Re: The global fertility crisis: are fewer babies a good or a bad thing? Experts are divided

The Guardian recently published an article on the “pros and cons” of low birth rates. We wrote a letter in response, which wasn’t published, so we are featuring it here.

We encourage all our members and supporters to make their voices heard! See our media guide for advice on how to do that.

Re: The global fertility crisis: are fewer babies a good or a bad thing? Experts are divided (Nov 2, 2024)

Dear Editor,

Declining birth rates are absolutely essential to achieving a more sustainable future. The “cons” of low fertility may be significant from an economic point of view, but they have no standing when considering that continued population growth on a finite planet can only lead to environmental collapse. We have no choice but to embrace the new small family size norm and do our best to adapt to it.

Instead of wasting billions on ineffective pronatalist policies, governments should invest in measures that lessen the impacts of population aging and decline. More funding for preventive healthcare, education, and child wellbeing, for example, increases economic productivity and brings a whole host of other benefits.

Our goal should be a smaller global population size with high human welfare. If we are lucky enough to achieve this, it is likely that fertility rates in low fertility areas would creep back up, closer to replacement level. Survey data indicate that on average, two children is still the most preferred family size, and that financial constraints and concern over the state of the world are currently the most limiting factors.

Sincerely,

Olivia Nater
Communications Manager
Population Connection