Pronatalism, the belief that low birth rates pose a serious challenge to society, is gaining traction in the United States. As the nation faces its lowest total fertility rate in history, voices from various sectors, including Silicon Valley and the White House, express concern over the potential negative impacts of a declining population on the economy. President Donald Trump has even solicited ideas on how to incentivize American families to have more children, recognizing the urgent need to address this demographic trend.
However, demographers who specialize in fertility and family patterns argue that the narrative surrounding population collapse is rooted in misconceptions. This narrative is built on three primary misunderstandings regarding fertility rates and their implications for future population trends.
Firstly, the common interpretation of standard fertility measures often misrepresents women’s childbearing behaviors and relies on unrealistic assumptions about future fertility patterns. Secondly, it tends to exaggerate the potential impacts of low birth rates on overall population size and growth. Finally, this perspective overlooks the important role that economic policies and labor market dynamics play in shaping the consequences of low birth rates.
When evaluating fertility, demographers utilize a measure known as the total fertility rate (TFR). The TFR estimates the average number of children a woman would have during her lifetime, given current birth rates throughout her childbearing years. Throughout history, fertility rates have shown considerable fluctuations. In the United States, for instance, the total fertility rate increased from approximately 2 births per woman during the 1930s to a peak of 3.7 around 1960. This trend experienced a decline below 2 births per woman in the late 1970s and 1980s, rebounding slightly to around 2 in the 1990s and early 2000s.
However, since the Great Recession (2007-2009), the U.S. total fertility rate has generally declined, reaching a record low of 1.6 in 2024. This drop is largely attributed to reduced births among teenagers and individuals in their early 20s, often unintended pregnancies. While the TFR provides a glimpse into current fertility patterns, it may not accurately predict how many children a woman will eventually have, considering trends such as delayed childbearing.
For instance, envision a 20-year-old woman in 2025; the TFR would suggest she will follow the same birth rate as today’s 40-year-olds when she reaches 40. However, it is more likely that birth rates will have shifted over that time, with more women having babies later and utilizing assisted reproductive technologies.
To get a clearer view of childbearing trends, demographers also analyze the actual number of children born to women by the end of their reproductive years. In contrast to the fluctuating total fertility rate, the average number of children born to women aged 40 to 44 has remained relatively stable, consistently around two. Despite current low birth rates, many Americans maintain a favorable view of childbearing. Surveys indicate that ideal family size remains at two or more children, and 90% of adults either have children or express a desire to become parents. Nonetheless, factors such as high child-rearing costs and economic uncertainty have hindered many from realizing their preferences for family size.
The notion of catastrophic population decline is further challenged by standard demographic trends. Over the past 250 years, the global population has surged from one billion to more than eight billion, with United Nations projections estimating that it will surpass ten billion by 2100. Despite the unpredictability inherent in such forecasts, they illustrate a critical point: demographic projections become increasingly uncertain over longer time horizons. While short-term estimates (e.g., five years out) are more dependable, making predictions about the population size a century from now is fraught with challenges.
Despite current fertility rates being below the replacement level of 2.1 children per woman, the U.S. population continues to grow, primarily due to immigration. Current estimates suggest a growth of 22.6 million people by 2050 and an increase of 27.5 million by 2100. Consequently, narratives projecting a dramatic decline in U.S. population size appear to lack a solid empirical foundation.
One significant concern associated with low fertility rates is the potential economic fallout. Advocates of pronatalism argue that a decline in birth rates could lead to labor shortages and an increased burden on social support systems due to an aging population. However, this perspective is not necessarily accurate, and simply boosting birth rates may not be a viable solution. The demographic shifts caused by lower fertility will alter the age structure of the population, but a higher percentage of older adults doesn’t automatically mean fewer workers available to sustain economic growth.
For instance, the proportion of children under 18 in the population is also expected to decrease, which may keep the number of working-age adults relatively stable. Moreover, improvements in health and longevity mean an increasing number of older adults will remain active and contribute to the economy. Labor force participation among individuals aged 65 to 74, for example, has grown from 21.4% in 2003 to 26.9% in 2023 and may reach 30.4% by 2033.
Adjustments to retirement age or reforms to Social Security systems can further alleviate any strains associated with an aging population. Pronatalists often argue that higher birth rates will expand the labor force, but this overlooks the immediate consequences of increased child dependency. More births lead to more dependents, necessitating significant investment in services like education, which can initially detract from labor force participation, especially among women. As fertility rates have decreased, women’s participation in the labor force has dramatically increased, from 34% in 1950 to 58% in 2024. Policies that incentivize higher birth rates could inadvertently conflict with the goal of enhancing workforce participation.
Research has demonstrated that economic policies and labor market conditions are the primary determinants of economic growth in developed nations, rather than merely demographic trends. Additionally, rapid advancements in technology, including automation and artificial intelligence, raise questions about future labor demands. Immigration also represents a powerful and immediate tool for addressing labor market dynamics and concerns regarding workforce availability.
In conclusion, while discussions around low birth rates and their potential implications are prevalent, it is essential to approach these conversations with a nuanced understanding of fertility dynamics, economic factors, and the role of policy. The potential for population decline is not as dire as some narratives suggest, and addressing underlying economic influences can provide a more effective path forward.
image source from：theconversation
