A demographic league table

Here is a good paper on what influences fertility rates, with implications for public policy.

My informal tables of total fertility rates per woman are something like this:

1. Totally traditional patriarchal society (e.g Yemen, large bits of Africa): 6-8 children per women
Modern (fundamentalist) patriarchy e.g Hasidics, Hutterites can match this number. Muslims do not seem to do quite as well, Saudi TFR has fallen from 6 to less than 4 in the past decade, except for Palies.
2. Welfare state with established pro-natalist policies, and a culture where men are expected to help with the children : 1.7-2.0 (France, Scandinavia)
3. Anglosphere with poorer maternity benefits, but flexible labour markets (plenty of part time jobs) and culture of equality between the sexes: 1.7 -1.9 (USA, UK, New Zealand). High birth rates among immigrants (because of age structure more than TFR) boost US to replacement level
4. Anglosphere with less flexible labour markets 1.5 -1.6 (Australia, Canada)
5. Modern states without substantial fertility incentives and traditionalist views on sex roles: 1.2-1.4 (central and southern Europe, Russia, east Asia)

Surprisingly, cost of housing does not seem to make a huge difference (it's cheap in Germany), nor do working hours. A culture where everyone is expected to get a PhD and thus does not start earning until they are in late 20s is also a bit of bummer for birth rates (Germany, Italy, South Korea).

None of the above requires assumptions about religious belief, about unconscious national death wishes, or decadent "live for today"

It does seem, counterintuitively, that the feminists have a point. It will be easier to change labour markets and maternity benefits than to eradicate sexism, and get Russian or Japanese men to change diapers. Note that there are a lot of developing countries in the 2-3 TFR range moving very rapidly from (1) to - where? Given persistent global sexism, could go all the way to (5) e.g in Latin America - or the Muslim world. Note how communism failed to dent sexist attitudes, despite the egalitarian rhetoric.

Why no babies?

Some obvious theories do not seem to be corroborated by the evidence.

- it is all the fault of women's lib, eroding the traditional family, encouraging women to go and work and "fulfil themselves" in other ways then having children... but Japan still has severely traditional roles and rampant sexism, and Korea, Russia and (surprisingly) Germany are not that liberated. Those cliches of liberated womenhood, Scandinavians have higher birthrates, even if still below replacement;

- "the decline of the west": but it is taking place everywhere

- the lagged response of birth rates to lower death rates, the so-called demographic transition. Certainly that is a major factor why population surges followed by a fall in the birth rate which then reduces the growth - but not the difference between similar countries, such as very low birth rates in Spain and Italy and higher rates in France next door, or USA (close to replacement) and Canada (as in so much else, Europeans in check shirts)

- higher immigrant birth rates. A partial explanation but a patchy and incosistent one, and disappears over time. Hispanic birth rates are higher than "whites" in the US, but not by much, and converging. South Asian families (Hindu or Moslem) have higher birth rates (still over 3 per women) but falling sharply in the UK, but immigrants in France do not appear to have a significantly higher rate than native Frenchwomen (who admittedly reproduce faster than some of their European sisters). The French government does not publish statistics by ethnic group, bit does by region, and the birth rates are remarkably similar between those areas with a high immigrant population and those where there are not (there are more immigrant births because of a younger age structure, but that is another issue)

- modernisation and urbanisation. The biggest single factor, with a clear correlation. Give women a minimum of freedom, contraception, and push people into urban environments and they have fewer children. They do not have to be rich or even well educated for this to happen

- capitalist values. I go with the Russian joke that socialism was evil and incompetent, while capitalism is evil and competent. Greed is good, and materialism the highest value. We all have to work all hours, and the system bids up the price of key assets (especially housing) so we need to. Result is no-one has time to breed

- religion. Ambigouous. Despite much better social incentives Americans have far more children than Canadians - religion seems the only explanation. But even the secular "blue" states breed more, if age structure is taken into account. It may have something to do with Americans still being generally optimistic - for them and for their children. But Thais, Indians, Iranians are religious, and their birth rates are falling sharply

Developed societies are not sustainable: they do not reproduce

It is only a few years ago that world's biggest problem seemed to be overpopulation. Be careful what you wish for.

If, as still seems probable, the world manages to survive the global greenhouse, there is another slower and more insidious major problem: industrial society, on present demographic trends, is not sustainable because the population will collapse through lack of births. This map shows not only the extent of the fall in global birthrates, but some unexpected details. Birth rates are below replacement levels of 2.1 children per woman in all of the developed world with the singular exception of the United States, where they are just above replacement. They are also below replacement however in China, Brazil, parts of South East Asia (Thailand, Vietnam), and interestingly in the more developed parts of the Middle East, (with the singular exceptions of Saudi Arabia and Iraq), that is in Turkey, Iran, Algeria and Tunisia. In India, spanish speaking Latin America and most of the rest of the middle East birth rates have fallen sharply to just above replacement, between 2-3 children per woman, and judging from trends elsewhere will continue to fall to below replacement.

In the developing world the fall in birthrates has been so sudden that total population will continue to grow for at least another generation, due to the age structure of the population. In developed countries where birth rates have been low for some time, and have now fallen to very low levels, then absolute population decline is in prospects unless counteracted by immigration: Japan and Korea especially, Germany, Italy and most of eastern Europe and Russia.

What are the causes? What are the implications, and does it matter? What can be done about it? I will focus on this in later posts.