Low Fertility: Causes, Prospects, and Economic Consequences
Paper Session
Tuesday, Jan. 5, 2027 1:00 PM - 3:00 PM (EST)
- Chair: David Weil, Brown University and NBER
Understanding the U.S. Fertility Decline: Evidence from a New Survey
Abstract
U.S. fertility rates have fallen to historic lows, yet the reasons for this decline remain poorly understood. This paper presents evidence from a new national survey designed to measure Americans’ attitudes, expectations, and aspirations regarding marriage, parenthood, and family life. The survey elicits information about young adults' relationship and fertility intentions and expectations; perceived barriers to marriage and parenthood; views about the value of marriage and children; and anticipated trade-offs among family, career, financial security, and other life goals.Costly Cities, Few Children: The Geography of Low Fertility in Korea
Abstract
We use novel credit and mobility data, alongside census records and surveys, to study the geography of South Korea's fertility decline. Fertility is lowest in large cities. In 2023, Seoul's total fertility rate was 0.55, compared with 0.72 nationally. Parents in Seoul spend 8.2 percent of household income on each child's private education, nearly twice the rural share. Higher income and assets are associated with higher birth rates within counties. Nationwide, child-rearing has grown more time-intensive, even as women's labor-force participation has risen. To evaluate the impacts of pronatalist policies, we build a dynamic spatial equilibrium model in which households jointly choose location, commuting, fertility, and investment in children's education. The model shows that policies targeting Seoul alone can lower national fertility by drawing households into a low-fertility region. By contrast, a nationwide cut in per-child education costs by 5 percent of income raises completed fertility by 7 percent, and by 9 percent when combined with parental subsidies funded by a 5 percent tax on nonparents.Economics and Pronatalism: A View over 120 Years
Abstract
Low birth rates in developed countries, along with the questions of how they affect the economy and whether policy should attempt to raise them, have recently attracted intense attention. This paper briefly surveys the last 120 years of economists’ thinking about low fertility as a problem, starting with a session at the AEA’s 1906 annual meeting on “Western Civilization and the Birth Rate.” Three themes that have persisted over this period are, first, that low birth rates are intertwined with women’s changing social and economic roles; second, that the privately chosen fertility is not necessarily socially optimal; and third, that there is a tradeoff between fertility and immigration. Early 20th-century economists expressed concern about low birth rates in unapologetically eugenic terms, a perspective absent from current academic analysis. The related issues of the SES gradient in fertility and whether pronatalist policies might encourage less desirable births were actively discussed in 1906 and have some echoes today. During this period, the Malthus/Ricardo view that lower fertility beneficially reduces the ratio of people to resources was gradually replaced by a Smithian one that emphasizes specialization and market size, as well as an appreciation for the impact of population size on the speed of technological progress. Contemporary concern about low birth rates focuses heavily on the dependency burden of population aging, particularly the viability of public pensions and the political economy of their reform. With low birth rates apparently persisting, interest in this issue is likely to increase, both because of growing fiscal stress from population aging but also because fertility, and the future that children represent, are such fundamental elements of people’s outlook on life.JEL Classifications
- J1 - Demographic Economics