Claudia Goldin has posted "The Downside of Fertility." The abstract is excerpted below.
The fertility decline is everywhere in the world today. Moreover, the decline goes decades back in the histories of rich countries. Birthrates have been below replacement in the U.S. and Europe since the mid-1970s, although further declines occurred after the Great Recession. The reasons for the declines from the 1970s to the early 2000s involve greater female autonomy and a mismatch between the desires of men and women. Men benefit more from maintaining traditions; women benefit more from eschewing them. When the probability is low that men will abandon traditions, some career women will not have children and others will delay, often too long. The fertility histories of the U.S. and those of many European and Asian countries speak to the impact of the mismatch on birth rates. The experience of middle income and even poorer nations may also be due to related factors. Various constraints that I group under “matching” problems have caused fertility to be lower than otherwise and imply that fertility has a “downside.”
Low and declining fertility have been much-discussed subjects of late in the U.S. as well as in several European and Asian countries. But the fertility decline in many of these nations occurred decades ago. Levels far below the magic replacement figure of 2.1 have existed for some time. There have, however, been further declines in some nations since around 2010. My primary goal is to understand why fertility has declined across a wide range of countries and to comprehend whether there are structural impediments. I will also address why concern is currently being voiced about low fertility despite its far longer duration. Policies intended to increase fertility have been proposed and implemented in many countries. But the policies do not address the structural impediments I will identify, although such policies can have beneficial effects on children and their parents without increasing the number of children.