Advertisement

Childlessness and Economic Development: A Survey

  • Thomas BaudinEmail author
  • David de la Croix
  • Paula E. Gobbi
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter shows why, beyond average fertility, childlessness matters in itself. Childlessness reacts to economic incentives in a peculiar way, which cannot be described by usual economic models of fertility. We make a distinction between childlessness due to poverty and childlessness due to economic opportunities. It allows to better understand the dynamics of childlessness along the history but also why the extensive margin of fertility (childlessness) does not adjust to economic shocks and development policies in the same way as the intensive margin (number of children of mothers). Introducing marriage into this framework provides new insights: higher educational homogamy per se decreases childlessness as it favors marriage. Nevertheless, because educational homogamy is most of the time accompanied by a rise in female education, it may also be associated with increases in childlessness in the data.

Keywords

Childlessness Fertility Education Marriage Children Sterility Economic development Poverty-driven childlessness Opportunity-driven childlessness Female empowerment Childcare Malthusian economy Educational homogamy Reproductive health Demographic economics Developed countries Developing countries Historical childlessness Quantity and quality of children Inequality 

JEL Classification Numbers

J11; O11; O40 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Thomas Baudin acknowledges the financial support of the French National Research Agency through the project ANR-18-CE26-0002.

David de la Croix acknowledges the financial support of the project ARC 15/19-063 of the Belgian French-speaking Community.

References

  1. Aaronson, Daniel, Fabian Lange, and Bhashkar Mazumder. 2014. “Fertility Transitions along the Extensive and Intensive Margins”. American Economic Review 104 (11): 3701–24 (November).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bardet, Jean-Pierre. 1983. Rouen au XVIIeet XVIIIesiècles. Paris: SEDES.Google Scholar
  3. Baudin, Thomas. 2011. “Family policies: what does the standard endogenous fertility model tell us?” Journal of Public Economic Theory 13 (4): 555–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ——. 2012. “The Optimal Trade-Off Between Quality and Quantity with Unknown Number of Survivors.” Mathematical Population Studies 19 (2): 94–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baudin, Thomas, David de la Croix, and Paula E. Gobbi. 2015. “Fertility and Childlessness in the US”. American Economic Review 105 (6): 1852–1882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. ——. 2019. “Endogenous childlessness and stages of development”. Forthcoming in the Journal of the European Economic Association. https://academic.oup.com/jeea/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/jeea/jvy042/5193476.
  7. Baudin, T., and V. Hiller. 2019. “On the Dynamics of Gender Differences in Preferences”. Oxford Economic Papers 71 (3): 503–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baudin, Thomas, and Koyel Sarkar. 2018. “Education and childlessness in India”. Université catholique de Louvain.Google Scholar
  9. Baudin, Thomas, and Robert Stelter. 2018a. “A history of childlessness in Germany”. mimeo.Google Scholar
  10. ——. 2018b. “Rural exodus and fertility in times of industrialization”. mimeo.Google Scholar
  11. Becker, Gary S. 1960. “An Economic Analysis of Fertility”. In Demographic and Economic Change in Developed Countries, NBER Chapters, 209–240. National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.Google Scholar
  12. Berrington, Anna. 2017. “Childlessness in the UK”. In Childlessness in Europe: Contexts, Causes, and Consequences, by Michaela Kreyenfeld Dirk Konietzka, pp. 57–76.Google Scholar
  13. Bhalotra, Sonia, Atheendar Venkataramani, and Selma Walther. 2018. “Fertility and Labor Market Responses to Reductions in Mortality”. mimeo.Google Scholar
  14. Brée, Sandra, and David de la Croix. 2019. “Key Forces Behind the Decline of Fertility - Lessons from Childlessness in Rouen before the Industrial Revolution”. 13 (1): 25–54. Cliometrica.Google Scholar
  15. Canning, David, Sangeeta Raja, and Abdo Yazbeck. 2015. Africa’s demographic transition: dividend or disaster? The World Bank.Google Scholar
  16. De Vries, Jan. 2008. The Industrious Revolution: Consumer Behavior and the Household Economy, 1650 to the Present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. de la Croix, David, and Matthias Doepke. 2003. “Inequality and Growth: Why Differential Fertility Matters”. American Economic Review 93 (4): 1091–1103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. de la Croix, David, and Omar Licandro. 2015. “The Longevity of Famous People from Hammurabi to Einstein”. Journal of Economic Growth 20:263–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. de la Croix, David, and Aude Pommeret. 2018. “Childbearing Postponement, its Option Value, and the Biological Clock”. CEPR Discussion Paper, Centre for Economic Policy Research.Google Scholar
  20. de la Croix, David, Eric B. Schneider, and Jacob Weisdorf. 2019. “Childlessness, celibacy and net fertility in pre-industrial England: the middle-class evolutionary advantage”. Journal of Economic Growth 24 (3): 223–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. de la Croix, David, and Marie Vander Donckt. 2010. “Would Empowering Women Initiate the Demographic Transition in Least Developed Countries?” Journal of Human Capital 4 (2): 85–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gobbi, P. E., and M. Goñi. 2017, July. “Childless Aristocrats: Fertility, Inheritance, and Persistent Inequality in Britain (1650–1882)”. CEPR Discussion Paper, Centre for Economic Policy Research.Google Scholar
  23. Gobbi, Paula E. 2013. “A model of voluntary childlessness”. Journal of Population Economics 26 (3): 963–982 (July).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. ——. 2018. “Childcare and commitment within households”. Journal of Economic Theory 176:503–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Greenwood, Jeremy, Nezih Guner, and John A. Knowles. 2003. “More on Marriage, Fertility, and the Distribution of Income”. International Economic Review 44 (3): 827–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Habakkuk, H. J. 1950. “Marriage Settlements in the Eighteenth Century”. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 32:15–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hiller, Victor, and Thomas Baudin. 2016. “Cultural transmission and the evolution of gender roles”. Mathematical Social Sciences 84:8–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hollingsworth, T. H. 1964. “The Demography of the British Peerage”. Population Studies, vol. Supplement.Google Scholar
  29. ——. 2001. “Hollingsworth Genealogical Data on the British Peerage”. Database. Re-digitised from handwritten original index sheets and archived by the Cambridge Group for the History of Population and Social Structure.Google Scholar
  30. Hollingsworth, Thomas H. 1965. The Demography of the British Peerage. London: Population Investigation Committee, LSE.Google Scholar
  31. Iftikhar, Zainab. 2018. “The effect of norms on fertility and its implications for the quantity-quality tradeoff in Pakistan”. IRES, Université catholique de Louvain.Google Scholar
  32. Iyigun, Murat, and Jeanne Lafortune. 2016. “Why wait? A century of education, marriage timing and gender roles.” mimeo.Google Scholar
  33. Jones, Larry E., Alice Schoonbroodt, and Michèle Tertilt. 2010. Chapter Fertility Theories: Can They Explain the Negative Fertility-Income Relationship? of Demography and the Economy, edited by John B. Shoven, 43–100. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  34. Kreyenfeld, Michaela, and Konietzka Dirk. 2017. “Childlessness in East and West Germany: Long-term trends and social disparities, in Kreyenfeld, Michaela, and Dirk Konietzka (Eds.)”. Springer, pp. 97–114.Google Scholar
  35. Leridon, Henri. 2008. “A New Estimate of Permanent Sterility by Age: Sterility Defined as the Inability to Conceive”. Population Studies 62 (1): 15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Malthus, Thomas. 1807. An Essay on the Principle of Population. Fourth Edition. London: T. Bensley.Google Scholar
  37. Poston, Dudley L., and Katherine Trent. 1982. “International Variability in Childlessness: A Descriptive and Analytical Study”. Journal of Family Issues 3 (4): 473–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Regalia, Ferdinando, and Jose-Victor Rios-Rull. 2001. “What accounts for the increase in the number of single households?” University of Pennsylvania, Mimeo.Google Scholar
  39. Rowland, D. T. 2007. “Historical Trends in Childlessness”. Journal of Family Issues 28 (10): 1311–1337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sadler, Michael Thomas. 1830. The Law of Population – in disproof of the superfecundity of human beings, and developing the real principle of their increase. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  41. Sobotka, T. 2017. “Childlessness in Europe: Reconstructing Long-Term Trends Among Women Born in 1900–1972”. In Childlessness in Europe: Contexts, Causes, and Consequences, 17–53. Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tietze, Christopher. 1957. “Reproductive Span and Rate of Reproduction Among Hutterite Women”. Fertility and Sterility 8 (1): 89–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Turra, Cassio M, and Bernardo L Queiroz. 2005. “Before it’s too late: demographic transition, labor supply, and social security problems in Brazil”. United Nations Expert Group Meeting on Social and Economic Implications of Changing Population Age Structures. Departamento de Assuntos Econômicos e Sociais, Divisão de População México.Google Scholar
  44. Van Bavel, Jan. 2012. “The reversal of gender inequality in education, union formation and fertility in Europe.” Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, pp. 127–154.Google Scholar
  45. Van de Walle, Etienne, and Francine Van de Walle. 1972. “Allaitement, stérilité et contraception : les opinions jusqu’au XIXe siècle”. Population 27 (4): 685–701.Google Scholar
  46. Wrigley, Edward Anthony, R S Davies, James Oeppen, and Roger Schofield. 1997. English Population History from Family Reconstitution: 1580–1837. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Baudin
    • 1
    Email author
  • David de la Croix
    • 2
    • 3
  • Paula E. Gobbi
    • 4
    • 2
  1. 1.IÉSEG School of Management & LEM (UMR 9221)LilleFrance
  2. 2.CEPRLondonUK
  3. 3.IRES/LIDAM - Université catholique de LouvainLouvain-la-NeuveBelgium
  4. 4.Université Libre de Bruxelles (ECARES)BruxellesBelgium

Personalised recommendations