There are two seemingly contradictory explanations for collapse in fertility rates that I commonly see:
That having kids is financially infeasible for many more households
That economic prosperity and education lead to the collapse of fertility
But I think what squares the circle is that the second statement is actually describing societies with more developed capitalism, and that the seeming extra prosperity has come from cannibalizing social reproduction in pursuit of more intensive labor productivity. It’s how you can get a society where there is relative material abundance, but no spare time or cash to raise your kids.
Fertility rates track the “one map” pretty closely, and I don’t think that’s a coincidence. And the fact that China has now joined that group might warrant some uncomfortable reflection on our part about the trajectory their society is taking.
But I think what squares the circle is that the second statement is actually describing societies with more developed capitalism, and that the seeming extra prosperity has come from cannibalizing social reproduction in pursuit of more intensive labor productivity. It’s how you can get a society where there is relative material abundance, but no spare time or cash to raise your kids.
ding ding ding
this is the conclusion Marxist feminists were coming to in the 70s and 80s while studying the capitalization of reproductive labor
I think any trajectory that China is going through 1) must acknowledge your point that if the square is circled thusly then it follows that the more socialized abundance wouldn’t ping the birthrates as intensely
But 2) the trajectory goes back a bunch further than the sensibilities than citizens of the one map readily conceptualize. So the weight of history probably does weird things to the data that I don’t know about
There are two seemingly contradictory explanations for collapse in fertility rates that I commonly see:
But I think what squares the circle is that the second statement is actually describing societies with more developed capitalism, and that the seeming extra prosperity has come from cannibalizing social reproduction in pursuit of more intensive labor productivity. It’s how you can get a society where there is relative material abundance, but no spare time or cash to raise your kids.
Fertility rates track the “one map” pretty closely, and I don’t think that’s a coincidence. And the fact that China has now joined that group might warrant some uncomfortable reflection on our part about the trajectory their society is taking.
ding ding ding
this is the conclusion Marxist feminists were coming to in the 70s and 80s while studying the capitalization of reproductive labor
I think any trajectory that China is going through 1) must acknowledge your point that if the square is circled thusly then it follows that the more socialized abundance wouldn’t ping the birthrates as intensely
But 2) the trajectory goes back a bunch further than the sensibilities than citizens of the one map readily conceptualize. So the weight of history probably does weird things to the data that I don’t know about
Maybe 15 or 20 years ago, but so much anymore. Latin America and South and Southeast Asia have approached 2.0 pretty quickly.
There are 25 countries left with a TFR over 4.0, and 2 of them are outside Africa. Those two are the most war-torn countries in Asia.