Japan, Turkey, France, Singapore. What do all of these countries have in common? Within the past few years, each and every one of them have adopted some form of pronatalist policy—measures specifically aimed towards increasing birth rates and family sizes. These are typically implemented in an effort to combat aging populations, as many of these countries have dipped below the replacement level fertility of 2.1 children per woman. But as more and more countries adopt pronatalist policies, the economic and social fallout has become apparent, leading many to question whether these policies should be introduced at all.
One of the most popular forms of pronatalist policy includes financial benefits and support to incentivize having children, such as cash bonuses, tax breaks, and subsidized childcare support. In theory, this makes pronatalist policies seem sound. But in practice, it’s a very different story, as they often exhibit very low returns for an exorbitantly high investment.
Taiwan serves as a prime example of this, where, as of 2023, the government has spent a hefty $3 billion on various efforts to raise fertility rates, including paid parental leave, tax breaks, and cash benefits. The result? A record low birth rate of 0.87 children per woman. Meanwhile, South Korea has spent even more on subsidizing childcare, at about $200 billion. In spite of this, their birth rate fell from 1.1 children per woman in 2006 to 0.81 just 15 years later. Even when financial incentives do work, they are still extremely expensive.
Additionally, some countries have escalated their pronatalist policies beyond optional incentives into the realm of reproductive autonomy, providing an alarming threat to hard-won women’s rights. From Iran, where contraceptives and abortions have been restricted, to China, where efforts have been made to reduce abortions, these forms of pronatalist policy exploit reproductive procedures in an effort to raise birth rates.
Furthermore, women often bear the brunt of the burden under many pronatalist policies, as they are targeted specifically to carry and care for children. Research shows that access to family planning and education for women decreases birth rates, with many conservative pronatalists arguing for the opposite. Overall, certain pronatalist policies seem to provide a disturbing glimpse into a Handmaid’s Tale-esque future.
Amidst worries about declining population in more developed countries, it’s also important to consider the broader context. Overall, the world population is growing (albeit at a slowing rate), and more people will only lead to more degradation of the environment and natural resource depletion. From this point of view, it can be argued that pronatalist policies would do more harm than good.
Knowing this, perhaps the key to answering the pronatalist debate is not to simply tell citizens to make more babies, but instead to take a deeper look at the problems these policies aim to address. A significant reason why some countries are so adamant about saving their plummeting populations is over concerns regarding economic growth. As more workers grow old and leave the workforce, there may not be enough young people to replace them and support a country’s economy. All the while, a growing population of senior citizens puts pressure on pension systems.
However, the argument that raising birth rates is the sole solution to this issue is simply untrue. Rather, promoting immigration or adopting more sustainable economic systems can alleviate current fears. Additionally, it is still possible to have a productive economy and high standards of living even with a smaller population, and the assumption that a successful economy relies on unlimited population growth can be considered outdated.
Instead of using pronatalist policies in ways that are expensive, unjust, and even ineffective, world governments should instead accept that a declining population will naturally occur. Instead of futile attempts to reverse current birth rates, efforts should be focused on preparing for the future, by preparing to support an elderly population, adopting economic reform, and ensuring the current environment can sustain those who already live there.
IMAGE CREDIT: Global Times
Leave a Reply