European fertility trends: Regional bifurcation or a new convergence?
Vienna Institute of Demography (Austrian Academy of Sciences), Wittgenstein Centre for Demography and Global Human Capital
Tomáš Sobotka
Eurostat seminar on population projections and demographic trends, Luxembourg, 13 November 2018
Background: A „big picture“ of fertility trends
Global level: • Disappearing distinction in fertility and fertility preferences
between the middle-income countries and the rich countries • A shift to later childbearing – with wide regional differences
European level: • A broad stabilisation in cohort fertility, unstable period fertility
trends • A “great divergence in fertility” (Billari 2018)? • Debates on the drivers of fertility change: labour market,
economic conditions, education, gender, migration • Policy discussions & responses
Background: the new challenges
The long-term experience of low fertility perceived with mixed feelings • Worries about the consequences for
countries (depopulation, accelerated aging, threat to national identity) and individuals
• Discussions often still focused on quantity (population numbers) and crude indicators of population age structure with fixed age boundaries (OADRs and similar)
• Positive aspects of low fertility often overlooked
• Policy reactions: the rise of pronatalism in official rhetoric and some policies (e.g. Russia, Belarus, Turkey and, outside Europe, Japan, Korea, Iran); also rising ethno-nationalism
Policy concerns: the global rise of pronatalism
Number of countries that aim to increase their fertility rate, out of 50 developed low-fertility countries globally
05
101520253035404550
1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016
UN World Population Policies Database, 1976-2015
“Third child: triple riches in the Third Millenium” (Pronatalist poster in Moscow, 2013) Photo: Ina Leykin; http://somatosphere.net/2011/12/population-prescriptions-pronatalism-and-the-fear-of-underpopulation-in-post-soviet-russia.html
Agenda Ø Fertility in highly developed countries: temporary or long-term
divisions?
Ø Fertility trends after the economic recession: surprising regional contrasts and continuing postponement of parenthood
Ø Continuing shift to delayed parenthood Ø Unstable fertility, stable preferences? Ø The role of labour market conditions and migrant fertility
Ø Changing education gradients? Ø Discussion
Focus: Europe + selected insights on highly developed low-fertility countries and regions: North America, East Asia, Australia, New Zealand
Fertility in highly developed countries: temporary or long-term divisions?
The new fertility divide?
• A broad stabilisation in cohort fertility and childlessness in most countries (Myrskylä et al. 2013)
Regional differentiation: Very low fertility in East Asia, Southern, Central and Eastern Europe • McDonald (2006): cultural/regional/policy divide: countries with
“very low fertility” (TFR < 1.5) vs. countries with higher fertility • Rindfuss et al. (2016): A global “bifurcation” in low fertility
levels; two distinct fertility “regimes” • Billari (2018): A new “Great Divergence” in fertility? Key issues with the “bifurcation” idea
– The regional divisions often identified on the basis of period TFRs which may change fast and which are affected by tempo effect
– Not all countries/regions fit this description
Period TFR (2010-15) and completed cohort fertility; women born 1974
Sources: Sobotka / Figure 31 in State of the World Population Report 2018 (UNFPA); period TFR data for China estimated (Basten et al. 2014). Completed Cohort Fertility: WIC (2016), Human Fertility Database (2018). Data for China: 1% Population Sample Survey of 2015.
1.371.45
1.57
1.42 1.44
1.911.85 1.85 1.91
1.50 1.531.61
1.491.58
1.951.91
2.17
2.02
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20
Fertility rate (children per woman)
Total fertility rate (2010-‐15)
Completed cohort fertility(women born 1974)
Cohort fertility trends: Not so easy to spot the divide
Completed fertility (children per woman), selected countries, women born 1940-1975
Sources: Sobotka (JBS, 2017); data based on Human Fertility Database, Council of Europe (2006), CFE database, national statistical offices, Census data, and own computations and projections
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20
2.40
2.60
2.80
3.00
1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970
Completed
coho
rt fertility
France
Germany
Italy
Japan
Poland
Romania
Russia
Spain
United Kingdom
United States
Netherlands
Cohort fertility trends: German-speaking countries
Completed fertility (children per woman), selected countries, women born 1940-1976 (1978)
Sources: Human Fertility Database, Geburtenbarometer (for Austria), European Demographic Data Sheet 2010-18 (for EU-28 data)
1.66
1.571.64
1.35
2.04
1.69
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20
2.40
2.60
2.80
1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975
Austria
Germany
Switzerland
Spain
France
European Union
Period fertility rates: the end of the „Great divide“?
Source: UNFPA SWOP 2018; European Demographic Datasheet 2018
Period TFR, European regions, US and Korea, 1980-2016 or 2017
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Southern Europe
Western Europe
Germany, Austria,SwitzerlandNordic countries
Central-‐Eastern Europe
South-‐Eastern Europe
Eastern Europe
EU-‐28
United States
Republic of Korea
Fertility trends after the economic recession: surprising regional
contrasts and continuing postponement of parenthood
Fertility ups and downs after 2000
2000-2008 Ø Almost universal upturn in period Total Fertility Rate (TFR) across
Europe Ø Strong fertility recovery in Central & Eastern Europe; ending of the
“lowest-low” fertility (TFR<1.3)
2008-2013 Ø Economic recession linked with declining TFRs, especially in the South Ø Renewed fertility postponement at younger ages
2013+ Ø Differentiated trends across Europe: fertility recovery especially in
Central & Eastern Europe, but also Germany, Austria Ø Surprising period fertility declines in all higher-fertility regions
Period fertility rates: the end of the „Great divide“?
Source: UNFPA SWOP 2018; European Demographic Datasheet 2018
Period TFR, European regions, US and Korea, 1980-2016 or 2017
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Southern Europe
Western Europe
Germany, Austria,SwitzerlandNordic countries
Central-‐Eastern Europe
South-‐Eastern Europe
Eastern Europe
EU-‐28
United States
Republic of Korea
Source: Human Fertility Database, Council of Europe 2006, Eurostat, national statistical offices
Contrasting period fertility trends in Europe,1980-2017
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20
Belgium
Norway
Finland
Iceland
Sweden
EU
UK
Ireland
0.7 cm
Source: Human Fertility Database, Council of Europe 2006, Eurostat, national statistical offices
Contrasting period fertility trends in Europe,1980-2017
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20
Belgium
Norway
Finland
Iceland
Sweden
EU
UK
Ireland
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
2017
Russia
Czechia
Hungary
EU
Germany
Austria
Period fertility rates: the end of the „Great divide“?
Source: Eurostat database (2018) and national statistical offices
Period TFR, Germany and Norway, 1960-2017
2.54 (1964)
1.25 (1994)
1.57
2.98 (1964)
1.62
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Norway
Germany
Period fertility rates: the end of the „Great divide“?
Source: Eurostat database (2018) and national statistical offices
Period TFR, Germany, Norway, and Czechia 1960-2017
2.54 (1964)
1.25 (1994)
1.57
2.98 (1964)
1.621.67
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Norway
Germany
CzechiaNorway
Germany
CzechiaNorway
Germany
CzechiaNorway
Germany
CzechiaNorway
Germany
CzechiaNorway
Germany
Czechia
2.46 (1974)
Continuing shift to delayed childbearing
What explains the unexpected fertility declines after the economic recession?
Was the decline in TFR in parts of Europe driven mainly by the shift in fertility timing?
A renewed postponement of childbearing: continuing trend post-recession; probably also a “squeeze” in fertility of lower-educated women • Fertility declines especially strong among young women < age 25 • Fertility decline also among migrant and lower-educated women • Continuing economic instability & precarious jobs among lower-
qualified women? • Later onset of dating and sexual activity? (Twenge 2017 for the US,
NIPSSR / Japanese National Fertility Survey 2015)
Falling fertility among teenage & young adult women
Source: Eurostat (2018), Human Fertility Database (2018)
Cumulative age-specific fertility rates at ages 15-24, selected countries, 2000-2016
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
United States
United Kingdom
Norway
France
European Union
Germany
Switzerland
Ireland
Austria
Spain
The continuing postponement of first births
Source: UNFPA SWOP 2018; European Demographic Datasheet 2018
Mean age at first birth, selected European countries, South Korea and the US, 1970-2016
20
22
24
26
28
30
321970
1974
1978
1982
1986
1990
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
Mean age at first b
irth
United States
Netherlands
Russia
Spain
Czechia
Republic ofKoreaJapan
Germany
The rising importance of fertility rates at later ages
Source: Computations based on Eurostat data (2018)
Share of fertility rates realised at ages 35+ (on the TFR, in %)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
Germany AustriaSwitzerland SpainEU-‐28
Unstable fertility, stable preferences?
Instability in period fertility trends
Ø Modern contraception allows couples to react to changing period conditions, economic and labour market trends, family policies, expanding education and other factors
Ø Planned or intended births can be – to some extent –flexibly “postponed”, “advanced” or “given up”
Ø Tempo effects still drive ups and down in period fertility Ø Period TFRs can also show remarkable increases Ø Cohort fertility shows much more stability
Period fertility trends still driven by tempo effect (Czechia and Norway, 1980-2017)
Source: European Demographic Data Sheet 2018; www.populationeurope.org
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
1980198419881992199620002004200820122016
Ferti
lity
Rat
e
TFR
CZECHIA
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
1980198419881992199620002004200820122016
Ferti
lity
Rat
e
TFR
NORWAY
Period fertility trends still driven by tempo effect (Czechia and Norway, 1980-2017)
Source: European Demographic Data Sheet 2018; www.populationeurope.org
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
1980198419881992199620002004200820122016
Mea
n ag
e at
firs
t birt
h
Ferti
lity
Rat
e
TFR
Mean age at first birth
CZECHIA
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
1980198419881992199620002004200820122016
Mea
n ag
e at
firs
t birt
h
Ferti
lity
Rat
e
TFR
Mean age at first birth
NORWAY
Period fertility trends still driven by tempo effect (Czechia and Norway, 1980-2017)
Source: European Demographic Data Sheet 2018; www.populationeurope.org
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
1980198419881992199620002004200820122016
Mea
n ag
e at
firs
t birt
h
Ferti
lity
Rat
e
TFR
Mean age at first birth
Tempo and parity-adjusted TFRp*
CZECHIA
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
1980198419881992199620002004200820122016
Mea
n ag
e at
firs
t birt
h
Ferti
lity
Rat
e
TFR
Mean age at first birth
Tempo and parity-adjusted TFRp*
NORWAY
Stability in fertility ideals and preferences
Ideal family size in Europe: mean % distribution across analysed countries
Source: Sobotka, T. and E. Beaujouan. 2014. Two Is best? The persistence of a two‐child family ideal in Europe. Population and Development Review, 40(3), pp.391-419.
Family size distribution, women born 1974 (in %)
Source: State of the World Population 2018, Figure 32
Childlessness rankings and change: East Asia and Southern Europe jumping up (top 6 and bottom 6 countries)
5.55.65.86.26.26.5
17.817.918.419.019.020.7
0 10 20 30
MoldovaSouth Korea
BelarusCzech Republic
RussiaBulgaria
FinlandCanada
GermanySingapore
United KingdomSwitzerland
Women born in 1960
9.79.89.910.010.411.5
20.420.720.923.123.2
28.2
0 10 20 30
LithuaniaCzech Republic
BulgariaBelarusRussia
Estonia
FinlandSpainItaly
GermanySingapore
Japan
Women born in 1972
Data: 46 low-fertility countries; based on Cohort Fertility and Education (CFE) database (www.cfe-database.org) and Human Fertility Database (HFD)
• Fastest increases in childlessness: Japan, Korea, Spain, Taiwan, Italy
The role of labour market conditions and migrant fertility
Economic and labour market conditions
Ø Most theories & empirical evidence suggest pro-cyclical correlation between economic growth and fertility (may also operate via marriage and partnership formation)
Ø Multiple effects of employment uncertainty: part-time jobs, unemployment, time-limited contracts, self-employment, downward mobility, income loss
The role of precarious position of young adults & intergenerational inequalities Adsera (2004): High unemployment & self-employment depress fertility, especially in Southern Europe
Close correlation of fertility trends with unemployment, especially in Southern Europe
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.60
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
Une
mploymen
t rate (%)
Perio
d TFR realise
d be
fore age 30
unemploymentrate
period TotalFertiltiy Rate (TFR) (lagged by 1 year)
Period TFR (births per woman) vs. unemployment rate (%) in Portugal, 2000-2015 (fertility rates lagged by 1 year)
Fertility response to unemployment during the recent recession
Source: Comolli, C L. 2017. “The fertility response to the Great Recession in Europe and the United States.” Demographic Research 36(article 51)
Timing of births before and during the recession: EU vs. Spain
Changes in age-specific fertility five years before (2003-8) and five years into the recession (2008-13)
Migrant fertility rates: towards convergence?
Source: European Fertility Datasheet 2015
Share of births to foreign-born mothers & net effect of migrant fertility on the TFR, 2013
Source: European Fertility Datasheet 2015; www.fertilitydatasheet.org
Trends in fertility of native and foreign (or foreign-born) women: temporary uptick due to „refugee migration“?
Data: Austria: Geburtenbarometer Austria, computations by Krystof Zeman; Germany: data published by destatis / Statistisches Bundesamt; https://www-genesis.destatis.de
Data for Austria by country of birth; data for Germany by country of citizenship
1.29
1.41
1.99
1.801.96
1.39
1.53
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20
Native born
Foreign born
Total
AUSTRIA
1.28
1.46
1.79
2.23
1.34
1.591.71
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20Germancitizens
Foreigncitizens(new)
Total
Foreigncitizens(estimate)
Germany
Education and fertility: shifting relationship
• Historical negative fertility gradients by social status among women (Skirbekk 2008)
• Often due to higher childlessness among better educated women
• Education gradient mostly unintended: No consistent evidence of systematic differences in fertility preferences
• Fertility trends among highly educated will drive the overall future fertility trends
Why education trends in fertility matter?
Diminishing education differentials in fertility?
What factors could drive the diminishing or reversing fertility gradient? • Higher gender equality, • Changing patterns of union formation; high earning potential among
women new advantage (Van Bavel 2012, 2017) • Higher educated women more “empowered” (information, knowledge,
abilities) to act on their family plans (Lutz 2017; Testa 2017) • Declining selectivity of the better educated • Unstable labour market and social status disadvantage of the lower
educated women (many remain without a partner & kids), disappearing jobs for the middle-educated (Adsera 2017)
Evidence for fertility convergence for the Nordic countries (Jalovaara et al. 2018), Belgium, possibly, US (Hazan & Zoabi 2015)
Continuing wide diversity in education gradients across countries: women born 1930-1970
Source: T Sobotka, É Beaujouan, and Z Brzozowska. 2018. “Reversals, diminishing differentials, or stable patterns? Long-term trends in educational gradients in fertility across the developed countries.” Paper presented at EPC Conference, Brussels, June 2018
Continuing wide diversity in education gradients across countries
Continuing wide diversity in education gradients across countries
The changing relationship between education, employment and first birth intensity during the recession period in Andalusia, Spain Parity and age-adjusted total fertility rate for first births (PATFR) by education and work status, 2000-2013
0.89 0.72 2007 0.85 0.790.85 0.77 2008 0.84 0.800.83 0.73 2009 0.82 0.800.82 0.76 2010 0.84 0.810.65 0.66 2011 0.77 0.840.80 0.77 2012 0.85 0.890.80 0.80 2013 0.88 0.86
20142015
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
2000 2005 2010 2015
Secondary orlowerTertiary
Not working
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
2000 2005 2010 2015
Temporary job
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
2000 2005 2010 2015
Permanent job
Source: Graph constructed from the data in Figure 1 in Diego Ramiro-Fariñas, Francisco J. Viciana-Fernández and Víctor Montañés Cobo. 2018. “Will highly educated women have more children in the future? In Southern Europe, it will largely depend on labour market condition” Vienna Yearbook of Population Research 2017 (Vol. 15)
Discussion: Key features of European fertility trends
Key fertility trends • Period fertility instability vs. broad cohort fertility stabilization
• Stable fertility preferences & continuing dominance of a two-child family
• Changes in fertility timing & fertility postponement continue affecting period fertility trends
• Policy responses: the rise of family-friendly and pro-natalist policies with mixed results
• Contrasting trends in the shift away from marriage and to diverse family arrangements
Shifting childbearing away from marriage: contrasting trends
Source: UNFPA SWOP 2018;
Percentage of births outside marriage, Selected countries and regions, 1970-2016
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1970197519801985199019952000200520102015
European Union
United States
Russia
Japan
France
Spain
Sweden
Recent fertility trends & surprises • Surprising continuation in period TFR declines in the regions with
“higher” (moderately low) fertility
• Changes in regional rankings: temporary convergence driven by the shifting timing of births?
• German-speaking countries: moving towards the middle of European fertility distribution with a small boost from migrant fertility
• Renewed falls in young age fertility in most countries, continuing postponement à fertility at young ages becoming marginal
• Southern Europe & East Asia new “hotspots” of very low fertility; South Korean TFR of 1.05 in 2017 (0.83 in Seoul) lowest globally despite increasing spending on families & pronatalist policies
• East Asia: extreme example of high parental investment in kids & of the quantity-quality tradeoff?
Future expectations: a broad convergence to moderately low fertility?
Projected TFR change in 2015–2050 (medium variants of WPP 2015, NSO, WIC expects) by the observed 2015 TFR level
-‐0.50
-‐0.40
-‐0.30
-‐0.20
-‐0.10
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.20
Projected TFR chan
ge 2015-‐2050
TFR in 2015 or latest
UN projection
WIC experts
NSO projections
Source: S. Basten, T. Sobotka and K. Zeman, 2018. “Low fertility future? Projections based on different methods suggest long-term persistence of low fertility” Paper presented at the European Population Conference, Brussels, 2018
Parenthood: Never has been so
complicated?
Data, texts, graphics, rankings & info on European fertility and population trends
www.fertilitydatasheet.org www.populationeurope.org
Human Fertility Database: www.humanfertility.org
