The Policy on Birth Rates and Families With Children: Current Approaches and Assessment of Their Effectiveness

From 2020 and 2021 to the present, the total fertility rate has resumed its decline in many developed countries, even those with the most developed support for families with children. This is due in part to economic crises (stagnant incomes against a backdrop of rising consumer standards and expectations, a global decline in housing affordability, etc.) and also to socio-cultural shifts (the effects of social media, the spread of “intensive parenting,” the increasing difficulty of balancing parenthood and employment while maternal duties are mostly undiminished, etc.). Most developed and many developing countries pursue demographic policies, which may be explicitly codified in legislation or implemented through separate measures. The authors examine this common fertility support with an emphasis on its transformation over the past decade and then assess the effectiveness of such measures based on a pool of international studies. The article also addresses what directions these policies may take in the new phase of sustained decline in fertility. A review of studies on fertility support measures indicates that a combined approach encompassing multiple areas has the greatest effect. However, policy consistency and a country's economic, social, historical, and cultural context are extremely important. Support measures have a greater impact on the timing of births than on the final number of children. One reason for this is the rapidly changing social and economic conditions, as well as significant shifts in cultural values, that are occurring during the lifetime of the current generation.

1. Aassve A., Lappegård T. Cash-Benefit Policy and Childbearing Decisions in Norway. Marriage & Family Review, 2010, vol. 46, no 3, pp. 149-169. DOI: 10.1080/01494929.2010.490094.

2. Baizan P. Regional Child Care Availability and Fertility Decisions in Spain. Demographic Research, 2009, vol. 21, article 27, pp. 803-842. DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2009.21.27.

3. Bauernschuster S., Hener T., Rainer H. Does Expanding Public Child Care Encourage Fertility? County-Level Evidence From Germany. ifo Institute, Working Paper Series 158, 2013. https://hdl.handle.net/10419/73789.

4. Bergsvik J., Fauske A., Hart R. K. Can Policies Stall the Fertility Fall? A Systematic Review of the (Quasi‐) Experimental Literature. Population and Development Review, 2021, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 913-964. DOI: 10.1111/padr.12431.

5. Billingsley S., Neyer G., Wesolowski K. The Influence of Family Policies on Women’s Childbearing: A Longitudinal Micro-Data Analysis of 21 Countries: Stokholm Research Reports in Demography. Stokholm, Stokholm University, 2018. https://su.figshare.com/articles/preprint/The_influence_of_family_policies_on_women_s_childbearing_A_longitudinal_micro-data_analysis_of_21_countries/6754193?file=12315542.

6. Boccuzzo G., Caltabiano M., Dalla Zuanna G., Loghi M. The Impact of the Bonus at Birth on Reproductive Behaviour in a Lowest-Low Fertility Context: Friuli-Venezia Giulia (Italy) From 1989 2005. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 2008, vol. 6, pp. 125-147. DOI: 10.1553/populationyearbook2008s125.

7. Brauner-Otto S. R. Housing and Fertility: A Macro-Level, Multi-Country Investigation, 1993-2017. Housing Studies, 2021, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 569-596. DOI: 10.1080/02673037.2021.1893279.

8. Doepke M., Kindermann F. Bargaining Over Babies: Theory, Evidence, and Policy Implications. American Economic Review, 2019, vol. 109, no. 9, pp. 3264-3306. DOI: 10.1257/aer.20160328.

9. Drago R., Sawyer K., Sheffler K., Warren D., Wooden M. Did Australia’s Baby Bonus Increase the Fertility Rate? Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series, Working Paper no. 1/09, 2009. https://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/assets/documents/hilda-bibliography/working-discussion-research-papers/2009/Drago_etal_Did_Australias_Baby_Bonus_Increase_the_Fertility_Rate.pdf.

10. Elhoro O., Badey D. New Media and Marital Instability: Exploring the Implications of Social Media on New Marriages. International Journal of Innovative Development and Policy Studies, 2021, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 116-126. /https://www.seahipublications.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/IJIDPS-S-13-2021.pdf.

11. Ellingsæter A. L., Kitterød R. H., Hansen M. N. How Does Parental Time Relate to Social Class in a Nordic Welfare State? Acta Sociologica, 2022, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 150-165. DOI: 10.1177/00016993211052079.

12. Esping‐Andersen G., Billari F. C. Re‐Theorizing Family Demographics. Population and Development Review, 2015, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 1-31. DOI: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2015.00024.x.

13. Esping-Andersen G. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1990.

14. Faircloth C. Intensive Parenting and the Expansion of Parenting. In: Parenting Сulture Studies. Cham, Springer International Publishing, 2023, pp. 33-67.

15. Gábos A., Gál R. I., Gábor K. The Effects of Child-Related Benefits and Pensions on Fertility by Birth Order: A Test on Hungarian Data. Population Studies, 2009, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 215-231. DOI: 10.1080/00324720903215293.

16. Gathmann Ch., Björn S. Taxing Childcare: Effects on Childcare Choices, Family Labor Supply, and Children. Journal of Labor Economics, 2018, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 665-709. https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/10813/taxing-childcare-effects-on-childcare-choices-family-labor-supply-and-children.

17. Gauthier A. H. The Impact of Family Policies on Fertility in Industrialized Countries: A Review of the Literature. Population Research and Policy Review, 2007, vol. 26, pp. 323346. DOI: 10.1007/s11113-007-9033-x.

18. Gauthier A. H., Bryson C., Fadel L., Haux T., Koops J., Mynarska M. Exploring the Concept of Intensive Parenting in a Three-Country Study. Demographic Research, 2021, vol. 44, pp. 333-348. DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2021.44.13.

19. Gauthier A. H., Gietel‐Basten S. Family Policies in Low Fertility Countries: Evidence and Reflections. Population and Development Review, 2025, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 125-161. DOI: 10.1111/padr.12691.

20. Gauthier A. H., Hatzius J. Family Benefits and Fertility: An Econometric Analysis. Population Studies, 1997, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 295-306. DOI: 10.1080/0032472031000150066.

21. Global Fertility in 204 Countries and Territories, 1950-2021, With Forecasts to 2100: А Comprehensive Demographic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. The Lancet, 2024, vol. 403, article 10440, pp. 2057-2099. DOI: 10.1016/S01406736(24)00550-6.

22. González L. The Effect of a Universal Child Benefit on Conceptions, Abortions, and Early Maternal Labor Supply. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2013, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 160-188. DOI: 10.1257/pol.5.3.160.

23. Huang Jr-Tsung. Personal Tax Exemption: The Effect on Fertility in Taiwan. Developing Economies, 2002, vol. 40, pp. 32-48. DOI: 10.1111/j.1746-1049.2002.tb00909.x.

24. Lebano A., Jamieson L. Childbearing in Italy and Spain: Postponement Narratives. Population and Development Review, 2020, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 121-144. DOI: 10.1111/padr.12313.

25. Lin P. S., Chang C. O., Foo Sing T. Do Housing Options Affect Child Birth Decisions? Evidence From Taiwan. Urban Studies, 2016, vol. 53, no. 16, pp. 3527-3546. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2585216.

26. Luci-Greulich A., Thévenon O. The Impact of Family Policies on Fertility Trends in Developed Countries. European Journal of Population, 2013, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 387-416. DOI: 10.1007/s10680-013-9295-4.

27. Matysiak A., Szalma I. Effects of Parental Leave Policies on Second Birth Risks and Women’s Employment Entry. Population, 2014, vol. 69, pp. 599-636. DOI: 10.3917/pope.1404.0599.

28. Mörk E., Sjögren A., Svaleryd H. Childcare Costs and the Demand for Children Evidence From a Nationwide Reform. Journal of Population Economics, 2013, vol. 26, pp. 33-65. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1752111.

29. Novoa C., Cova F., Nazar G., Oliva K., Vergara-Barra P. Intensive Parenting: The Risks of Overdemanding. Trends in Psychology, 2025, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 53-66. DOI: 10.1007/s43076-022-00229-9.

30. Pellegrino A., Abe M., Shannon R. The Dark Side of Social Media: Content Effects on the Relationship Between Materialism and Consumption Behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 2022, vol. 13, article 870614. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.870614.

31. Puur A., Klesment M. Signs of a Stable or Provisional Increase in Fertility? Reflections on Developments in Estonia. Demográfia. English Edition, 2011, vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 31-55. https://ideas.repec.org/a/nki/journl/v54y2011i5p31-55.html.

32. Raute A. Can Financial Incentives Reduce the Baby Gap? Evidence From a Reform in Maternity Leave Benefits. Journal of Public Economics, 2019, vol. 169, pp. 203-222. https://www.qmul.ac.uk/sef/media/econ/research/workingpapers/2018/wp871.pdf.

33. Raybould A., Sear R. Children of the (Gender) Revolution: A Theoretical and Empirical Synthesis of How Gendered Division of Labour Influences Fertility. Population Studies, 2021, vol. 75, no. 2, pp. 169-190. DOI: 10.1080/00324728.2020.1851748.

34. Rindfuss R. R., Guilkey D., Morgan S. P., Kravdal Ø., Guzzo K. B. Child Care Availability and First-Birth Timing in Norway. Demography, 2007, vol. 44, pp. 345-372. DOI: 10.1353/ dem.2007.0017.

35. Rindfuss R. R., Guilkey D. K., Morgan S. P., Kravdal Ø. Child-Care Availability and Fertility in Norway. Population and Development Review, 2010, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 725-748. DOI: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2010.00355.x.

36. Rotkirch A. The Wish for a Child. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 2020, vol. 18, pp. 49-62. DOI: 10.1553/populationyearbook2020.deb05.

37. Society at a Glance 2024. OECD Social Indicators. OECD Publishing, 2024. https://www. oecd.org/en/publications/society-at-a-glance-2024_918d8db3-en.html.

38. Sun S. H. L. Population Policy and Reproduction in Singapore: Making Future Citizens. London, Routledge, 2012.

39. The Global Risks Report 2023. World Economic Forum, 2023. https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Global_Risks_Report_2023.pdf.

40. Van Wijk D. House Prices and Fertility: Can the Dutch Housing Crisis Explain the Post2010 Fertility Decline? Population, Space and Place, 2024, vol. 30, no. 7, article e2787. DOI: 10.1002/psp.2787.

41. Vignoli D., Bazzani G., Guetto R., Minello A., Pirani E. Uncertainty and Narratives of the Future: A Theoretical Framework for Contemporary Fertility. In: Schoen R. (ed.). Analyzing Contemporary Fertility. The Springer Series on Demographic Methods and Population Analysis. Cham, Springer, 2020, vol. 51, pp. 25-47. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-48519-1_3.

42. Wood J., Neels K. Local Childcare Availability and Dual-Earner Fertility: Variation in Childcare Coverage and Birth Hazards Over Place and Time. European Journal of Population, 2019, vol. 35, pp. 913-937. DOI: 10.1007/s10680-018-9510-4.

43. World Population Policies 2021. New York, United Nations, 2021. https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/undesa_pd_2021_wpp-fertility_policies.pdf.