October 14th, 2024

Rising incomes do not always mean fewer births

A study reveals rising incomes in sub-Saharan Africa can increase birth rates. Work hours affect South Korean pregnancy intentions, while Singapore faces low fertility and restrictive egg freezing laws. IVF success rates have improved.

Read original articleLink Icon
Rising incomes do not always mean fewer births

Rising incomes do not always correlate with fewer births, as evidenced by a recent study examining sub-Saharan Africa. Contrary to the common belief that wealth leads to lower fertility rates, the study found that women who became wealthier through interventions like business training were more likely to have children. For instance, Ethiopian women who received business training were 22% more likely to have a child. The newsletter also discusses various aspects of family policy and reproductive trends, including the impact of work hours on pregnancy intentions in South Korea, where women working 40-45 hours weekly had a significantly higher chance of conceiving. Additionally, it highlights Singapore's low fertility rate and its restrictive egg freezing laws for single women. The importance of access to fertility treatments is underscored, revealing that unsuccessful treatments can lead to mental health issues. The newsletter also touches on Sweden's policy of subsidizing grandparents for childcare, the influence of co-worker fertility on individual decisions, and the rise in maternal mortality rates in the U.S. due to changes in measurement practices. Lastly, advancements in IVF success rates are noted, with recent data showing improved outcomes for embryo transfers.

- Rising incomes in sub-Saharan Africa can lead to increased birth rates.

- Work hours significantly affect pregnancy intentions among South Korean women.

- Singapore's fertility rate is critically low, with restrictive egg freezing laws.

- Access to fertility treatment is crucial for mental health and well-being.

- IVF success rates have improved significantly over the past decade.

Link Icon 3 comments
By @AStonesThrow - 6 months
I would never have used income as a metric to correlate or predict fertility; it's completely preposterous.

I believe that education is an indicator, because education in the developed world means preparation for a career and skilled employment outside the home. Therefore, a conventional education is to the detriment of home-making and child-bearing skills. An educated young adult would much rather start a career, and honestly doesn't know how to marry or have children! Some people, though, seem to frame it as "smart enough to avoid having kids" or "enlightened people know that large families are uncool".

Factors I could imagine affecting fertility: the security/permanence of marriage and family; the view of offspring as an asset and investment vs. a burden, expense, and liability; the demand for more than one parent to work/labor outside the home or be completely away from the family (such as war, exploration, travels.) The ability of children to contribute to household income and upkeep (Farmers and shepherds love extra unskilled hands!) Loyalty of children to accept personal responsibility, when parents are elderly and need care of their own.

Unfortunately it seems like all the above factors are conspiring against fertility at this time, in many areas of the developed world. No wonder immigration is such a flashpoint for us.

By @kbolino - 6 months
I'm not sure the authors are examining the right variable. Very high individual or household income is actually a predictor of higher fertility than average, even in the developed world. Moreover, the fertility vs. income curve in the US at least is actually U-shaped, with higher values at both ends, but a depression in the middle.

It is only really the case that higher income suppresses fertility when talking about average income over time for a country or other large place. Nevertheless, that trend is quite robust, even though zooming in reveals other things happening too. This is a classic statistical paradox of aggregation.