James W. Vaupel

http://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol7/8/

Bookmark this page
Send this article to a friend

	Click the icon to view and/or download the PDF file. Once you are in the PDF file, use your browser back button to return to this page.

Abstract
Life expectancy is overestimated if mortality is declining and underestimated if mortality is increasing. This is the fundamental claim made by Bongaarts and Feeney (2002) in their article "How Long Do We Live?", where they base their claim on arguments about "tempo effects on mortality". This Reflexion explains why this claim is true in most heterogeneous populations. It suggests that demographers should be careful about distinguishing between life expectancy under current conditions, which is difficult and problematic to assess, and life expectancy at current rates, which can be estimated using standard methods. Finally, it speculates that there may be a deep connection between tempo and heterogeneity.

Author's affiliation
James W. Vaupel
Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Germany

Keywords
frailty, heterogeneity, life expectancy, tempo effects

Word count (Main text)
3271

Other Articles by the same author/authors (in Demographic Research)

	[14-7] The relative tail of longevity and the mean remaining lifetime
	[13-24] Lifesaving, lifetimes and lifetables
	[8-7] Oldest Old Mortality in China
	[7-1] Decomposing demographic change into direct vs. compositional components
	[6-5] Dr. Väinö Kannisto: A Reflexion

Similar Articles (in Demographic Research)

	[18-14] Constant global population with demographic heterogeneity (life expectancy, heterogeneity)
	[15-21] Mortality tempo-adjustment: An empirical application (tempo effects, life expectancy)
	[14-7] The relative tail of longevity and the mean remaining lifetime (heterogeneity, frailty)