IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dem/demres/v53y2025i29.html

Reassessing the U-shaped relationship between gender equality and fertility: A replication and extension of Kolk’s (2019) study using comprehensive gender equality measures

Author

Listed:
  • Haohao Lei

    (University of Oxford)

Abstract

Background: While theories predict that fertility initially declines and subsequently rebounds with rising gender equality, previous empirical studies have produced mixed results, partly due to differences in gender equality measurement and methodological approaches. Objective: This study replicates Kolk’s (2019) research, which found weak evidence for a U-shaped relationship between public-sphere gender equality and fertility. The study re-evaluates these findings using data covering the period 1950–2003 and incorporating a broader, multidimensional measure of gender equality, the Historical Gender Equality Index. Results: The analysis identifies a conditional U-shaped relationship between gender equality and fertility, meaning that the expected fertility rebound at high gender equality emerges only when controlling for long-term fertility-decline trends and fertility tempo distortions. Conclusions: The replication provides evidence that the previously identified weak support for a U-shaped relationship may stem from the choice of gender equality indicators. By employing a more comprehensive measure and controlling for period and country fixed effects, this analysis reveals a conditional U-shaped relationship. However, this modest fertility rebound at high gender equality levels is insufficient to reverse the broader, long-term decline in fertility observed across advanced societies. Contribution: This study reveals that the weak support for the U-shaped relationship identified in previous research stems from the selection of gender equality measures. By adopting a more appropriate measure of gender equality, this analysis aligns empirical evidence with contemporary theories. Furthermore, the differing results between previous studies and this analysis emphasise the critical role of gender equality in shaping fertility trends in both the private and public spheres.

Suggested Citation

  • Haohao Lei, 2025. "Reassessing the U-shaped relationship between gender equality and fertility: A replication and extension of Kolk’s (2019) study using comprehensive gender equality measures," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 53(29), pages 937-968.
    • Handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:53:y:2025:i:29
    DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2025.53.29
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol53/29/53-29.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4054/DemRes.2025.53.29?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter McDonald, 2000. "Gender Equity in Theories of Fertility Transition," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 26(3), pages 427-439, September.
    2. Frances Goldscheider & Eva Bernhardt & Trude Lappegård, 2015. "The Gender Revolution: A Framework for Understanding Changing Family and Demographic Behavior," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 41(2), pages 207-239, June.
    3. Peter McDonald, 2013. "Societal foundations for explaining fertility: Gender equity," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 28(34), pages 981-994.
    4. N. Ryder, 1964. "The process of demographic translation," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 1(1), pages 74-82, March.
    5. Selin Dilli & Sarah G. Carmichael & Auke Rijpma, 2019. "Introducing the Historical Gender Equality Index," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 31-57, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ester Lazzari, 2021. "Changing trends between education, childlessness and completed fertility: a cohort analysis of Australian women born in 1952–1971," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 417-441, December.
    2. Thaís García-Pereiro & Letizia Mencarini & Raffaella Patimo & Maria Letizia Tanturri, 2025. "Women's Domestic Burden and Gendered Fertility Intentions in Italy: The Role of Parity and Child's Sex," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 41(1), pages 1-41, December.
    3. Ansgar Hudde, 2018. "Societal Agreement on Gender Role Attitudes and Childlessness in 38 Countries," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 34(5), pages 745-767, December.
    4. Martin Kolk, 2019. "Weak support for a U-shaped pattern between societal gender equality and fertility when comparing societies across time," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 40(2), pages 27-48.
    5. Soo-Yeon Yoon, 2017. "The influence of a supportive environment for families on women’s fertility intentions and behavior in South Korea," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 36(7), pages 227-254.
    6. Sunnee Billingsley & Gerda Neyer & Katharina Wesolowski, 2022. "Social Investment Policies and Childbearing Across 20 Countries: Longitudinal and Micro-Level Analyses," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 38(5), pages 951-974, December.
    7. Youngcho Lee, 2022. "Is Leave for Fathers Pronatalist? A Mixed-Methods Study of the Impact of Fathers’ Uptake of Parental Leave on Couples’ Childbearing Intentions in South Korea," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 41(4), pages 1471-1500, August.
    8. Thomas Anderson & Hans-Peter Kohler, 2015. "Low Fertility, Socioeconomic Development, and Gender Equity," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 41(3), pages 381-407, September.
    9. Hudde, Ansgar, 2016. "Fertility Is Low When There Is No Societal Agreement on a Specific Gender Role Model," EconStor Preprints 142175, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    10. Trude Lappegård, 2020. "Future fertility trends are shaped at the intersection of gender and social stratification," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 18(1), pages 43-48.
    11. Barbara S. Okun & Liat Raz‐Yurovich, 2019. "Housework, Gender Role Attitudes, and Couples' Fertility Intentions: Reconsidering Men's Roles in Gender Theories of Family Change," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 45(1), pages 169-196, March.
    12. Liat Raz-Yurovich & Barbara S. Okun, 2024. "Are highly educated partners really more gender egalitarian? A couple-level analysis of social class differentials in attitudes and behaviors," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 50(34), pages 1005-1038.
    13. Henrik-Alexander Schubert & Christian Dudel & Marina Kolobova & Mikko Myrskylä, 2023. "Revisiting the J-shape: human development and fertility in the United States," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2023-022, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    14. Jolene Tan, 2023. "Perceptions towards pronatalist policies in Singapore," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 1-27, September.
    15. Leen Marynissen & Eleonora Mussino & Jonas Wood & Ann-Zofie Duvander, 2019. "Fathers’ Parental Leave Uptake in Belgium and Sweden: Self-Evident or Subject to Employment Characteristics?," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-21, November.
    16. Fleckenstein, Timo & Lee, Soohyun Christine & Mohun Himmelweit, Sam, 2023. "Labour market dualization, permanent insecurity and fertility: the case of ultra-low fertility in South Korea," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117935, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. José Henrique Costa Monteiro da Silva & Everton E. Lima & Maria Coleta Ferreira Albino de Oliveira, 2022. "Educational pairings and fertility decline in Brazil: An analysis using cohort fertility," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 46(6), pages 147-178.
    18. Julia Hellstrand & Jessica Nisén & Mikko Myrskylä, 2022. "Less Partnering, Less Children, or Both? Analysis of the Drivers of First Birth Decline in Finland Since 2010," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 38(2), pages 191-221, May.
    19. Katharina Wesolowski & Gerda Neyer & Sunnee Billingsley, 2020. "Disentangling the complexity of family policies: SPIN data with an application to Lithuania and Sweden, 1995–2015," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 43(42), pages 1235-1262.
    20. Serap Kavas & Arland Thornton, 2025. "The influence of developmental idealism on Turkish parents’ intention to continue childbearing," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 1-47, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:53:y:2025:i:29. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Editorial Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/ .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.