Dr Joshua Wilde introduces a special issue of the Population and Development Review with lessons learned in studying fertility and family dynamics in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Dr Joshua Wilde, Senior Scientist and Researcher at the Demographic Science Unit and Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science, authored the introduction alongside Natalie Nitsche, Associate Professor at the Australian National University’s School of Demography.
The special issue also includes a study on novel fertility forecasting methods to predict the US COVID-19 baby bust, co-authored by Dr Joshua Wilde, DPhil student Jasmin Abdel Ghany and researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research.
The introduction of the special issue outlines three conclusions based on fertility and family dynamic research, including studies featured in the special issue:
1. More data is needed to unpick the complex relationship between fertility and the pandemic
A lack of reliable data before, during and even after the pandemic has made it particularly challenging to address this relationship. Although some countries are slowly making administrative birth registers available, these comprehensive datasets are generally scarce and mostly found in high-income countries.
Another challenge lies in accurately unpacking fertility dynamics which would require large sample sizes that include the entire reproductive process from conception to pregnancy and birth, to everything in between. As fertility and dynamics become ever more complex, population scientists require comprehensive data on the reproductive process.
2. Large variations in fertility and no uniform response to the pandemic
The pandemic happened during a turbulent time for fertility rates which were declining steeply across the world in the few years running up to the pandemic, with the exception of sub-Saharan Africa. This backdrop led to conflicting theories on how the pandemic would influence fertility, with some proposing baby booms driven by an increase in sexual encounters as couples spent more time together at home while others expected baby busts nine months later, driven by various factors such as rising unemployment and disruptions to family dynamics.
The aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic brought with it the stark realisation that fertility and family dynamics were driven by large variations across societies, time, and population subgroups. By mid-2021, most population scientists expected moderate to large declines in fertility when in fact many countries in Central Europe saw no clear effects and Nordic countries saw increases. The response of birthrates to the pandemic became even more incoherent as additional estimates were released from low- and middle-income countries.
Another issue addressed in the introduction is the overreliance of ad-hoc data collection immediately after the first lockdown on comparing current fertility plans to pre-pandemic ideas and concepts of fertility. The pandemic did however improve ideations around rarely discussed correlates such as physical and mental health, relationships, and sexual identity.
The authors also point out that shifts in fertility ideation and reproductive behaviours, such as positive reaffirmations among childless women during the pandemic which could potentially reduce the stigma among women who are childless by choice, demonstrate that population scientists could benefit from relying more on qualitative methodologies – particularly during times of rapid social and demographic change.
3. Population scientists need to challenge the theoretical frameworks for fertility and family dynamics
The third conclusion of this introduction is that pandemic effects on fertility and family dynamics are unclear due to ambiguous baseline and causality issues. As the pandemic hit, fertility dynamics were at a crossroads with Nordic countries unexpectedly seeing fertility levels plummet to record-low levels whilst Central and Eastern European countries experienced significant fertility recoveries at the same time as US, Canada and Australia saw strong fertility declines.
These developments challenge the theoretical frameworks that population scientists rely on for explaining cross-national variations in fertility, and make it extremely challenging to estimate a ‘pandemic effect’ given the complexities of population processes during and preceding the pandemic.
The authors stress the need for better data, monitoring, and prediction of fertility alongside better theories to explain large variations in fertility, and novel ways to make causal interpretations of pandemic related shifts in demographic and family dynamics.
Dr Joshua Wilde said, ‘We hope that this special issue, and the studies within it, encourage population scientists to bravely rethink how we deal with causality in demographic science and seize the opportunity to disrupt our theoretical models so that our fertility predictions can be ready for the next crises.’
While questions remain around fertility and family dynamics, lessons learnt within the studies of this special issue and others are helping population scientists advance our knowledge on how fertility and family dynamics evolved during the pandemic.
The introduction concludes, ‘Whatever our preconceived notions of how the pandemic “should” have affected birthrates, it is clear that we were all collectively mistaken on at least some margin. Some may see this as a failure of the population science community. We do not. Rather, we see it as an exciting opportunity to further develop theoretical frameworks, data, and tools ready to handle such unprecedented shocks.’
The full article, ‘Fertility and Family Dynamics in the Aftermath of the COVID-19-Pandemic’, can be found in the Population and Development Review special issue.
