The global economy faces a deeply embedded structural problem that few leading economists are willing to address—because doing so would mean confronting the fundamental flaws of the capitalist system itself. Modern global capitalism relies on growth. In other words, markets always need to grow—somewhere, anywhere—creating new opportunities and generating profits in order for the system to function at all. Maintaining infinite growth on a planet with finite resources is becoming an increasingly difficult mission.
Some argue that the economy will resolve this issue on its own, perhaps by expanding into virtual domains like the rapidly developing AI sector. However, the economy is still very much grounded in physical space and dependent on real people.
For the past few decades, the main driver of the global economy has been China’s extraordinary growth. One could even question whether the global economy, as we know it today, would exist at all without China’s economic “locomotive.”
Between 1980 and 2020, one-third of global GDP came from China. That’s more than the U.S., which accounted for 22% of global GDP in that period. The EU contributed 12%, and Japan 4%.
After the 2008 global financial crisis, the world became even more dependent on China. From 2010 to 2020, China generated over 40% of global GDP.
This wasn’t just due to China’s massive industrial output—its entire socio-economic structure played a crucial role, especially its vast population. While it’s now being reported that China may have lost its title as the world’s most populous country to India, China has already delivered something that India won’t be able to replicate for a long time: a maturing younger workforce that’s no longer just cheap labor but also increasingly urbanized and consumer-oriented. In other words, young Chinese people have disposable income—and they’re spending it, creating massive new markets.
But why are we suddenly talking about China in the past tense? Isn’t it still the main force powering the global economy? Apparently not. Why? What has changed?
Nothing major—it’s just that China’s market growth has reached its limit. China produces and consumes as much as it can, and that is no longer enough for the insatiable demands of the global economy.
How is that possible? Because the global economy doesn’t just depend on consumption—it requires constant growth. And China no longer has room to grow. Its population has hit an economic ceiling. While there’s still some room for advancement, it’s not enough to sustain global growth.
Additionally, China’s population is starting to shrink, which is unsurprising given its past population policies and economic development. The government may try to reverse this trend, but even if it succeeds, there’s no major population boom on the horizon. In short, China is entering a period of stagnation—something the global economy cannot afford.
China is aging, and soon it won’t have the massive labor force that once carried the world economy on its shoulders. But there’s no time to pause, not even to observe China’s slowdown. The global economy demands new growth—and demands it now. If it doesn’t get it, a new crisis is inevitable, one we will all feel.
Isn’t this ultimately going to drive us into a wall? Almost certainly. Yet, as mentioned, none of the influential players are willing to open that discussion. And even if they did, there’s little they could do to change the course.
This isn’t like climate change, which is at least being widely discussed. Ironically, many even see climate change as an opportunity for economic growth—think green energy and environmental technology. If, hypothetically, there were nopotential profit in fighting climate change, we’d probably be in an even worse state. That’s how closely tied everything is to growth. Much of the enthusiasm around solving climate issues stems from the promise of new “green” growth.
Ultimately, the economy doesn’t care where new markets come from, or what they destroy in the process—it just needs growth. Any growth.
So where can the world find the massive new growth it so desperately needs to keep global capitalism alive?
India?
India is often cited as “the next China.” The Indian government certainly hopes to emulate China’s success. But that’s far from guaranteed. Why? Because India is also heading toward a demographic plateau. Its population is nearing its peak, and will soon begin to decline. Even if Indian incomes rise, it won’t be enough to sustain the ever-increasing demands of global growth.
Where, then, can we look for salvation?
In this increasingly desperate search, many are turning their eyes to Africa.
What makes Africa so appealing to proponents of the current global economic system? First and foremost, a declining mortality rate and high fertility. Current estimates suggest that Africa’s population will grow from today’s 1.4 billion to 2.5 billion by 2050.
Meanwhile, economic powers like China, South Korea, Japan, and the European Union will face worsening labor shortages and demographic challenges. Africa, however, will have a surplus of young workers—and that’s why many believe Africa could become essential to the future of the global economy.
The hard numbers are revealing. In East Asia, total fertility rates have dropped to between 0.8 and 1.3. In the EU, the average woman has 1.5 children. In the U.S., it’s slightly higher at 1.7. Latin America stands at 1.9, and India exactly 2.0—and falling.
That means that, in the coming decades, nowhere in the world will be spared serious demographic challenges—except Africa.
Africa’s fertility rate is remarkably high—on average, women there have 4.3 children, more than twice the global average.
Of course, if Africa continues to develop economically, this number will fall, particularly if women gain better access to education. But education levels, especially among women, remain low across much of Africa. For example, in sub-Saharan Africa, only 4 out of 10 girls of secondary school age attend high school. In half of Africa’s 54 countries, fewer than 1 in 5 women finish secondary school; in 11 countries—including Ghana, Mozambique, and Niger—that figure is less than 1 in 10.
This year, one in three children born will be born in Africa. That means by 2040, one-third of all people aged 15 to 24 will be African. By 2050, Africa will have a labor force five times larger than Europe’s, and larger than India’s and China’s combined.
These are facts. They won’t change. But one question remains: What will happen to Africa by 2050?
Will the continent be intentionally kept underdeveloped as a “reservoir” of new labor? It wouldn’t be surprising if some radical advocates of modern capitalism supported such inhumane strategies.
Or will Africa develop rapidly and become a new driver of global markets? Could it be the “new China” instead of India? That depends on many factors—above all, whether Africa can finally free itself from neo-colonialism, which deliberately hinders its development (often to extract valuable resources), or whether it can rise despite such exploitation.
It’s worth remembering that in 1980, China was a very poor country—less developed than Africa is today. China’s total GDP in 1980 was just $423 billion, roughly the same as the Netherlands today. At the time, China’s per capita GDP was $431—half of what it is today in Ethiopia.
Africa stands on the brink of profound transformation. It will undoubtedly become crucial—indispensable—to the global economy. But at the same time, it faces the looming threat of extreme exploitation: of its resources, its labor, and even its fertility rates.
The next few decades will decide which of these futures becomes reality.
About the Author
