Qatar's government has supported population growth among native Qataris through extensive subsidies and social
welfare programs, including housing loans, reduced
dowries, and family
allowances that grow with the number of children per couple. These measures are designed to promote marriages and larger families and have led to a significant increase in population. Historically, the Qatari government has been secretive about the total size of its native population, considering it a "national secret". Throughout the 20th century, Qatar's population saw dramatic changes. In 1904, the
British Foreign Office estimated the population at approximately 27,000. Economic hardships in the early 20th century, exacerbated by the decline in
pearl fishing and the
Great Depression, reduced the population to around 16,000 by the mid-1940s. The discovery of oil in the late 1940s reversed this trend, leading to a population increase. By 1970, the first official census recorded 45,039 indigenous Qataris, although the true number was likely closer to 47,700 due to undercounting. Estimates by 1975 suggested the population had risen to 60,300, with the
naturalization of foreign-born wives of Qatari men believed to contribute to a large percentage of this increase. Despite small-scale naturalization in specific instances, Qatar's naturalization policies, like most other Persian Gulf countries at the time, were relatively strict from the 1970s onward. Children of Qatari mothers and foreign fathers are not granted Qatari citizenship; however, as of 2018, they are granted
permanent residency status, which entitles them to similar state benefits as Qatari citizens. Nonetheless, the government limits the number of permanent residency visas it issues each year. The 2005 citizenship law allows for the
revocation of citizenship without appeal, which has been used on a number of families with
dual citizenship.
Social welfare Qatar has been described as a
rentier state that has allocated a significant portion of its wealth from hydrocarbon exports towards the social welfare of its citizens, in a sense "buying their loyalty". Such programs are seen by the
House of Thani as being integral to maintaining their
legitimacy. Initially, the distribution of wealth in the rentier state model was exclusive, with only a select few involved in its creation and allocation, while the majority benefited as recipients. Despite the perception of every Qatari holding a "winning lottery ticket," the reality was that hydrocarbon revenues were controlled by the state and channeled to citizens through specific mechanisms. During Qatar's early years of oil wealth, infrastructure and social services evolved slowly alongside hydrocarbon development. Initial efforts targeted basic needs like electricity, water, healthcare, and education, albeit with a significant portion of oil revenues redirected to the ruler's personal treasury. However,
protests during Sheikh
Ahmad bin Ali Al Thani's rule led to a more equitable distribution of oil revenues, known as the "quarter rule". His successor, Emir
Khalifa bin Hamad Al Thani, furthered this trend, significantly increasing social aid, housing benefits, and salary increments. In 1985, Arabic newspaper
Al Raya reported that the policy of the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs at the time was to distribute monthly stipends of
QAR 750 for single men, QAR 1,050 for married couples, and up to QAR 1,770 for couples with children. In addition to providing essential services like healthcare, education, and housing—all at no cost to citizens—there are no taxes, and there is an abundance of additional state benefits, including land grants, interest-free loans, scholarships for students studying abroad and guaranteed civil service jobs. As a result of these various benefits, some Western analysts have described Qatari citizens as "too rich to care" about disrupting the political system or questioning the legitimacy of the ruler. Despite these outward appearances of prosperity and contentment, recent surveys reveal that some of the Qatari population is dissatisfied with state benefits. While services like healthcare and education enjoy relatively high levels of support, other aspects, such as retirement benefits, receive notably less endorsement. Benefits and privileges afforded can vary depending on the social standing of a family. ==Language==