total Fertility Rates, Oklahoma, Surrounding States,
and the U.S.: 1950 to 1980 12
8 Inmigrants to Oklahoma, by Region and State: 1975 to 1980 17
9 Outmigrants from Oklahoma, by Region and State: 1975 to 1980 18
10 Inmigrants to Oklahoma, by Region and State: 1980 to 1983 19
11 Outmigrants from Oklahoma, by Region and State: 1980 to 1983 19
12 Inmigrants to Oklahoma, by Region and State: 1983 to 1986 20
13 Outmigrants from Oklahoma, by Region and State: 1983 to 1986 21
14 Census and Projected Population under Three Migration Assumptions,
Oklahoma: 1950 to 2010 24
15 Projected Population by Age under Three Migration Assumptions,
Oklahoma: 1950 to 2010 26
16 Percent Distribution of the Population by Age and Sex,
Oklahoma and the United States: 1980 and 2010 32
17 Labor Force Participation by Age and Sex, Oklahoma: 1980 34
18 Distribution of Employment by Industry, Oklahoma: 1988 35
19 Elementary-Age, High School-Age, and College-Age Population
Oklahoma: 1950 to 2010 39
-Page v
Table
1 Components of Population Change, Oklahoma: 1920 to 1989 11
2 Median Age of Population, Oklahoma and the U.S.: 1980 to 2010 30
3 Employment Status of the Non- Institutionalized Population by Sex
Oklahoma: 1960 to 1988 33
4 Number and Percent of Working Population 18 to 64 Years of Age,
Oklahoma and the U.S.: 1980 to 2010 36
5 Number and Percent of Elderly, Oklahoma and the U.S.: 1980 to 2010 41
-Page vi
Executive Summary
This report provides basic facts and figures about Oklahoma's population. This includes
an examination of the components of population change, natural increase, and net migration. Empha-sis
is placed on the potential changes in Oklahoma's age composition and the consequences of these
changes. A brief historical account is given of Oklahoma's population growth since the land run in
1889. This report also provides a picture of current and projected growth in Oklahoma, relying on the
state and county projections published by the Oklahoma Department of Commerce in November 1988.
Further, this report compares Oklahoma's recent growth patterns with those of other states in the
region. Finally, this report reviews some of the implications projected changes carry for the social,
economic, and political climate of the state. The major findings in this report are outlined below.
• Although the birth rate subsequently dropped in the 1960s and 1970s-reaching a new low
of 15.3 births per 1,000 population in 1973-migration was strong and accounted for half of
the state's growth (63 percent) in the seventies.
• Prior to 1970, state growth was consistently lower than nationally, but between 1970 and
1983, state growth rates were consistently higher than national rates.
• At a moderate level of migration (5,000 per year), the state population is expected to reach
approximately 3.7 million by the year 2010. Under high levels of migration, the state
population is expected to grow to nearly 4.0 million; under low migration, the state may
reach only 3.5 million.
• The median age for Oklahomans, which was 30.1 in 1980, is projected to increase to 37.0
years by 2010. Yet even with this substantial increase, Oklahoma will continue to have a
younger population than the total U.S. population, as the latter is projected to increase
from 30.0 to 39.0 years.
Page vii
Page viii
• Because of their years of work experience, the 84 percent increase of those in the prime
age group (45 to 54) should both improve the quality of the state's labor force and
heighten productivity. However, there may not be enough higher level and management
positions for these people. Further, possible lower turnover may cause advancement
opportunities to become more limited.
• The decline in the number of entry level workers (18 to 24) may cause labor shortages for
those businesses which rely heavily on young workers. This group will decrease by 7
percent between 1980 and 2010.
• The elementary school population (aged 5 to 13) is projected to increase by 11 percent
between 1980 and 2000 which will require a substantial increase in elementary teachers
and most likely demand an expansion of school facilities. However, the demand for
teachers between 2000 and 2010 will decline slightly along with an 8 percent decrease in
elementary students.
• The high school population (aged 14 to 17) is expected to decrease over the next three
decades but only Slightly. The growth rate will fluctuate, declining by 8 percent between
1980 and 1990, then increasing 12 percent between 1990 and 2000, before again declining
about 7 percent between 2000 and 2010. The impact on educational facilities and the
fluctuating demand for qualified instructors will be less dramatic than that experienced by
the elementary school system.
• The college-age population is projected to decrease by 7 percent. Over the thirty-year
period, this population will decline by 18 percent between 1980 and 1990, increase by
about 6 percent over the following decade, and another 7 percent between 2000 and 2010.
It is unclear what effect this meager growth will have on college enrollment in the
state. So far this decade, colleges have been fairly successful in attracting older students to
supplement their enrollment.
• As those persons born during the baby boom begin to reach retirement age around 2010,
the social security system may begin to experience severe strains.
• The elderly population-those aged 65 and above-will increase at about the same rate as
the rest of the population. The group will grow 26 percent from roughly 376,000 to a little
over 473,000. However, those aged 75 and above will increase 44 percent while those 85
and above will increase 93 percent. The demand for increased health care and institutional
care for the oldest elderly is expected to expand.
• The changes in the size and composition of a population which were brought about by
migration are closely interrelated to changes in the state's economic conditions.
• Between 1975 and 1986, 1.1 million persons moved to Oklahoma, while about 900,000 left
the state giving Oklahoma a "net gain" of about 200,000 persons. From 1975 to 1980,
Oklahoma had a net gain of about 117,000 persons, while the 1980 to 1983 period experi-enced
a net gain of approximately 141,000 persons. Finally, from 1983 to 1986, Oklahoma
lost about 55,000 persons.
• Between 1975 and 1986, Texas, Arkansas, Missouri, Kansas, and California accounted for
the majority of Oklahoma's inmigrants and outmigrants.
• The services-producing sector in Oklahoma employs over one-fourth of the state's workers
making it the largest employing sector in the state. Manufacturers employed less than 15
percent, while the mining sector employed a proportionately larger number of workers
than did this sector nationally. Other sectors in Oklahoma were similar to those in the
United States.
Page ix
Section I
Introduction: Data Sources and
Data Limitations
This report consists of six sections plus an executive summary, conclusion, and appendix.
Section IIprovides an overview of the state's population patterns in terms of growth, size,
urban/rural residence, and race.
Section illdiscusses the components of population change-natural increase and
migration-and their impact on growth in the state.
Section Npresents Oklahoma's migration trends for the period 1950 to 1989 and compares
Oklahoma's migration patterns to other states in the region. It focuses on migration into and out of
Oklahoma during 1975 to 1986 with emphasis on the origin and destination of migrants for three
periods: 1975 to 1980, 1980 to 1983, and 1983 to 1986.
Section V calculates the future growth of Oklahoma and the region by using three different
sets of migration assumptions: high, medium, and low. It explores the alternative scenarios possible
under the low and high assumptions.
Section VI examines the implications of the changing age structure in Oklahoma, particularly
with regard to school and COllegeenrollment, the labor force, and the elderly population.
The Appendix contains historical population and vital statistics for the state. All footnotes
that appear in each section are compiled at the end in a section called "Endnotes."
Data Sources
The primary sources of data for this report are the Oklahoma Department of Commerce
population projections for the State of Oklahoma published in November 1988; data from various past
censuses conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau; annual population estimates prepared by the Census
Bureau; population projections published by individual states in the region; and for Kansas, Louisiana,
and the United States, population projections published in 1983 by the Census Bureau. The migration -Page 1
data for 1975 to 1980 are from the special county/co-county migration tape file and the subject report
by the Census Bureau, Geographical Mobility for States and the Nation. The 1981 to 1986 migration data
are from the Internal Revenue Service.
Data Umitations
In this report we make no attempt to examine county-level patterns; the analysis is at the state
level only.
Expected future trends, as reported here, are based on specific demographic assumptions about
fertility, mortality, and migration that might not hold true in the long run. The projection analysis is an
attempt to provide an illustration of the potential implications of an alternative demographic future in
Oklahoma rather than to predict exact labels of future populations. For a review of the assumptions
used in projecting the future population of the state, the reader should consult the explanation of
methodology in the report Population Projections for Oklahoma and Its Counties and for Its Cities by Age
and Sex: 1980-2010. Copies of this report are available from the Department of Commerce.
-Page 2
Section II
Oklahoma's Population: Growth, Size,
Urban/Rural Residence, and Race
Growth
Relatively complete documentation of Oklahoma's population growth exists back to the land
runs which began over one hundred years ago. These events brought thousands of migrants into the
state almost overnight. At the same time-although there are no birth or death records available for the
state prior to 1920-it is very likely that high rates of natural increase also contributed to the state's
rapid population growth.' Oklahoma's 1890 population of 259,000 tripled in only ten years and then
doubled to 1.4 million by statehood (1907). But it took another sixty-nine years, from statehood to
1976, for the population to double again.
During the past sixty years, Oklahoma has grown less than half as fast as the nation. Moreover,
state growth has been much more erratic, ranging from a low of -4.4 percent change in the 1940s to a
high of 18.2 percent in the 1970s. Over the same period (1920 to 1980) the nation's growth was lowest,
7.2 percent, during the depression (1930 to 1939) and highest, 18.5 percent, in the 1950s during the
height of the baby boom. Prior to 1970, state growth was consistently lower than nationally, but
between 1970 and 1983, state growth rates were consistently higher than national rates.
During the 1970s, the population in Oklahoma grew at rates unseen since the 1920s, increasing
by more than 18 percent. This increase was part of the movement to the "sunbelt" occurring across the
nation. The approximately 3,000,000 population of the state in 1980 increased to an estimated popula-tion
of 3,224,000 by 1989. It has grown at an average rate of approximately 22,000 persons per year (0.7
percent) since 1980. This average, however, hides the phenomenal growth that took place between
1980 and 1983 as well as the loss of population since 1984.
Comparison to Other States in the Region: In terms of population size, Oklahoma, with a 1980
population of 3,025,500, was ranked fourth among its neighbors and twenty-sixth in the nation. Texas, -Page 3
third largest state in the nation, continued to dominate the region with its enormous population. In
fact, its population was approximately the same as that of Oklahoma, Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, and
Louisiana combined. While Oklahoma's growth has been erratic, Missouri and three other states in the
region (Louisiana, Kansas, and New Mexico) have experienced steady, if unspectacular, growth. As
shown in Figure 1, New Mexico has led the region in proportionate population growth since 1970.
Size
Figure 1
Percent Change in Population
Oklahoma and Surrounding States: 1950 to 1989
P",cent
40.0r------------------------~-....,
Oklahoma is less densely settled than the national average. In 1980 Oklahoma made up 1.9
1950-60 1960-70
~~
percent of the nation's total land area, but only 1.3 percent of the total U.S. population. The state's
30.0
1970-80 1980-89 ~-
population density was 44.1 persons per square mile compared to 64.0 persons for the nation. By
20.0
10.0
0.0
-10.0 ••••• --'
OK TX 1040 LA co KS AR
Source: Oklahoma Department of Commerce.
population size, Oklahoma ranked twenty-eighth in the nation in 1989.
The population of the state is heavily distributed among the metropolitan areas, as shown in
Figure 2. With the exception of Kay County and Payne County in the northcentral portion of the state -Page 4
and Muskogee County in the eastcentral part of the state, the counties with more than 50,000 persons
are all metropolitan counties. More than half of the state's population lives in the five metropolitan
areas: Oklahoma City, Tulsa, Lawton, Enid, and Ft. Smith (which is shared with Arkansas). The
fourteen counties comprising the metropolitan areas in the state made up 57.0 percent of the state's
population in 1980.
Figure 2
Population of Counties
Oklahoma: 1988
Number
o 4.100 to 9.999
~ 10.000 to 24.999
I7.i 25,000 to 74,999
~ 75,000 to 613,600
Source: Oklahoma Employment Security Commission.
Urban/Rural Residence
Oklahoma is primarily urban, 67.3 percent, but less so than the nation which is 73.7 percent
urban. In this context, urban refers to the number of persons living in urbanized areas and in cities and
towns of 2,500 or more persons outside urbanized areas. Still, as shown on Figure 3, there are 12
counties in the state that are totally rural, that is, have no communities as large as 2,500; and 64
counties have proportionately lower urban population than the state average. Only ten counties have a
higher proportion of urban population than the national average of 73.7. -Page 5
Race
Figure 3
Percentage of Urban Population by County: 1980
Percent Urban. o Total Rural
§ 0.Ot033.9
~ 34.0 to 67.2
rlJ 67.3 to 83.9
• 84.0 to 97.6
State Average = 67.3%; U.S. Average = 73.7%
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce.
By race the state is predominantly white, but its American Indian population is second largest
in the country. As shown in Figure 4, the non-white or minority races comprised 14.2 percent of the
total state population in 1980. Nationally, non-whites made up 16.9 percent, of which blacks were by
far the largest group with 11.7 percent. In Oklahoma, blacks were the largest minority group also,
making up 6.8 percent of the total population, followed closely by American Indians with 5.6 percent.
Nationally, American Indians comprised less than 1 percent and Asian and Pacific Islanders 1.6 percent
of the total population. The racial category of Asian and Pacific Islanders, a relatively small group in
the state (0.65 percent), is comprised of many subgroups. The largest subgroup in Oklahoma in 1980
was Vietnamese, with 21.1 percent.
Although the Hispanic population is categorized as an ethnic group rather than a race, it
composes more than 6 percent of the nation's population and about 2 percent of the state's population. -Page 6
Figure 4
Oklahoma Population by Race
Oklahoma: 1980
White85.8%
---Black 6.8%
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce.
Persons of "Spanish Origin," the Census Bureau's designation for Hispanic heritage, can belong to any
race. In the 1980 Census, half chose white as their race while most of the remaining half chose "other."
More than three-quarters of Oklahoma's Hispanic population were of Mexican origin in 1980.
Including Hispanic with other minority groups, the state has a total minority population
constituting 14.2 percent of the population, compared to a U.S. total minority population of 20.4
percent. The minority population in the state lives mainly in metropolitan areas, with the exception of
the American Indian population. However, as shown in Figure 5, the eastern and southern portions of
the state have higher proportions of minorities than the rest of the state. Counties as dispersed across
the state as Cherokee in the northeastern portion of the state and Comanche in the southwest have
among the highest percentages of minority population (28 percent), with Adair County in the northeast
containing the highest, 34.4 percent. -Page 7
Figure 5
Percentage of Minorities in Oklahoma by County: 1980
Percent Minority
o 1.4 to 7.3
~ 7.4 to 14.9
rlJ 15.0 to 20.2
• 20.3 to 34.4
State Average = 14.2%; National Average = 20.4%
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce.
-Page 8
Section III
The Dynamics of Population Change: Natural
Increase and Migration
Changes in both the size and composition of a population always occur as the result of a
complex interaction between the two components of population change: natural increase and net
migration. Natural increase simply refers to the total number of births in a population minus the total
number of deaths. Thus, the greater the difference between the number of live births and the loss of
members of the population through death, the greater the natural increase component. Net migration,
on the other hand, refers to the number of persons moving into a particular area minus the number of
persons moving out. The volume of net migration is affected by both "internal" migration-movement
Substantial changes in fertility and mortality rates are typically gradual, occurring over long
from state to state within the nation-and international migration.
periods of time, and are therefore generally slow at bringing about population changes. Even when
labor force are delayed. Migration, on the other hand, can change rapidly and produce immediate
accelerations in fertility do occur, as during the baby boom phenomenon when rates moved from
average to high fertility in a span of 12 years,' the effects of an increased population on schools and the
short-term as well as long-term impacts on the labor force, the sale of consumer goods, housing, and
In turn, variations in all three rates-fertility, mortality, and migration-result from a complex
the educational system.
interplay with a variety of social, economic, and demographic factors. For example, fertility rates are
sensitive to female labor-force participation, age at first birth, and marriage and divorce rates. Mortal-ity
rates, on the other hand, are largely determined by the level of health care and environmental
quality and safety, as well as general health habits. Finally, factors such as economic growth, employ-ment
opportunities, and quality of life influence migration patterns.
In order to fully understand the process by which population size changes, it is necessary to-Page 9
analyze each population component individually. Figure 6 reports the two major components of popu-
lation change: birth/death and migration rates over the period 1920 to 1989. Because no annual
migration rates are available prior to 1940, the migration component in the graph appears flat from
1920 to 1940. The area between the birth rate and death rate portrays natural increase-the amount by
which the population would grow if there were no migration.
Figure 6
Components of Population Growth
Oklahoma: 1920 to 1989
Rate per 1,000 Population 30~--------------------------------------------~ Crude Birth
Rate~
Crude Death
Rate~
10
t.
O~----~---------, -----' -I ~"~~~~~~~~~---,J-' ----~----~'~-;\
',/' \,' v
.Net Migration
Rate -----~ ••~ V
1i20 1940 1i60 1980
Source: Oklahoma Department of Health; U.S. Department of Commerce.
Examination of the graph shows that the death rate in Oklahoma has remained relatively
stable over the 69-year span, while both migration and birth rates have undergone a series of fluctua-tions.
In the 1920s, for example, the high birth rate and small positive net migration produced a
relatively rapid population gain. By the late 1920s, however, birth rates plummeted, reaching a low in
1929 of 16.8 births per 1,000 population. Fertility once again rose during the thirties and early forties
before rapidly accelerating after World War II. In 1947 the birth rate reached 23.3 births per 1,000
population with a record 53,000 babies born in that year alone.' This was the beginning of the now
famous "baby boom" period, 1946 to 1964.
Page 10
It was the large natural increase in the decades between 1930 and 1960 that helped offset the
large numbers of persons leaving the state during the same period. In these three decades, Oklahoma
lost nearly 900,000 persons to the dust bowl and its aftermath.' In other words, over one-third of the
state's population moved away. However, as displayed in Table 1 and the Appendix, the total popula-tion
of the state declined by only 68,000 persons, a loss of less than 3 percent. Though the birth rate
subsequently dropped in the 1960s and 1970s-reaching a new low of 15.3 births per 1,000 population in
1973-migration was strong and accounted for half of the state's growth (52 percent) in the seventies.
Table 1
Components of Population Change
Oklahoma: 1920 to 1989
(in thousands)
Total
Population Natural Net
Period Change Increase Migration
1920-1930 368 294 74
1930-1940 ·59 225 ·284
1940·1950 ·103 287 ·390
1950-1960 95 304 ·209
1960-1970 231 211 20
1970-1980 466 173 293
1980-1989 199 224 ·25
Source: Oklahoma Department of Health; U.S. Department of Commerce.
Even though fertility remained low throughout the seventies and early eighties, the largest
number of births ever recorded in the state-nearly 59,~ccurred in 1982. Births jumped because of
the large number of baby boom women entering their childbearing years-what has been labeled the
"echo effect." The relatively large number of young adults moving into the state during the seventies
and early eighties also acted to increase the number of potential mothers. Because the number of
young women in the state was so large, even the increased rates of delayed marriage, divorce, and
childlessness as well as low fertility rates could not stop the rising number of births.
Page 11
Figure 7
Total Fertility Rates
Oklahoma, Surrounding States, and the U.S.: 1950 to 1980
Rate per 1.00w0omen of childbearing age
5.000r-----------...;..-.;....--------------,
Fertility Rate. Within the region, strong natural increase over the last three decades has caused
state populations to grow or has moderated large population losses from outmigration. In all states in
the region, natural increase declined from 1950 to 1980. The reason for this decline is seen in Figure 7
which displays both the high fertility of the baby boom and the subsequent drop in fertility in the 1970s
and 1980s.
Fertility, as measured by the total fertility rate,' has been more moderate in ~klahoma than in
1950 1970
~~
1960 1980
4.000 ~
3.000
1.000
OK AR CO KS LA MO NM TX u.s.
other states. It neither expanded as fully during the 1960s nor contracted as much in the 1970s and
Source: National Center for Health Statistics.
1980s. While the state's fertility was below that of the country from 1950 to 1970, it was 10 percent
above the United States by 1980. All states in the region, with the exception of Colorado, had higher
fertility than the United States in 1980.
Page 12
Oklahoma's 1980 total fertility rate was 2,022, slightly below the replacement level of2,100 (or,
as commonly expressed, 2.1 per woman).' Still, it was higher than U.S. fertility which has dropped 41
percent since 1950, from 3.1 to 1.8. Texas, Louisiana, and New Mexico had higher fertility than Okla-homa
in 1980. This is largely because all three states have a proportionately larger non-white popula-tion
which has consistently higher fertility than whites. In Oklahoma, for example, American Indians
have a crude birth rate 20 percent higher than the white rate, while the black rate is 45 percent higher.
Page 13
Section IV
Migration Trends: 1950 to 1989
Over the last thirty-nine years, migration in Oklahoma has undergone a series of fluctuations.
From 1950 to 1960, the state lost over 209,000 persons to migration but then gained more than 20,000
persons between 1960 and 1970. In the ten years between 1970 and 1980, Oklahoma gained over
241,000 migrants and then gained another 204,000 between 1980 and 1983. Since 1983, however, the
state has been consistently losing population to outmigration. Estimates of net migration between
1983 to 1989 place the loss at over 200,000.
To understand the cause of these variations in the state's migration patterns, it is helpful to
examine the connection between large scale population movements and economic conditions. Popula-tion
losses in Oklahoma between 1950 and 1960 reflected a stagnant and, at times, declining state
economy. Consequently, many residents of Oklahoma were probably forced to seek employment
opportunities or higher wages outside the state. The slow but steady economic growth in the state
between 1960 and 1970 turned this situation around and brought a small inflow of migrants to the state.
Next came the extraordinary increase in the price of petroleum in the 1970s which rapidly accelerated
the state's economic growth. As a result, thousands of jobs were created which touched off a large
influx of migrants to the state. With the substantial downturn in the mining industries beginning in
1982, however, and the subsequent drop in employment, the state began losing population to outmigra-tion
once again.
Migration in the Region
The pattern of migration to the region changed tremendously over the period 1950 to 1980.
Combined net migration for the eight states for the period 1950 to 1960 was negative, when approxi-mately
546,000 more persons left than came to the region. By the 1960s, however, this large outflow
had slowed with only 85,000 more persons leaving than entering the region. A complete turnabout was
Page 15
evident by the 1970s as the region gained more than 2.5 million migrants. However, even during the
seventies, two states, Kansas and Missouri, continued to lose population to migration.
Oklahoma Migration: 1975 to 1986
Of the two components of population change, migration holds the potential for bringing rapid
and abrupt changes in both the size and composition of a population. Migration affects the size of a
population by simply adding to or subtracting from the total number of persons. Compositional
changes occur, on the other hand, because migration tends to be a highly selective process. That is,
migration typically adds to or subtracts from a population very distinctive types of people. Generally,
people who migrate are more likely to be young, relatively well educated, and possess more job-related
skills than people who do not migrate.
Changes in the size and composition of a population are often related to changes in economic
conditions. For example, an area experiencing substantial economic growth will typically attract people
seeking new or better employment opportunities. In contrast, residents of an economically depressed or
declining area may be forced to relocate in search of higher wages or employment.
It is important to remember that migration is always a two-way process. As some migrants
depart a particular location, other migrants arrive. In Oklahoma's case about 1.1million persons
moved to Oklahoma between 1975 and 1986while about 900,000 persons left the state, giving Okla-homa
a "net gain" of about 200,000 persons. The states bordering Oklahoma provided the majority of
Oklahoma's inmigrants and also received the bulk of the state's outmigrants.
In this section we focus on the movement of people into and out of Oklahoma between 1975
and 1986. Data used for the period 1975 to 1980 were obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau while the
data for the period covering 1980 to 1986 came from the Internal Revenue Service. Data on the source
and destination of migrants are not yet available for the period 1987 to 1989.
Origin and Destination of Oklahoma Migrants
1975 to 1980. Between 1975 and 1980, census data show that about 383,000 persons moved
into Oklahoma while about 266,000 persons left the state during the same period, giving the state a net
Page 16
gain of about 117,000. During this five-year period 20 percent of the inmigrants to Oklahoma arrived
from Texas, 13 percent from California, 7 percent from Kansas, and 5 percent each from Arkansas and
Missouri (Figure 8). Texas was also the most frequent destination for Oklahoma residents leaving the
state between 1975 and 1980, receiving 29 percent of all Oklahoma migrants (Figure 9).
Figure 8
Inmigrants to Oklahoma
By Region and State: 1975 to 1980
Arkansas 5.2% ----,
Other Northcentral
/" States 14.9%
Southern
Region 40.8%
Northcentral
Region 27.5%
Kansas 7.3%
~ Northeast
Region 6.5%
California 12.7%
-.Other Western
States 9.3%
Western
Region 25.20/.
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census.
Page 17
Other Southern
States 16.2%
Northcentral
Region 21.2%
Figure 9
Outmigrants from Oklahoma
By Region and State: 1975 to 1980
Southern
Region 40.8%
Region 3.7%
Western
Region 24.2%
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census.
1980 to 1983. An analysis of IRS data shows that between 1980 and 1983 about 429,000
persons came to Oklahoma and about 288,000 Oklahoma residents left the state, giving Oklahoma a
net gain of approximately 141,000 persons. Again, the bordering states provided the majority of
inmigrants for this period and also received the bulk of Oklahoma's outmigrants. Texas contributed 19
percent of all inmigrants while California accounted for 8 percent, Arkansas and Kansas each with 8
percent, Missouri with 7 percent, and Colorado with 5 percent (Figure to). Twenty-seven percent of
Oklahoma outmigrants moved to Texas, with California, Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and Colorado
receiving a descending proportion of the state's outmigrants (Figure 11).
Page 18
Figure 10
Inmigrants to Oklahoma
By Region and State: 1980 to 1983
C lorado 4.7%
California 8.1%
Western
Region 22.7%
Texas 19.4%--
Other Southern _
States 14.3%
Other Western
States 10.2%
Southern
Region 41.1% Northeast
----- Region 4.6% ~!!!!!
Arkansas 7.5% -' -,Other Northcentral
States 17.1%
Northcentral
Region 31.5%
Source: Internal Revenue Service.
Figure 11
Outmigrants from Oklahoma
By Region and State: 1980 to 1983
Western
Region 22.1%
California 8.0%
Other Southern
States 16.6% -r-r-r-rr>:
Other Western
»>: States 10.2%
Southern
Region 51.2% Northeast
Region 4.4%
Texas 27.3%
~
Arkansas 7.2%
\ Other Northcentral
States 10.1%
Northcentral
Region 22.3%
Source: Internal Revenue Service.
Page 19
1983 to 1986. Between 1983 and 1986, IRS data show that 288,000 persons came to Oklahoma
while 343,000 persons left. During this period, then, Oklahoma lost about 55,000 persons due to
outmigration. As with the previous two periods, the bordering states, along with California, accounted
for the majority of Oklahoma's inmigrants and outmigrants (Figures 12 and 13).
Figure 12
Inmigrants to Oklahoma
By Region and State: 1983 to 1986
Western
Region 20.8%
Southern
Region 44.0%
Other Southern
Stat es 15.4%
Texas 22.0%
_____ Northeast
Region 5.1%
Arkansas 6.5%
\ Other Northcentral
States 15.9%
~orthcentral
Region 30.1%
Source: Internal RevenueService.
Page 20
Southern
Region 49.9%
Figure 13
Outmigrants from Oklahoma
By Region and State: 1983 to 1986
Other Southern
States 16.4%
Colorado 3.6%
I
Western
Region 21.4%
/California 8.0%
Arkansas 6.5%
States 9.6%
Texas 26.9% ---
····<>z···
Other Northcentral
States 11.8%
Source: Internal Revenue Service.
Page 21
Section V
Future Growth: Oklahoma and Region
By making certain assumptions about future trends in fertility, mortality, and migration, we can
calculate "population projections"-or predictions of the future population size. Because of the evident
uncertainties surrounding predictions of future changes in the population components, it is desirable to
calculate more than one series of projections. The projections used in this report were calculated for
the state and counties under three different sets of migration assumptions-"high," "medium," and
"low." The series of projections calculated under "high" migration assume atypically high rates of
migration. Correspondingly, "medium" migration assumes a moderate gain from migration, while
"low" migration posits no population gain at all from migration. The Oklahoma Department of
Commerce projections? assume a high net migration of 15,000 per year, medium net migration of 5,000
per year, and a low of zero net migrants. The advantage to this procedure is that three series of projec-tions
present a reasonable range of future population trends. Thus, one series, typically the projections
calculated under the medium assumption, is designed as the most probable series.
This section talks about Oklahoma's and the region's projected growth. There is a brief discus-sion
of the alternative scenarios possible under the low and high assumptions. The projections used in
this section, however, are not from a single unified projection study. Rather, we obtained and utilized
state-derived projections from most of Oklahoma's neighbors." All of these state-generated projections
were completed after the recent economic recession and with full recognition of the trouble in the
mining sector.
Oklahoma's Projected Growth
Although the recent outflow of migrants from Oklahoma has led to a slow population decline
over the last several years, we do not expect this trend to continue. Our projections show that average
annual net migration over the decade 1990 to 2000 should be about 5,000. Although this is somewhat
Page 23
smaller than the 1.2 percent annual increase characteristic of the 1970s and the 1.0 percent annual
increase over the decade of the 1980s, it nevertheless represents a relatively substantial population gain
from migration. We also expect a healthy rate of natural increase throughout the decade with a total of
more than 228,000 persons during the ten-year period. Combined with migration, this will add over
278,000 persons to the state's population.
Figure 14 shows Oklahoma's projected growth under all three migration assumptions. The
only variation in our series of projections concerns our assumptions about the future course of migra-tion
in Oklahoma. Although some demographers prepare projections incorporating changes in fertility
and mortality, our projections assume that these two rates will remain relatively stable through 2010.9
Under the medium assumption, we expect the state to maintain a relatively low level of migration-approximately
5,000 per year-but since fewer young adults and young families are expected to enter the
state, the rate of natural increase is expected to decline. Thus, Oklahoma's total population should
Page 24
Figure 14
Census and Projected Population
Under Three Migration Assumptions
Oklahoma: 1950 to 2010
Million 4.5r-----------------------------------------------,
..'.' ...'.'.'.'.'.'.. .'...' .... .... - . •.. -
4.0 High
Medium
3.5 Low
3.0
2.5
2.0~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Yell'
Source: Oklahoma Department of Commerce; U.S. Department of Commerce.
reach approximately 3.7 million by the year 2010. If, on the other hand, net migration falls to a lower
level than anticipated, Oklahoma's population may reach only 3.5 million. Finally, if Oklahoma
experiences a larger net migration than expected (15,000 a year) the state's population could total 4.0
million.
The potential range of migration patterns also affects our predictions of Oklahoma's age
structure. Figure 15 presents projections of the numbers of persons within four different age groups-o
to 4, 5 to 17, 18 to 64, and 65 and older-under three sets of migration assumptions. According to our
projections, the age group 18 to 64-which approximates the working age population-is most sensitive
to variations in migration. Examination of the graph shows that under the medium migration assump-tion
there will be over 2.3 million persons in this age group by the year 2010. If Oklahoma fails to
attract as many migrants as expected, however, 18 to 64 year olds will total about 2.2 million. Under
the high migration assumption, we expect approximately 2.6 million persons of this age group.
The variation in the future number of persons aged 0 to 4 and 5 to 17 is, of course, dependent
upon the migration patterns of their parents. For example, if more young families move into the state
than anticipated, the number of children aged 0 to 17 years of age would naturally exceed our medium
projection of nearly 852,000 by the year 2010.
Finally, the number of elderly persons-of years and older-in the year 2010 will also depend
upon the volume of migration. Although the projections for this age group under all three assumptions
appear quite similar, the differences carry profound implications for the state. Requirements for
medical care and for elderly residential and institutional care are sensitive to even small changes in the
number of elderly. Since migration is so closely linked to the health of the state's economy as well as
the amount and type of competition among the states, it is difficult to determine the precise level of
future migration to the state. At present, however, the medium assumption seems most reasonable.
Page 25
Figure 15
Projected Population by Age
Under Three Migration Assumptions
Oklahoma: 1950 to 2010
--
010.
2000
11110M
.' ............
...<.:.~.~..~.~
Number
2110,OOOr----------------------------------------------------,
Number
800,ooO~~~------------------------------------------------,
700,000
1100,000
51o 17
....... ........ . .
.'.'
...~.~.~~.~
500,000 '-- __ '- --' ••••••• ••••••• ••••• •••••• ••••••• ••••-•-•-•A
525,000
450,000
375,000
300,000
225,000
HIgh
--- Medium
____ Low
2010
HIgh
--- Medium
----Low
200,000
2010
150,000'--_ •.•.• --' -': •...••. ....•..• ...•••. --'•••.......•...1
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
1950 1970 1980
Year
1990 2000
2110,000
240,000
220,000
MIllion
3.0r--------------------------------------------------~
1950 1980 1970 1980
Year
li90
1.0'-__'-- ••.•.•. •.•.•. ....•... .•...• '-- --'__...l
2.5
HIgh
--- Medium
2000 2010
1980
2010
Low
2.0
1.5·
1950 1960 1970 1980
Year
1990
Number
85+
HIgh
. --- Medium
Low
Source: Oklahoma Department of Commerce; U.S. Department of Commerce.
Region's Projected Growth
Without exception, all states in the region are expected to grow. Texas will remain by far the
largest state in the region with over 20 million persons by the year 2000, almost half the total popula-tion
of the entire eight-state region. New Mexico will remain the smallest state with less than 2 million,
and over the next decade and a half, Colorado, Texas, and New Mexico will remain the region's fastest-growing
states with average annual growth rates significantly higher than Oklahoma's 1.2 percent.
The states in the region that continue to attract more migrants than they lose will grow at a
more rapid pace. Without another baby boom, states that fail to attract migrants will grow more slowly.
Page 27
Section VI
Age Composition: Impact on Labor
Force and School Enrollment
The age composition of a population is of primary importance in many types of planning, par-ticularly
estimates of school enrollment, health care delivery, labor force, manpower, and potential
voter participation. Moreover, the age structure is crucial in relation to a variety of social and eco-nomic
variables since the the latter tend to vary greatly according to age. For example, age has a
fundamental effect on subjective attitudes and beliefs as well as on Objective characteristics such as
income, occupation, and group membership. In this section, we outline the proportion of Oklahoma's
total population in each age cohort, how these proportions are expected to change over the next thirty
years, what factors are responsible for this change, and what impact these changes are likely to have,
particularly for the state's labor force, its educational system, and its elderly citizens.
To understand how a population has arrived at its present age structure or to project what
future changes may occur requires an analysis of the two components of population Change: fertility
and mortality, and migration. To begin with, changing fertility rates over time produce different age
groups or "cohort" sizes. A sudden rise in the number of births, for example, increases the proportion
of young persons in the population and can thereby change the age structure. On the other hand, a
sudden drop in the fertility rate reduces the proportion of young persons in the population and conse-quently
causes the age structure to shift upward.
The life expectancy of individuals can also affect a population'S age composition. If, on the
thereby increase the proportion of older persons in the population. On the other hand, if the life
average, individuals in a population enjoy a long life, they survive to move into older age groups and
expectancy within a population is generally low-such as in developing nations-fewer individuals
survive to the older age groups, leaving a small proportion of elderly.
Finally, an individual who migrates has the effect of subtracting one individual from his age
group in one location and adding one to his age group in another location. Since people who migrate
Page 29
United States 30.00 33.00 36.50 39.00
are typically young, a large migration can rapidly increase a population's proportion of young people.
In short, both immediate and long-term fluctuations in fertility/mortality and migration rates are
reflected in the age composition of a population.
Oklahoma's Age Composition
The population of Oklahoma, like many other states in the nation, is aging as measured by the
median age. Median age is a statistical measure which refers to the age at which half of the population
is younger and half is older. The median age for Oklahomans, which was 30.1 in 1980, is projected to
increase to 37.0 years by 2010 (see Table 2). Yet even with this substantial increase, Oklahoma will
continue to have a younger population than the total U.S. population as the latter is projected to
increase from 30.0 to 39.0 years. to
Table 2
Median Age of Population
Oklahoma and the U.S.: 1980 to 2010
1980 1990
Projections
2000 2010
Census
Oklahoma 30.10 32.50 35.40 37.00
Source: Oklahoma Department of Commerce; U.S. Bureau of the Census.
The state's population is aging as a result of a combination of two factors. First, the fertility
rate in Oklahoma has been declining since the late 1960s. In other words, the "averag~" woman is
having fewer babies than she used to. As the number of children being born decreases, the proportion
of older persons in the population increases. Secondly, with the eldest of the individuals born during
the baby boom now entering their forties, the sheer number of people in this age group results in a
higher median age.
Page 30
One way to graphically represent the age structure of a population is by a population pyramid
like the one shown in Figure 16,which displays the population distribution of the 1980 state population
with the projected 2010 population superimposed upon it. The pyramid consists of stacked bars with
each bar representing the number of males and females born within a particular period. The scale at
the bottom of the period shows the proportion of males and females in each age group. Typically, the
youngest age groups have the largest bars while the bars become smaller as age increases.
Examination of the pyramids shows several important changes occurring in the age structure
over the next 30 years. To begin with, the proportion of young people in Oklahoma (0 to 14) will be
smaller in 2010 than in 1980. This proportional change comes about as a result of the "baby bust" years
of the 19705when fertility declined in Oklahoma as well as nationally.
Secondly, those in the age cohorts 15 to 19 through 30 to 34 occupy a greater proportion of the
pyramid in 1980 than their projected proportion in 2010. They belong to the baby boom cohort born
during the period 1946 to 1964 when fertility rates were high. But by the year 2010, members of this
cohort will have moved into the age group 45 to 64 and thereby increased the proportion of this age
group in the population. In addition, the population in 2010 will have a smaller percentage under age
35 than was the case in 1980. This results from the combination of the decline in fertility rates since the
closing of the baby boom as well as the aging of the baby boomers themselves. Finally, the percentage
of persons beyond the age of 84 will be higher in 2010 than in 1980.
Any significant change in the age structure of a population can be expected to produce changes
in a variety of social and economic institutions. These changes can range from shifts in consumer
behavior patterns to alterations in the manpower available to the labor force. Following a discussion of
the labor force in Oklahoma, this section will point out some of the social and economic implications
which stem from probable Changes in Oklahoma's age structure.
Page 31
~I ACE
85 +
80-84
75 -79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55 -59
50- 54
45 -49
40-44
35 -39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
United States
Figure 16
Percent Distribution of the Population by Age and Sex
Oklahoma and the United States: 1980 and 2010
5 o
Percent
5
Oklahoma
5 4 3 2 o
Percent
4 3 2 1 2 3 4
Source: Oklahoma Department of Commerce; U.S. Department of Commerce.
~ Amount by which the 1980 percentage exceeds the 2010 percentage
• Amount by which the 2010 percentage exceeds the 1980 percentage
Oklahoma's Labor Force
The labor force in Oklahoma has grown rapidly and has become proportionately more female
and younger in the past two decades. Table 3 provides a summary of the state labor force for the last
three census periods and for 1988. While population has grown 40 percent from 1960 to 1988, the size
of the labor force has increased 90 percent. The decade of the 1970s showed the most rapid gain in the
size of the civilian labor force. This resulted from the echo wave of the maturing baby boom generation
entering the employment market from the late 1960s through the early 1980s.
Table 3
Employment Status of the Non-Institutionalized Population by Sex
Oklahoma: 1960 to 1988
Total Percent Labor Force
Civilian Growth Participation Rates
All Labor in Labor Both
Races (ODDs) Force Sexes Male Female
1960* 822 5.0 50.2 73.7 30.4
1970 968 17.8 55.4 73.8 39.3
1980 1,343 38.7 59.7 73.5 47.2
1988 1,533 14.1 63.8 74.3 54.6
* Data for Total Civilian Labor Force Participation based on
persons between the ages of 14 and 64 (all others 16 to 64).
Source: U.S. Department of Labor; U.S. Department of Commerce.
The proportion of the population in the labor force has steadily climbed over the period, from
50.2 percent in 1960 to 63.8 percent in 1988. This was largely due to the increased participation of
females in the labor force. Female labor force participation has risen very rapidly, from 30.4 percent in
1960 to 54.6 percent in 1988. It still remains considerably lower than male labor force participation,
however, which has remained remarkably stable over the time period, at approximately three-fourths of
the male noninstitutional civilian population.
Page 33
Labor force participation fluctuates with age, as shown in Figure 17. Only about half of
adolescents (ages 16 to 19), who are usually still dependent and attending school, are in the labor force.
For females, once age 20 is attained, the participation rate flattens until age 40 after which it begins to
decline. Male participation, on the other hand, continues to rise after age 20, remains high from ages
25 through 49, then falls off rapidly to levels more similar to those of females. Males at age 60, how-ever,
have as high a participation rate as the highest female levels.
Figure 17
Labor Force Participation by Age and Sex
Oklahoma: 1980
Participation Rate
100~---------------------------------------------,
Whites in Oklahoma comprise the largest portion of Oklahoma's civilian labor force, 85.9
Male
~
percent in 1980. Other races in the state hold a proportion of the labor force commensurate with their
80
population size. Labor force participation rates vary somewhat by race, but the differential by race is
-Fem-ale
not as large as that by age and gender. In 1980 Hispanics had higher rates than other races, including
60
whites, at 62.7 percent, while American Indians in the state had the lowest rates, at 56.6 percent. By
Page 34
40
20
16-19 I 25-29 I 35-39 I 45-49 I 55-59 I 65-69 I
20-24 30-34 40-44 50-54 60-64 10-14
15+
Age
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce.
race, the largest differential between males and females in labor force participation rates is between
white males and females who differ by 28.2 percentage points. The smallest differential, 12.4, is be-tween
black males and females. This is because black women are more likely to be in the labor force
The services-producing sector in Oklahoma employs over one-fourth of the state's workers
than females of any other race, while black males exhibit the lowest participation rates among all races.
making it the largest employing sector in the state (Figure 18). Nationally, the largest industrial sector
in 1988 was services, which employed 24 percent of the nation's workforce. In Oklahoma, manufactur-ers
employed less than 15 percent, while the mining sector employed a proportionately larger number
of workers than did this sector nationally. Other sectors in Oklahoma were similar to those in the U.S.
Retail 19.5%
Figure 18
Distribution of Employment by Industry
Oklahoma: 1988
Wholesale 5.3%
Transportation 3.1%
Manufacturing 14.7%
F.I.R.E 5.3%
Mining 4.1%
Construction 3.1%
Government 22.4%
Services 22.5%
Source: Oklahoma Employment Security Commission.
Page 35
Implications of a Changing Labor Force
Perhaps one of the most important consequences of the coming shift in Oklahoma's age
structure will have to do with changes in the labor market. Changes in the size of the labor force can be
estimated using projections of the working age population-those aged 18 to 64. Of course, not every-one
within this range is actually working, as was previously discussed. Therefore, projections of labor
force participation based on projections of the working age population are likely to be overestimated.
As the baby boom cohort aged, each successive cohort of workers entering the labor force
increased the demand on the labor market to expand. Table 4 shows that the working age population is
projected to expand to over 2.3 million in 2010, an increase of 30.4 percent from 1980. However, the
increase will not be equally distributed across the age cohorts. The most dramatic increase will occur in
the age group 45 to 54 which is expected to increase by almost 84 percent. The proportions of the
population aged 35 to 44 and 55 to 64 are expected to grow by 41 and 53 percent respectively. By
contrast, the younger working age population, ages 18 to 34, is expected to grow by only 0.9 percent.
Table 4
Number and Percent of Working Population 18 to 64 Years of Age
Oklahoma and the U.S.: 1980 to 2010
Census Projections
1980 1990 2000 2010
Number % Number % Number % Number %
Oklahoma 1,794,300 59.3 1,988,831 60.1 2,163,356 61.6 2,339,695 63.8
U.S. 137,241,000 60.6 154,385,000 61.8 67,154,00 62.4 180,47,000 3.9
Source: Oklahoma Department of Commerce; U.S. Department of Commerce.
These shifts have important ramifications for employment and retirement prospects. Because
of their years of work experience, the increase of those in the prime age group (45 to 54) should both
improve the quality of the state's labor force and heighten productivity. However, because of its large
number, this age group may find that there will not be enough management and higher level jobs to go
Page 36
around. Turnover in the higher positions will lessen thereby making advancement a longer and more
difficult process. If current retirement policies are maintained, with incentives for early retirement, the
labor force may not be large enough to meet the demand.
Of equal importance is the impact of an aging population on the social security system. At
present, the number of people in the labor force exceeds the number of those receiving social security
benefits. But when the cohort of people born during the baby boom reach retirement age (beginning in
2010), the demands on the social security system may produce severe strains between this larger cohort
and the younger-and less numerous-workers who must finance the system. In other words, the retired
baby boom cohorts will be dependent upon much smaller cohorts to keep the social security system
solvent-a task to which the younger cohorts may not feel obligated as social security taxes may have to
rise dramatically.
Although the aging of the state's labor force might create employment difficulties for the baby
boomers, the situation should benefit younger workers. The proportion of younger workers-those
born during the "baby bust"-will comprise a steadily declining share of the total working age popula-tion.
Those in the entry level working group-18 to 24 years old-are projected to actually decrease by
about 7 percent from 1980 to 2010. In 1980, this group comprised 22 percent of all 18 to 64 year olds
but will account for only 16 percent in 2010. This overall decrease, however, will not be smooth over
the next three decades. Between 1980 and 1990, this group will decline 18 percent before again rising
about 6 percent during the 1990s and 7 percent between 2000 and 2010. The population aged 25 to 34
will also grow at a declining rate. Projections show a 20 percent increase in this age group during the
1980s, followed by a 16 percent decline between 1990 and 2000. Between 2000 and 2010, this group will
again experience an increase with a growth of 7 percent.
There is considerable disagreement as to the ultimate impact the decline of young workers will
have on the labor force. On the one hand, many experts believe there will be a severe labor Shortage of
entry level workers, particularly in the near future. The decline in growth rates for these cohorts will no
doubt mean fewer people competing for the available jobs. In fact, employers who are accustomed to
an abundance of workers eager for any kind of work may find themselves competing for the smaller
Page 37
number of workers by increasing salaries and wages and offering improved benefits. If there is indeed a
shortage, the businesses most likely to be hurt will be those who have traditionally relied on young, low-wage
workers such as the service industries.
Others believe, however, that a number of intervening factors will offset the decline in the
entry level population. For example, advances in technology and automation may reduce the number
of workers necessary to perform some tasks. Moreover, the entry of women into the labor force may
accelerate and therebyhelp to avert any labor Shortage. Finally, increases in the typical retirement age
along with immigration may also contribute manpower to the labor force.
Implications for School and College Enrollment
Typically, the first institution to feel the impact of a changing age structure is the educational
system. As members of the baby boom cohort reached school age, educational facilities were strained
to provide adequate space for the huge number of new students. Between 1950 and 1970 alone, the
number of SChool-agechildren in the state increased by 26 percent which crowded classrooms, created
a Shortage of teachers, and outdated existing facilities. As a result, elementary, and later secondary
schools, were forced to expand both in physical size and in the number of faculty. But as the baby
boomers moved out of the system and fertility rates declined, the demand on the educational system
began to lessen. School enrollments dropped, causing cutbacks on the number of teachers as well as
curtailment of some programs.
Our projections show that the elementary school population-aged 5 to 13-will grow from
about 413,000 in 1980 to about 422,000 in 2010, a growth of 2 percent. However, this overall growth
rate fluctuates substantially over the three decades (Figure 19). Between 1980 and 1990, this age group
will increase by 9 percent, but by only about 2 percent between 1990 and 2000, reflecting the movement
of the youngest of the large group of baby boom females out of the most productive Child-bearing ages,
20 to 24. Between 2000 and 2010, the 5 to 13 year-Old group will actually decline by 8 percent.
Page 38
Figure 19
Elementary-Age, High School-Age, and College-Age Population
Oklahoma: 1950 to 2010
Thou,and, 500~----------------------------------------------~
The impact of this overall increase on Oklahoma's elementary school system will vary over the
400 1-- .....
I' ,---
11 ~.~, '----- -'
/ College
/
.•..•.•..•.•.../ /
next thirty years. The 11 percent increase of the elementary population between 1980 and 2000 will
300 High
/SChOOI
.'.,..' ." '. .. , . ....... " " "
require a substantial increase in elementary teachers and may demand an expansion of school facilities.
200
100~~ __ ~ ~ __ ~ ~ ~ __ ~ ~
1~50 1~60 1~70 1~80 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Year
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce; Oklahoma Department of Commerce.
However, the decline in the size of this population between 2000 and 2010 will have just the opposite
effect. Once again, the demand for teachers will decrease along with the decline in students. On the
positive side, however, we could expect an improvement in the student-teacher ratio if teachers are not
laid off. Moreover, the total dollar amount spent by the state on education may decrease without any
corresponding decrease in the quality of education.
The high school population (aged 14 to 17), on the other hand, is expected to decrease over the
next three decades but only slightly. The 1980 figure of 208,000 14 to 17 year-olds is expected to decline
to a 2010 total of about 199,000. Again, the rate of growth will fluctuate during these years-declining 8
percent between 1980 and 1990, then increasing 12 percent between 1990 and 2000, before again
declining about 7 percent between 2000 and 2010. The impact on educational facilities and the fluctu-
Page 39
ating demand for qualified instructors will be somewhat different than the circumstances facing the
elementary system. In the 1980s, while the elementary population expanded rapidly, the high school-age
population declined. The large growth in the elementary group in the 1980s, however, will fuel a
large gain in the high school population in the 1990s. Both will decline from 2000 to 2010 but only the
elementary age population will remain larger than its 1980 size.
Although many.factors are involved in the decision to attend college, such as tuition costs,
family income, and employment prospects, the size of the traditional college-age population (18 to 24
year olds) can provide an indication of likely higher education enrollment. The COllege-agepopulation
is projected to decrease from about 402,000 persons in 1980 to about 372,000 in 2010, a decline of 7
percent. Over the thirty-year period, this population will decline by 18 percent between 1980 and 1990,
increase by about 6 percent over the following decade, and another 7 percent between 2000 and 2010.
It is unclear what effect this meager growth will have on college enrollment in the state. So far this
decade, colleges have been fairly successful in attracting older students to supplement their enrollment.
Implications of a Growing Elderly Population
One truly revolutionary change in store for Oklahoma's age structure-and one that carries
profound implications-is the dramatic rise in the number of elderly. Increases in longevity in conjunc-tion
with declines in fertility may demand further shifting in priorities toward the welfare of the elderly.
Governmental leaders and policy makers will be forced to pay increasing attention to the need for
hospital and nursing home care, retirement housing, recreation, rehabilitation, and adequate in-home
support services for the elderly.
Oklahoma's elderly population is expected to grow faster than the rest of the population.
Table 5 shows that between 1980 and 2010, the elderly population-those aged 65 and over-will in-crease
26 percent from roughly 376,000 to a little over 473,000. However, those aged 75 and above will
increase by 44 percent while the oldest of the elderly-those aged 85 and above-will increase by 93
percent. The corresponding increases nationwide will be even greater, with those 75 and above growing
84 percent and those over 85 growing by 273 percent.
Page 40
TableS
Number and Percent of Elderly
Oklahoma and the U.S.: 1980 to 2010
Census Projections
1980 1990 2000 2010
Number CJb Number CJb Number CJb Number CJb
Oklahoma
65+ 376,100 12.4 426,923 12.9 443,104 12.6 473,032 12.9
85+ 33,981 1.1 48,675 1.4 59,109 1.7 65,566 1.8
U.S.
65+ 25,549,000 11.3 31,560,000 12.6 34,882,000 13.0 39,362,000 14.0
85+ 2,240,000 1.0 3,254,000 1.3 4,622,000 1.7 6,115,000 2.2
Source: Oklahoma Department of Commerce; U.S. Department of Commerce.
As the elderly population continues to grow over the coming decades, more and more pressure
will be placed upon health care facilities to provide adequate care. Persons living past 75 are much
more likely to face a succession of illnesses which require medical attention and often hospitalization.
This could become especially critical in the next century when the large numbers of baby boomers move
into the over 75 age bracket. In fact, if the elderly continue health care use at the present rate, it could
place strains on the state's economy. To control costs of health care services provided to the elderly,
the system by which the health care is financed and delivered will have to be reevaluated.
A related, but potentially more serious problem, is the probable increase in the number of
elderly who are disabled and require residential or institutionalized care. Of course, the ultimate
number who will require institutional care depends on a number of factors. But if we assume that
current living arrangement patterns and income levels for this group persist to the year 2010, increased
stress on health care facilities can be expected. Finally, since women tend to live about seven years
longer than men, many women can expect to spend a number of years at the end of their life without a
spouse and possibly without adequate resources. In 1980, for example, nearly 85 percent of women
aged 85 or over lived alone compared to 34 percent of men in the same age group. Elderly women (65
years and older) living alone had the lowest median income of all elderly, only $3,937 according to the
Page 41
1980 Census. Consequently, both state and federal governments can probably expect increases in the
amount of money needed through transfer payments and various services to the elderly.
As mentioned earlier, considerable strain will be placed on the social security system early in
the next century. In 1985, there were about 366,CXXlelderly drawing social security benefits. But if we
assume similar proportions in 2010, we can expect more than 460,(XX)elderly in Oklahoma to receive
social security.
Page 42
Conclusion
This report has detailed some of the projected changes in the size and composition of Okla-homa's
population from 1980 to 2010. Some of the implications for the social, political, and economic
climate of the state have been examined for their potential in aiding governments, businesses, private
agencies, and community organizations in the process of policy formation. Throughout this report, we
have attempted to stress that demographic processes and the social and economic life of the state are
closely interrelated. It follows, then, that to formulate either social or economic policies without taking
into account demographic factors leads to incomplete and ill-formed policies.
Although there is an inherent assumption by many that population growth is preferable to loss
or stagnation, there is considerable debate concerning the appropriate population size or rate of
population growth for the state. There are many who feel that rapid population growth creates more
short-term problems than positive, long-term gains and should therefore be avoided. However, even in
the absence of specifically formulated population policies, the state may still have a myriad of de-facto
policies that unintentionally affect demographic processes and population growth. For example, the
recruitment of industries and new business, while not directly controlled by the state, does impact
future population growth and migration to an area, as does the location of highways, the development
of recreational areas, and local zoning and building codes. These activities can influence migration,
thereby increasing a population in one area and potentially creating a decrease in another. Other
policies may indirectly affect fertility and mortality, such as support of family planning, allocation of
transfer payments, maternity leave policies, support of medical research, and the availability of afford-able
child care facilities. These policies may make raising a family or saving a life easier, thereby
helping to increase fertility or decrease mortality and subsequently enlarging the size of the population.
From this report, the reader should be aware of at least some of the consequences of popula-tion
growth or loss for our state. Perhaps the most important consequence concerns the state's labor
force. In order for the Oklahoma economy to prosper, it must have available a labor force which is
Page 43
both adequate in size and properly trained. Our study identifies two possible scenarios. On the one
hand, there exists the possibility of a labor shortage sometime late in this century, particularly for those
businesses which rely heavily upon younger workers. This is entirely possible, given that fertility and
migration gains are likely to remain low. However, unexpected population gains from migration, in
conjunction with increased labor force participation among women and delayed retirement, may offset
this shortage.
A second important consequence arises from the impact of compositional changes on the
education system. Despite continued growth throughout the rest of the century there will be an uneven
distribution of children and young adults in the population which will force constant adaptation by our
schools. Educational leaders should prepare for these future compositional changes.
Third is the revolutionary change in store for the state as a result of the increase in the number
of elderly citizens. Given the general financial and health difficulties often associated with old age, the
existence of a large elderly population raises the difficult question of responsibility for their welfare. If
state and local governments assume wider responsibility, substantial strains on their respective econo-mies
could occur. In order to control the ever-increasing costs of health while maintaining a high level
of quality care, it appears a substantial restructuring of the system by which health care is financed and
delivered is needed.
The demographic and economic forces that are currently shaping Oklahoma will affect a
number of social and economic institutions for a number of years to come. The recognition and study
of present and future demographic characteristics will aid poiicymakers in their efforts to develop more
informed and effective policies.
Page 44
Appendix
Total Population, Births, and Deaths
Oklahoma: 1920 to 1989
Year Population Births Deaths Year Population Births Deaths
1920 2,028,283 40,636 16,054 1955 N/A 50,636 19,705
1921 N/A 47,068 16,340 1956 N/A 51,894 20,954
1922 N/A 50,944 16,378 1957 N/A 51,349 21,568
1923 N/A 47,452 17,273 1958 N/A 50,552 21,812
1924 N/A 50,453 17,103 1959 N/A 51,141 21,996
1925 N/A 54,915 20,026 1960 2,328,284 50,900 22,932
1926 N/A 55,770 20,507 1961 2,380,000 50,859 22,973
1927 N/A 51,856 21,170 1962 2,427,000 51,351 24,005
1928 N/A 42,986 20,953 1963 2,439,000 49,955 24,458
1929 N/A 39,738 21,398 1964 2,446,000 47,563 24,194
1930 2,396,040 42,505 19,646 1965 2,440,000 42,806 24,304
1931 N/A 43,269 18,802 1966 2,454,000 39,993 24,806
1932 N/A 41,039 19,285 1967 2,489,000 40,102 24,859
1933 N/A 43,697 20,309 1968 2,503,000 40,973 25,708
1934 N/A 47,302 21,373 1969 2,535,000 42,737 25,972
1935 N/A 43,691 21,091 1970 2,559,463 44,991 26,750
1936 N/A 41,815 23,350 1971 2,618,000 45,353 25,682
1937 N/A 41,223 21,399 1972 2,657,000 42,303 26,935
1938 N/A 44,190 20,422 1973 2,694,000 40,765 27,357
1939 N/A 42,760 20,657 1974 2,732,000 42,363 27,228
1940 2,336,434 44,258 20,618 1975 2,772,000 42,704 27,165
1941 N/A 45,313 20,097 1976 2,823,000 43,655 27,103
1942 N/A 45,277 18,985 1977 2,866,000 45,449 26,766
1943 N/A 47,800 19,765 1978 2,913,000 45,883 27,892
1944 N/A 46,885 18,438 1979 2,970,000 49,007 27,756
1945 N/A 43,405 18,731 1980 3,025,266 52,065 28,227
1946 N/A 50,043 18,420 1981 3,105,587 53,620 28,568
1947 N/A 52,691 19,101 1982 3,223,933 58,748 29,305
1948 N/A 50,428 19,074 1983 3,316,937 56,859 29,426
1949 N/A 49,971 19,346 1984 3,320,677 54,323 28,635
1950 2,233,351 50,472 19,431 1985 3,314,508 53,100 29,735
1951 N/A 50,597 20,082 1986 3,304,183 50,536 29,708
1952 N/A 50,146 19,645 1987 3,269,106 49,697 29,191
1953 N/A 51,275 19,820 1988 3,233,842 47,279 29,766
1954 N/A 51,457 20,121 1989 3,224,265 47,000 • 29,000 •
• Unpublished data.
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce; Oklahoma Department of Health.
Page 45
Endnotes
1Assuming that birth rates of Oklahomans were similar to those of the United States. In the
early 1900s, the United States crude birth rate (number of annual births per 1,000 population) was
close to 30.0, significantly higher than the 25.3 at the height of the baby boom.
2 The United States total fertility rate in 1944 was 2.5 per woman of childbearing age; by 1957,
the height of the baby boom, the rate was 3.8 children per woman.
3 With a population 32 percent smaller, the 1947 population produced as many births as the
1985 population.
4 Although the drought and subsequent dust storms that plagued parts of Oklahoma (particu-larly
the Panhandle) are blamed for the exodus of people from the state, it was primarily the depressed
cotton industry that caused many cotton-tenant farmers of the Southeastern counties to leave the state.
They were the "Okies" who received so much national attention. Furthermore, the floods that fol-lowed
the droughts displaced more Oklahomans than the drought and dust. See H. Wayne Morgan and
Anne Hodges Morgan, Oklahoma: A Bicentennial History, W.W. Norton & Co., New York, 1977, pp.
160-170.
5 The total fertility rate measures how many children 1,000 women would bear if their lifetime
of childbearing was the same as that prevailing during the period of observation (i.e., a particular year).
6 Replacement level represents the number of births per woman of childbearing age that are
necessary to merely replace the current population. Each female must replace herself with another
female to assure that another generation will be born. Because more males are born than females and
not all females survive to bear children, the average number of births must be 2.1 to ensure that at least
one female will be born to replace each woman in the population.
Page 47
7Population Projections for Oklahoma and its Counties by Age and Sex, and for its Cities: 1980-
2010, Oklahoma Department of Commerce, November 1988.
8Each state's own projections were used except for Kansas, which had not yet produced its own
projections to the year 2000. Census Bureau projections for Kansas were taken from Bureau of the
Census, Current Population Survey, Series P-25, No. 1053, Projections of the Population of States, by
Age, Sex, and Race: 1989 to 2010, January 1990.
9 Fertility is assumed to remain at its 1979 to 1981 level until the year 1999 and then decline by
5.5 percent. The total fertility rate will thus start at 1.99 children per woman of childbearing age and
then drop to 1.88. The projections also assume that life expectancy will improve during the current
decade as well as during the 1990s. According to the mortality assumptions, the expectation of life at
birth will increase from 69.6 years to 70.9 years for males and 77.8 years to 79.6 years for females
between 1980 and 2010.
10 Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, Series P-25, No. 1018, Projections of the
Population of the United States, by Age, Sex, and Race: 1988 to 2080, January 1989.
Page 48
P.O. Box 26980
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73126-0980
1-800-443-0KLA or 405-843-9770