{A}

The reasons based as to why there is no rapid population growth in France are that, at the beginning of the 20th centaury France had a low birth rate compaired to its neighbouring countries and it past history. French law facilitated the immigration of thousands of colons, ethnic or national French from former colonies of North and West Africa, India and Indochina, to mainland France. 1.6 million European pieds noirs migrated from Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco. 1970s, over 30,000 French colons left Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge regime as the Pol Pot government confiscated their farms and land properties. However, after the 1973 energy crisis, laws limiting immigration were passed. In addition, the country's birth rate dropped significantly during this time.

Since the 1980s, France has continued being a country of mass immigration. Meanwhile, the national birth rate, after continuing to drop for a time, began to rebound in the 1990s and currently the country's fertility rate is close to the replacement level. More over in recent years, immigrants have accounted for one quarter of the population. During the Middle Ages more than one quarter of Europe’s population was French, during the 17th century it was still one fifth.

Starting around 1800, the historical evolution of the population in France has been extremely atypical in the Western World. Unlike the rest of Europe France did not experience a strong population growth in the 19th century and first half of the 20th century. The birth rate in France diminished much earlier than in the rest of Europe. Consequently, population growth was quite slow in the 19th century. This was a loss for France as its

population fell due to the First World War, as this may explain the sudden collapse of France in 1940 during the Second World War France was often perceived as a country facing irrecoverable decline.

At the time, racist theories were quite popular, and the dramatic demographic decline of France was often attributed to the genetic characteristics of the "French race", a race destined to fail in the face of the Germanic and Anglo-Saxon "races". In addition, the slow growth of France's population in the 19th century was reflected in the country's very low emigration rate. While millions of people from all other parts of Europe moved to the Americas, few French did so. Most people in the United States of French extraction are descended from immigrants from French Canada, whose population was rapidly growing at this time.

Two centuries of population growth

Between 1815 and 2000, if the population of France had grown at the same rate as the population of Germany during the same time period, France's population would be 110 million today—and this does not take into account the fact that a large chunk of Germany's population growth was siphoned off by emigration to the Americas, and suffered much larger military and civilian losses during the World Wars than France did. If France's population had grown at the same rate as England and Wales (whose rate was also siphoned off by emigration to the Americas, Australia and New Zealand), France's population could be anywhere up to 150 million today. And if one starts the comparison at the time of King Louis XIV (the Sun King), then France would in fact have the same population as the United States. While France had been very powerful in Europe at the time of Louis XIV or Napoleon, the demographic decline the country experienced after 1800 resulted in it losing this advantage.

It is therefore very difficult to estimate the number of French immigrants or born to immigrants, because of the absence of official statistics. Only three surveys have been conducted

In 1927, 1942, and 1986 respectively. According to a 2004 study, there were, in 1999, approximately 14 million persons of foreign ancestry which is about a quarter of the population, defined as either immigrants or people with at least one immigrant parent or grandparent.

5.2 million Of these people were from South Europe countries such as Italy, Spain, Portugal and former Yugoslavia and 3 million come from the Maghreb.

This therefore indicates that one third of the population currently living in France is of "foreign" descent. By 1 January 2006, it was estimated that the number of foreigners living in metropolitan France amounted to 3.5 million people. Two out of five foreigners are from Portugal, Algeria or Morocco. Thus EU nationals immigrating to France comprise 1.2 million people while 1.1 million people are from the three Maghreb countries of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia.

In the first decade of the 21st century, the net migration rate was estimated to be 0.66 migrants per 1,000 population a year. This is a very low rate of immigration compared to other European countries, the USA or Canada. Since the beginning of the 1990s, France has been attempting to curb immigration. This trend is also demonstrated in anti-immigrant sentiments among the public.

The immigration rate is currently lower than in other European countries such as United Kingdom and Spain; however, some say it is doubtful that the policies in themselves account for such a change. Again, as in the 1920s and 1930s, France stands in contrast with the rest of Europe. Back in the 1920s and 1930s, when European countries had a high fertility rate, France had a low fertility rate and had to open its doors to immigration to avoid population decline.

This difference in immigration trends is also because the labor market in France is currently less dynamic than in other countries such as the UK, Ireland or Spain. One reason for this could be France’s relatively high unemployment, which the country has struggled to reduce for the past two decades.

All in all the population growth of France has not been rapid based on the number of those who migrated into France in the past racisms during that period which has come to affect its population growth rate as it would have been at the same level as that of the U.S and European countries. This therefore puts it at stage four of the demographic transition model as it is a developed country.

{B}

Stage two and stage three of the demographic transition model in England in Wales in that; stage two witnessed a rapid urbanization which altered the public officials and factory owners to improve on the services it offered to it citizens. This therefore lead to the factory owners having awareness based on having a poor work force would lead to a huge impact on efficiency. Availability of clean piped water and installation of sewage systems brought about personal cleanliness thus reduced the chance of having effects from water bon diseases. All sorts of opportunities were available in England an Wales which was mostly seen in the urban areas such opportunities included employment, wider range of goods could be purchased, disposable income and many more.

The infant mortality rate at this stage fell to 200per 1000 in 1770 to just over 100 per 1000 in 1870. This therefore meant that a better nutrition played a role to this decline. Disease diminished such as

Scarlet fever Tuberculosis

Other than that a combination of better nutrition brought about a general improvement in health that was brought about by legislation such as the Public Health Act. The role of Medicine discovery of vaccination against smallpox. Though some of them were not that effective not until later on.

Stage three therefore brought about an important role of medical science this therefore would control mortality rate, doctors were now able to offer potent, specifically effective drugs. More over more attention was paid to maternity, child welfare and school health. Improvement on public health care was introduced. Family size varied by social group with the upper professional middle class leading the way in contraception. Birth rate which had been 30.5 per 1000 in 1890 fell to 25 per 1000 in 1910 and was down to 17 per 1000 by 1930. This therefore portrayed that England and Wales were entering the last stage of the demographic transition model. In 1960 the introduction of contraceptive pills and improvement in other forms of the oral contraception which meant that the relationship between desired family size and achieved family size had never been stronger.