Reasons for the decline in fertility rates. Demographic holes in Russia: definition, description, main ways out of the crisis
According to the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, today the world is undergoing another demographic transition, which is characterized by an increase in life expectancy and a decrease in the birth rate. World fertility rate in 1950-1955. was five births per woman, in 2010-2015. - twice smaller. The number of countries in which this ratio is 2.1 is growing. This is the so-called replacement level, at which a generation of parents gives birth to an equivalent number of children to replace them. In 1975-1980, only 21% of the world population had a birth rate at this level, in 2010-2015 it was already 46%. According to UN forecasts, already between 2025 and 2030, two-thirds of the world's population will live in countries where the birth rate falls below the replacement level.
Why is the birth rate declining?
Scientists have come to the conclusion that a decrease in the birth rate is not associated with a low standard of living. On the contrary, according to statistics, higher birth rates are observed in developing countries, and not in developed ones. That is, the poorer the country, the more children are born there. This was established back in the 19th century, when the French demographer Jacques Bertillon conducted a study of fertility in the districts of Paris, Berlin and Vienna and found that fewer children are born in more affluent families.
The American analytical company Stratfor writes that there are now too many elderly dependents and an underemployed population in the world. Therefore, a decrease in the birth rate can lead to negative consequences in the global economy. The company identifies the following reasons for the fall in the birth rate: changing religious values, the emancipation of women, the growth of their employment, higher costs for childcare and education.
A 2017 report from the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs notes that the fall in the overall birth rate is associated with the aging of the world's population. Demographers also attribute the decline to a reduction in child mortality, high access to modern contraceptives, and an increased desire of women to delay having children in order to get an education and build a career.
American anthropologists led by Paul Hooper in a 2016 article, they write that the listed factors take place, but the real reason for the decline in fertility is competition for high social status and the possession of prestigious things. The authors of the study note that the sharpest decline in fertility occurs in countries with market economies, where there is competition for jobs and an excess of consumer goods. Anthropologists argued this hypothesis on the example of the Tsimane tribe living in the north of Bolivia. The average Tsimane family has nine children, but those who have moved to cities closer to the Spanish-speaking population, the average number of children per family drops to three.
About what else are the reasons for the decline in the birth rate, AiF.ru told Aminat Magomedova, Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Population, Faculty of Economics, Moscow State University. Lomonosov. “There are different approaches to explaining the historical evolution of fertility. Within the framework of the theory of demographic transition, the decline in fertility is an element of the global demographic process of transition to a more economical mode of reproduction. The concept of demographic homeostasis considers the dynamics of fertility in connection with mortality rates. The higher the mortality rate in a society, the more children are needed to at least reproduce themselves. And as the death rate goes down, the birth rate goes down accordingly,” says Magomedova.
One approach is the utility concept, which explains the birth of children by their utility. “Within the framework of the economic utility of children, a change in the direction of the transfer of benefits “from children to parents” to “from parents to children” is considered. If earlier children were profitable as a labor force, it was believed that the more children, the stronger the family economically, now we understand that it is children who require maximum expenses, time, effort, energy. There is also an explanation in terms of psychological utility. It is believed that even one child can satisfy the psychological need for children in modern society. To do this, they do not need to be in large numbers, ”says the expert.
Magomedova also notes that the decline in fertility is associated with the emergence of personal interests, individualization of the sphere of fertility, less influence of traditions and norms on the decision to have a child. An increase in the proportion of educated women and an increase in the employment of women in a post-industrial society lead to the postponement of the birth of children, sometimes to the refusal to have them.
The demographic transition - the process of reducing the birth rate and mortality - is an ambiguous phenomenon. On the one hand, it helped raise the standard of living in many countries, brought women into the labor market who no longer have so many children. Investments in education and health of people have grown. These "windows of opportunity" will be available for several decades to developing countries in which the demographic transition has recently begun. Developed countries, the pioneers of this process, are already reaping its benefits: they are rapidly aging, they spend a lot on pensions and have entered the peak of their birth rate, a leading Spanish demographer, professor at the Complutense University of Madrid argues in the HSE Demographic Review magazine. David S. Reher.
Both progress and considerable costs - this is how the “dry residue” of the demographic transition can be characterized. Its waves (the second of which occurred in developed countries in the 1950s-1980s) always resonate with socio-economic changes in society. Moreover, according to many experts, the decline in mortality and fertility is one of the root causes of socio-economic transformations. Professor, Faculty of Political Science and Sociology, Complutense University David S. Reher gives the demographic transition just such a meaning, specifying, however, that this process is still part of the overall picture of the modernization of society in developed countries (the expert dates it to 1850-1975). Signs of modernization are rising living standards and education, urbanization, women's emancipation, the displacement of agriculture by industry and the service sector, and the emergence of a consumer society.
Now that the pioneering countries of the demographic transition are already fully confronted with its derivatives in society, it is already possible to accurately assess its pros and cons, notes David Reher in the article “Economic and social consequences of the demographic transition”, published in the journal Demographic Review. The article is constructed dialectically: on the one hand, the author recognizes certain "gains" of the demographic transition, on the other hand, he immediately finds the insidious underside of these phenomena.
The economy has benefited from demographics
For many reasons - from the development of immunology thanks to Louis Pasteur, the retreat of epidemics, the accumulation of knowledge about competent child care and ending with better nutrition for people - in the twentieth century there was a process of reducing child and infant mortality. This began to influence reproductive decisions: the drop in mortality was followed by a decrease in the birth rate, associated with the conscious regulation of reproduction. Women began to give birth to fewer children. This made it possible to devote more attention to those few heirs who were born, and also freed up time for the mothers of families for self-realization and allowed them to go to work. According to some estimates, as a result of the demographic transition, women began to spend on average not 70% of their adult lives on bearing and raising young children, but five times less - only 14%.
Thus, at the individual level, solutions related to birth control appeared.
At the same time, adult mortality also declined as living standards improved: both nutrition and health care improved.
Since the decrease in mortality preceded the decrease in the birth rate and the second process was slower, the countries leading the demographic transition managed to use “demographic dividends” in the economy. Their essence is that the number of generations born is still growing, and the population remains quite young and able-bodied.
As long as this period lasted, and the economy was able to create the right amount of new jobs in response to growing demand, there was a “window of opportunity” for a sharp economic recovery. A similar strong impact of demographics on the economy can be seen in the example of countries that have made a sharp leap in development relatively recently: these are the “Asian tigers” (South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan), as well as Iran and Brazil. The "young" sex and age structure of the population usually affects the growth of labor productivity, the researcher adds.
However, the period of “demographic dividends” passes with time. Between the late 1950s and the early 1980s, the number of newborn cohorts began to decline. This means a reduction in the population of working and reproductive ages. Thus, the demographic transition inexorably leads to the aging of the population and increasing the burden on the economy of the elderly.
Population aging has led to the creation of pension systems
At the same time, if there were no such demographic transformations, they should have been invented, if only for the sake of the emergence of pension systems. The importance of the latter cannot be overestimated: they remain an integral component of relative social harmony.
The accelerated aging of the population is becoming a challenge to all social systems based on intergenerational income transfers. A generous redistribution of funds is proving problematic. To mitigate this effect, according to some experts, may be that "saving over the life cycle in conditions of low birth and death rates will lead to a higher ratio of capital to labor, which will at least partially reduce the burden of the dependency burden on the elderly," the article notes. . Long-term accumulation of human capital can also lead to an increase in living standards, adds David Reher.
Migration solves the problem of labor shortage
The demographic transition stimulated migration, which became a more or less effective means of redistributing the population. The sending countries thereby reduced the burden on the population's resources, more successfully solved the problems of employment of residents and received fuel for the economy through remittances from migrants to their homeland. The host countries solved the problem of labor shortages.
At the same time, now in a number of countries, the researcher recalls, due to the excessive migration flow, the recipient countries are increasingly tightening their entry policies.
Demographic transition popularized education
The described demographic processes have led to the fact that women also have the opportunity to "re-educate", and investments in the education of children have grown, Reer writes. “The movement towards universal education for children has been a hallmark of the most developed societies for a century, and more recently governments and families in the developing world have also pursued this goal,” the researcher points out. In general, parents have become more attentive to the quality of their children's education.
As for women, along with the demographic transition, the factors for the spread of their work were largely the consequences of the Second World War, access to economic opportunities in the service sector (the male “monopoly” ended here), the increased role of public institutions - primarily schools - in the education children, as well as the increasing importance of the consumer society.
Marriage is bursting at the seams
In fact, the role of women in society has changed radically due to the demographic transition - it has become more active, the researcher writes. However, these transformations led to negative consequences - the devaluation of the institution of marriage.
Relations between husband and wife, men and women have become more “volatile”. Emancipated ladies began to perceive marriage differently. It has ceased to be lifelong, it became possible to replace the "wrong" partner. Life strategies in this sense have acquired great variability.
Benefit for developing countries
Reducing population growth rates in developing countries (by which the author of the article means China, Costa Rica, Iran, Morocco, Tunisia, Venezuela, Turkey and a number of other countries) will allow them to significantly improve the standard of living of people and modernize, David Reer is convinced. In almost all of these countries, the health of adults and children is improving, the level of education and the proportion of working women are growing, and society is being significantly restructured. In these countries, economic growth has so far outpaced population growth by a margin.
At the same time, population aging in developing countries will go much faster than in Europe, the expert noted. This is due to the higher rates of decline in fertility and mortality than in the countries leading the demographic transition. In almost every developing country in this sample, the number of births declined steadily at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries. Over the past 15-20 years, the total number of births in China and Tunisia has decreased by 31%, in Iran - by 33%, in Morocco - by 19%, Reer points out.
If this trend continues (and there is every reason to expect it), then the rapid aging of the population will begin, the expert writes. In a few decades, these countries will face a decline in the population of working and reproductive ages, which will affect both the labor market and the future number of births. Thus, for developing countries, the most important question is how long the demographic window of opportunity for the economy will be open.
Hurry up to take advantage of demographic bonuses
This promising window is unlikely to be open for too long, says David Raer. Only for China, which still has a relatively young population amid state birth control policies, could the window of opportunity last up to 40 years. However, in China, the prospects are not easy (see the article “China's economy depends on its demographics” about this) - a decrease in the proportion of the working-age population, which is expected in the next decade.
The rest of the countries, the expert believes, have been given even less time to take advantage of the chances of socio-economic transformations. This period ranges from 10 to 30 years. “It is difficult to resist the fear that when the window of opportunity closes, the levels of social, economic and institutional development in many of these countries may not be sufficient,” the researcher emphasizes. In any case, they must mobilize their forces and complete their development process as quickly as possible, concludes David Reher.
MOSCOW, Jan 31— RIA Novosti, Igor Karmazin. According to Rosstat, the birth rate in Russia has fallen to a ten-year low. For the first time in recent years, a natural population decline has been recorded in the country. RIA Novosti figured out why this happened and what to expect in the coming years.
Back to the 1990s
"The birth rate depends on the number of young women of reproductive age. Last year, the smallest generation in Russia, those born in 1999, reached their 18th birthday. Throughout the second half of the 1990s and the first half of the 2000s, the birth rate was extremely low. The increase began only after 2006. We had absolutely wild fluctuations associated with socio-economic upheavals.The second half of the 1980s - 1986-1987 - 2.5 million births! Then the fall - by the mid-1990s it was 1.3-1, 4 million births a year. Finally, 1.2 million in 1999," says Elizarov.
The expert emphasizes that now the generation of those who were born during the demographic crisis is approaching the age of childbearing. “They give birth to children now most often at the age of 25-26. Those who were born in 1992-1993 approached this milestone, and at that time a fall was already recorded. Now you yourself understand that this is not the end,” says Elizarov.
women men
At the same time, the explanation of the situation is not limited to the problems of the 1990s. Yes, there are fewer women, but every single woman gives birth to less. The very approach of citizens to building a family has changed, priorities have shifted. According to the same Rosstat, the average age of a Russian mother is 26 years. This is five years more than in the 1990s. During this time, the interval between the appearance of the first and second children in the family also almost doubled. In the 1990s, it was an average of three years, and in 2017 it was already 5.6 years. Thus, the birth of the second and subsequent children moved beyond the 30th anniversary of the mother.
Professor of the Department of Labor and Social Policy of the Institute of Public Administration and Management (IGSU) of the RANEPA Alexander Shcherbakov points out that the reason should also be sought in the low standard of living and the desire to improve the well-being of the family through work and one's own labor. In addition, Russian women in general now have much more career ambitions. “We have a paradoxical situation: women think about their gender purpose only in the second place. They share a more masculine outlook on life, where a career is in the first place. And modern men are more and more like women. They often do not set themselves the task of financially providing for their families ", Shcherbakov warns.
The country's authorities understand that the situation is very serious, and take action. So, in November 2017, Russian President Vladimir Putin about the "reset" of the country's demographic policy. In December, the head of state signed a law on monthly payments to families after the birth of their first child. On average, the amount in 2018 will be, depending on the region, 10,523 rubles, in 2019 - 10,836 rubles, in 2020 - 11,143 rubles. The payment is targeted, when accruing, the income of each family is taken into account. The right to receive money is granted to those whose average income per family member does not exceed one and a half times the subsistence minimum.
In addition, in December, the president signed a law extending the maternity capital program until the end of 2021. At the birth of a second and third child, citizens of Russia are entitled to a payment. Its size in 2017 is 453,026 rubles.
They don't want sex
The solution of economic issues, however, is not a panacea. Just look at global trends. Of the 21 countries with the highest birth rates, 19 are in Africa, according to the UN. All European states belong to the countries with the lowest birth rate, although it is clear that the economic situation there is much better than on the African continent.
Sexologist, head of the Center for Sexual Health Anna Koteneva believes that specific modern morality affects the decline in fertility. "Too much unnecessary information, too much fuss. A modern person lives according to the principle of "here and now", "even a flood after me." Everyone wants to enjoy life, responsibility, including for children, is perceived as a burden. Selfishness, individualism, independence rule even infantilism,” she says.
Koteneva adds that current technologies seem to open up endless possibilities for communication, many moral prohibitions have been lifted. "But the current generation does not know how to communicate, and often does not want to. The value of physiological intimacy has decreased. Previously, sex for young people was something forbidden, mysterious, desirable. Now it is available, but it has become one with other pleasures, entertainment, intimate the relationship has depreciated," says the sexologist.
Be that as it may, forecasts for the near future are not too optimistic. Rosstat warns that natural population decline is expected every year until 2035, and the peak will be in 2025-2028. This trend will be balanced by migration growth, but the population of Russia, demographers believe, will still decline during this period.
The demographic catastrophe of the 1990s and early 2000s has receded. But the number of Russian people continues to decline, and migrants from Central Asia come to take their place. We need to react. Not only to the state, but also to ourselves ...
“Men become feminine”: why the birth rate has fallen in Russia
According to Rosstat, the birth rate in Russia fell to ten year low. For the first time in recent years in The country experienced a natural population decline. RIA Novosti figured out why this happened and what to expect in coming years.
Back in 1990s
According to report Rosstat, in 2017 -m in Russia on light appeared 1.69 million children. It's on 203 thousand or on the 10.7% lessthan a year earlier. According to this indicator, 2017 was the worst year for ten years - in last time fewer newborns in Russia was only 2007. The decline in the birth rate is observed in all regions of Russia except Chechnya. They gave birth actively, on 2016 level — 29 890 people. Max drop - in Nenets Autonomous Okrug (minus 16.5%), followed by — Chuvashia (minus 15%).
But there is also reasons for optimism. Mortality in Russia in also dropped markedly last year. year in 1.824 million people died in the country. It's on 63 thousand less than in 2016 — lowest inXXIcentury indicator. significantly reduced and infant mortality. In 2016 on 1000 births, 6 children died, in 2017 — 5,5.
However, all this is not helped to keep the natural population growth. fixed natural decline - minus 134.4 thousand people. In 2016, it was plus 5.4 thousand. But the total population of Russia still increased over migratory flow account. For a year in The country has added 200 thousand visitors. The main donor countries were Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan And Ukraine.
Surprisingly, these results for no experts become. Scientific Supervisor of the Laboratory of Population Economics and demography of the Faculty of Economics of Moscow State University Valery Elizarov says that demographic difficulties are inevitable as at least in next 15 years. He calls the socio-economic situation of the 1990s the main reason.
“The birth rate depends on number of young women in reproductive age. IN last year the 18th anniversary was reached by the smallest in Russian generation - born in 1999 throughout the second half of the 1990s and the first half of the zero years, the birth rate was extremely low. The increase began only after 2006. We had absolutely wild swings associated with socio-economic shocks. Second half of the 1980s - 1986-1987 - 2.5 million births! Then fall - to mid-1990s, there were 1.3-1.4 million births in year. Finally, 1.2 million 1999”, Elizarov notes.
The expert points out that now the age of childbearing is the generation of those who were born in period of demographic crisis. “Give birth children now most often 25-26 years old. Those who were born in 1992-1993 and at this time, a fall was already recorded. Now you yourself understand that this is not yet the end", Elizarov says.
women men
Together with only the problems of the 1990s explain the situation exhausted. Yes, there are fewer women, but because and each individual woman gives birth less. The attitude of citizens towards building a family, priorities have shifted. According to data the same Rosstat, average age of a Russian mother - 26 years. It's on five years more than 1990s. During this time, the interval between appearances in family of the first and second child. In the 1990s it was three years on average but in 2017 - already 5.6 years. Thus, the birth of the second and subsequent children moved behind mother's 30th birthday.
Professor of the Department of Labor and social politicians Institute of Public Service and management (IGSU) RANEPA Alexander Shcherbakov points out that the cause should also be sought in low standard of living And striving for at the expense of work, own labor to improve the well-being of the family. In addition, at Russian women in in general, now much more career ambitions. “We have a paradoxical situation: about their gender purpose, women think only in second turn. They share more male look at a lifewhere is the career at first place. And modern men are more and more like women. They often don't set themselves the task of financially providing for the family, Shcherbakov warns.
The authorities of the country understand that the situation is very serious, and take action. Yes, in November 2017 Russian President Vladimir Putin announced about the "reset" of the country's demographic policy. In December, the head of state signed law about monthly payments to families after the birth of the first child. On average, the amount 2018 will be, in depending on region, 10 523 rubles, in 2019 — 10 836 rubles, in 2020 — 11 143 rubles. Direct payment, The calculation takes into account the income of each family. Right to receiving money is provided to those who is the average income for family member is not exceeds one and a half times the subsistence minimum.
Besides, in December, the President signed a law on extension until the end of 2021 maternity capital programs. At the birth of the second third child, citizens of Russia are entitled to payment. Her size in 2017 — 453 026 rubles.
no sex want
The solution of economic issues, however, is not panacea. It is enough to look at global trends. According to the data UN, from 21 countries with the highest birth rates 19 are in Africa. All European states belong to countries with the lowest birth rate, although it is clear that the economic situation much better there than African continent.
Sexologist, head of the Sexual Health Center Anna Koteneva believes that the decline in fertility affects the specific modern morality. “Too much unnecessary information, too much fuss. Modern man lives in principle "here and now”, “after me even a flood”. Everyone wants to enjoy life, responsibility, in including for children are perceived as burden. Selfishness, individualism, independence, even infantilism rules“, she says.
Koteneva adds that current technologies seem to open up endless possibilities for communication, many moral prohibitions have been lifted. “But the current generation is not able to communicate often doesn't want it. The value of physical intimacy has declined. Used to be sex for young people was something forbidden, mysterious, desirable. It's available now, but got up in one row with other pleasures, entertainment, intimate relationships depreciated”, says the sexologist.
No matter how was, forecasts for the near future is not too optimistic. Rosstat warns: natural population decline is expected every year up to 2035, but the peak will be 2025-2028 years. This trend will be counterbalanced by migration growth, but population of Russia, demographers believe, in the specified period will still be reduced.
Demography: Russia is being let down by the "women's issue"
The Federal State Statistics Service of Russia published the Demographic forecast before 2035. By According to the forecast of Rosstat, it is expected that the population of Russia by 2036 will remain at 2017 level - 147 million people, plus or minus a few percent. At the same time, the share of the working-age population will remain almost constant. - 55-56%. Such data is not enough to number of working ages see internal changes. After all, if in within these 55–56%, there will be an increase in the number of the young part to age 40, and a decrease in the number of the older part of the working age, then a favorable demographic future for Russia lies ahead. AND quite different awaits us if, on the contrary, the young part will decrease.
Developing the Rosstat forecast, (what method - about see below), it is possible to determine the dynamics of the number of young ages up to 2040.
separate men and women on graphs do not make much sense, since recessions and rises in dynamics of the future number of 20-year-olds, 30-year-olds and 40 year olds almost double. BUT number of men and women in ages from 20 to 40 years differs only by a few percent.
What does this diagram make clear?
First. The number of 20-year-olds will increase to 2035 but slightly.
Second. Number of 30-year-olds in will begin to decline in the coming years. And in in the first half of 2020, the contraction will be very strong - about 10% annually.
Third. Number of 40-year-olds up to second half of 2020 will increase. But this increase will be small. BUT in 2030s will begin to decline, from about toy the same speed as the reduction of 30-year-olds in 2020 years.
So the total number of the young part of the working age on between 2018 and 2040 will decrease.
IN conclusion
IN In recent years, official publications have been full of peppy statements about the emerging long-term favorable trend in the demography of the Russian people.
IN In Russia, the Russian people make up about 80% of the total population. So the results of the spectral analysis of the Rosstat forecast can be extended to Russian people.
Like or dislike, but for peppy statements about the emerging long-term favorable trend in the demography of the Russian people - there is no reason.
For a long time it was believed that the decline in fertility is due to the economic difficulties that arise with the advent of each subsequent child. When we noticed in the 60s that the birth rate was declining, they began to conduct sociological studies, using questionnaires to find out the conditions for the existence of families.
To the question: “why don’t you have more children?”, Answers were given:
1) there is not enough salary;
2) a problem with housing conditions;
3) it is difficult to arrange children in children's institutions;
4) inconvenient mode of operation;
5) lack of help from grandparents;
6) illness of one of the spouses;
7) unhealthy existing children;
8) conflicts between spouses.
In general, they thought that if we help solve these problems, then the birth rate will rise. It would seem that everything is clear. But to the question: “under what conditions would you have another child?” - very many, especially those with two children, answered: "under no circumstances."
Gradually, experts began to come to the conclusion that it is impossible to study the decline in the birth rate only from the point of view of interference. A number of authors (V.A. Borisov, A.N. Antonov, V.M. Medkov, V.N. Arkhangelsky, A.B. Sinelnikov, L.E. Darsky) developed the concept of "family needs for children". It consists in the fact that spouses do not at all want to have an unlimited number of children. The desire of a person to procreate is not biological, but social character, and manifests itself in very different ways at different times and in different conditions.
The theory of the institutional crisis of the family explains why the birth rate worldwide falls to one or two children, which automatically means depopulation. According to this theory, people were only interested in having many children in the pre-industrial era. In those days, the expression "the family is the cell of society" corresponded much more to the real state of affairs than in our era. The family really acted as a miniature model of society.
The family was a production team (for the families of peasants and artisans, who made up the vast majority of the population). Children from a very early age participated in family production and were of undoubted economic value to their parents.
The family was a school in which children received from their parents all the knowledge and work skills they needed for their future independent life.
The family was an institution of social security. In those days, there were no pensions. Therefore, the elderly and the disabled who lost their ability to work could only rely on help from their children and grandchildren. Those who did not have a family had to beg for alms.
The family was a place of leisure. As a rule, family members rested and had fun together.
In the family, that is, in marriage, the sexual need and the need for children were satisfied. Extramarital affairs were condemned by public opinion. It was very difficult to hide them from others in rural areas or small towns, especially if these connections were of a long and regular nature.
The presence of children (primarily sons) was a necessary condition in order to be considered a full-fledged member of society. Childlessness was condemned by public opinion, and married couples without children suffered psychologically from their inferiority.
Children also performed an emotional and psychological function, as parents experienced joy and a sense of spiritual comfort from communicating with them.
Thus, for all their shortcomings, traditional families basically coped with their functions: they provided for themselves economically, carried out the socialization of new generations, took care of the older generation and produced as many children as were enough (even with the then very high mortality rate) for the physical survival of mankind. At the same time, the population in different historical periods either grew or was relatively stable.
Of course, during catastrophes - wars, crop failures, epidemics, etc. - the population was sharply reduced, but subsequently the high birth rate compensated for all these losses. Under normal conditions, that is, in the absence of such cataclysms, there has never been a steady trend towards a decrease in the population due to the excess of deaths over births for a long time - this became possible only in our era.
With the onset of industrialization, the situation changed dramatically. The family lost its production functions and ceased to be a labor collective. Family members - husband, wife and grown children (the use of child labor is especially characteristic of the era of early capitalism) begin to work outside the home. Each of them receives an individual salary, regardless of the composition of the family and its existence in general.
Accordingly, there is no need for a sovereign head of the family as the head of family production.
In addition, the complication of knowledge necessary for socialization and subsequent labor activity leads to an extension of the training period. If in a traditional peasant family, already 7-year-old children became good helpers for parents, then in a modern urban family, children go to school until they are 17-18 years old, and if they then enter institutes and universities, they remain dependents of their parents until they are 22-23 or more. years.
But even after they start working, they do not give their parents their earnings and generally leave the parental family at the first opportunity. Their desire for secession is especially intensified after marriage, and, unlike the era of majorate and minority, when the son inheriting property remained with his parents, all children are separated and only housing difficulties could prevent this (which is very typical for our country).
So, in the pre-industrial era, the economic component of the need for children played an important role. But if it were the only one, the birth rate today would drop to zero altogether. The economic value of children in modern conditions is expressed not even by zero, but by a negative value, and a considerable one at that.
The emotional-psychological component of the need for a family and children is that the family and children give a person emotional satisfaction. In marital relationships, this satisfaction is manifested in the sexual and psychological spheres. Communication between parents and children brings joy, fills life with meaning.
That is why children do not stop being born even when, from an economic point of view, they no longer bring income to their parents, but, on the contrary, only losses.
Demographic policy, using only economic levers (benefits and allowances for families with several children, taxes on childlessness), has nowhere produced lasting results. Although quite popular "the concept of interfering with the birth of children" widespread, including in scientific circles. It is dominated by the view that the birth rate is too low due to difficult material living conditions.
From this follows the conclusion that it is necessary to alleviate these conditions by providing families with a small child or several children with various benefits and allowances, and the birth rate will increase so much that the threat of depopulation will be eliminated. Such a point of view is based only on worldly logic and “common sense” considerations, but is not supported by statistics. A low birth rate, which does not provide even a simple replacement of generations, is observed in all economically prosperous Western countries. The decline in the birth rate itself occurs not only in conditions of an economic crisis, as is the case in today's Russia, but also in conditions of economic recovery.
It has been two centuries since demographers became aware of the "feedback paradox". When the birth rate was very high and its artificial restriction in marriage was not practiced, the average number of children born in families of all social groups differed little, and the difference between them was mainly due to differences in the average age of first marriage among women belonging to different social groups. groups. The average number of surviving children also depended on social differences in mortality. The decline in child mortality began earlier among the most educated, cultural and wealthy groups of the population.
Therefore, in these groups (earlier than in others), parents gained confidence that all their children would survive, and began to practice artificial birth control. The birth rate first decreases among the social elite, as well as among the intelligentsia, then among the workers, and only last of all among the peasants. At a time when society as a whole is undergoing a transition from a high birth rate to a low one, the effect of the “feedback” mechanism becomes most noticeable. However, after the process of fertility decline spreads to all social groups, and its level no longer provides a simple replacement of generations, this feedback weakens and may disappear altogether.
Some authors, resorting to data juggling, tried to prove that in this case the feedback is replaced by a direct one, and rich families have, on average, more children than poor ones. But even if such differences appear in the average number of children between families belonging to different social groups, these differences remain small and unimportant, since none of these groups is already able to reproduce itself in a natural way. Under such conditions, it does not really matter in which social groups of the population the birth rate is higher and in which it is lower, since in all groups it is still below the line of simple replacement of generations.
In addition to the concept of interference, there is the concept of child-centrism(its author is the French scientist A. Landry, and the most active supporter in our country is A.G. Vishnevsky). The child becomes the center of the modern family, which implies one-childhood - this is the concept of child-centrism. Nevertheless, regardless of the different points of view of demographers, one thing can be recognized - the current family does not think about the death of children. If earlier there was a very high probability of the death of young children, now few people take into account that a son or daughter will die before their parents. If the countless media reports of accidents were sure to point out the family circumstances of the dead and mention the episodes when they were the only children of their parents, many families would understand that one child is too little.
One of the main factors in the decline in the birth rate is the destruction of the traditional institution of marriage as a contract in which the husband undertakes to support the family, and the wife to bear children and run the household. Now sexual and friendly communication is possible even without joint housekeeping, obligations, etc. Illegitimate (formally) children in many countries of Western Europe make up from a third to a half of all those born, in Russia - almost 30%. Everywhere out-of-wedlock births are growing, but their growth does not compensate for the decline in marital births - on the whole, the birth rate is falling.
So the relationship between the problem of declining fertility and the destruction of marriage is very strong. But there is no direct connection between the birth rate and mortality rate in our time. In modern Russia, population decline is determined not so much by high mortality as by low birth rates. The nature of generational replacement depends on mortality only when the level of the latter is high in childhood and young ages, and a significant part of each generation does not live up to the average age of parents at the birth of children. In our time, more than 95% of born girls live to this age.
A further reduction in mortality is extremely important for humanitarian and economic reasons, but has little effect on the nature of generational replacement. With a total fertility rate of 1.2-1.3 children, which is observed in today's Russia, the population will decline even if the average life expectancy reaches 80 years. Therefore, in order to increase the birth rate to a level that provides at least a simple replacement of generations, it is necessary to influence not only the economic component, but also the social and emotional-psychological components.