IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Should governments in Europe be more aggressive in pushing for gender equality to raise fertility? The second "YES"

  • Livia Sz. Oláh

    (Stockholm University)

Registered author(s):

    This paper is based on my contribution to a debate, organized by MPIDR, on the question displayed in the title above. I was asked to present arguments for the "yes"-response (together with Laurent Toulemon, and arguing against the "no"-side represented by Gerda Neyer and Dimiter Philipov). As pointed out in the paper, the most important theoretical reasoning relevant for this question is the gender equity theory. A number of studies provide sound empirical support to it, as discussed in the paper in details, and thereby also a rationale for a positive impact of increased gender equality on fertility. As the dual-earner family is here to stay, and given the well-known negative consequences of long-term very low fertility for a society, pushing for gender equality seems to be a reasonable strategy to be considered aiming for sustainable societal development.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol24/9/24-9.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany in its journal Demographic Research.

    Volume (Year): 24 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 9 (February)
    Pages: 217-224

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:24:y:2011:i:9
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.demogr.mpg.de/

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:24:y:2011:i:9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Editorial Office)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.