The most developed countries have declining birth rates, endangering their economies—or maybe not

Low fertility rates—the average number of children born to a woman—may not spell economic trouble after all, scientists say. 

In a new study, demographers from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) challenge the widespread beliefs that fertility rates will eventually rebound as countries become more developed and that persistently low fertility is inherently harmful to society or the economy. 

Instead, they argue that low fertility rates are likely to persist—and that enduringly low fertility can be sustainable and even economically desirable.

For decades, policymakers and demographers have worried that birth rates falling below the so‑called “replacement level” of 2.1 children per woman would lead to shrinking populations, labor shortages and economic decline.

…

Related on the SLP

IVF doesn’t cause low sperm counts in boy babies—Genes do Owen Paterson: ‘Anti-GMO stance of Green Blob, Greenpeace condemn poor to starvation, death

As Europe inches forward in its embrace of gene-edited crops, hopes abound that opposition to GMOs might fade

World Health Organization calls Kennedy- and CDC-backed Guinea-Bissau hepatitis B vaccine study designed to ‘prove’ the danger of vaccines “unethical”

Chaos or at peace with the world: The complex ways psychedelics transform the brain

The researchers argued that economic sustainability depends far more on population structure than sheer size. Higher education levels, increased labor force participation and rising productivity can offset the effects of fewer births, and in some cases, may outweigh them entirely.  

Lower fertility, they suggested, can even bring advantages. With fewer children, societies may be able to invest more resources per child, strengthening human capital, innovation and long‑term productivity. 

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here