Published recently in the Population and Development Review’s special issue on Contraceptive Transition Theories, a new study by the Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science and Boston University explores the evidence on the relationship between economic development and contraception.
The study provides a review of literature on the economic factors that drive contraceptive transitions and supports the idea that as a country becomes more economically developed, people often prefer to have fewer children and use methods of contraception, and family planning more broadly to achieve their reproductive goals.
Co-author Mahesh Karra, Associate Professor of Global Development Policy at Boston University’s Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies explains, ‘As income increases and social norms change, women and couples may prefer to use contraception more, even if they still want the same number of children. For example, women might want to space births or time pregnancy to more effectively align with their choice to work, seek education, or engage in other activities.’
The study looks beyond the effect of income on the desired number of children by addressing less studied relationships between general development and social norms surrounding contraception. While there are known correlations between economic development and contraception transitions over time and across different regions, the study highlights mechanisms beyond fertility decline that explain the relationship between economic growth and contraceptive change. Re-examining and expanding contraceptive demand beyond standard fertility objectives may therefore provide different findings on the links between contraception and economic development.
Dr Joshua Wilde, Senior Scientist and Researcher at the Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science and Oxford Population Health’s Demographic Science Unit said, ‘Our research highlights the complex interplay between economic development and contraception. The evidence suggests that economic development can drive contraceptive behaviour through multiple pathways, not just through fertility decline. This highlights the need for more comprehensive development strategies that include family planning as one of many components.’
The study adds that economic development may have unintended consequences on contraceptive behaviour and fertility preferences. For example, increased income and market changes might alter social norms in unpredictable ways. These implications point to the importance of considering economic factors in family planning and development policies and highlight the need for continued research to deepen our understanding of these complex relationships.
Associate Professor Mahesh Karra adds, ‘These findings have significant programmatic implications. Firstly, understanding the economic factors driving contraceptive behaviour can help policymakers design more effective family planning programmes that aim to promote contraceptive concordance, where women’s and couples’ preferences are recognised and realised. Secondly, integrating family planning into broader development strategies can, in part, improve overall wellbeing.’
The study highlights how contraception and family planning can have broader human capital and development impacts. For example, if families have fewer children, they might be able to invest more in each child’s health and education, which may allow their children to work in more skilled and higher paying jobs and, in turn, earn more income.
The study concludes that at closer examination, the relationship between trends in contraceptive use and economic development over time is dynamic, multidirectional, and multidimensional. Importantly, the authors find the current mapping between fertility and contraceptive behaviour to be both limited and incomplete.
The full article, 'Economic Foundations of Contraceptive Transitions: Theories and a Review of the Evidence', is available in the Population and Development Review’s special issue.
