Post

@econmsk.bsky.social and Levine's new WP on Fertility in high-income countries has two remarkable graphs www.nber.org/papers/w3398... The first shows the enormous shift up in share of women delaying / choosing to not have any kids across cohorts:

Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham

@paulgp.com

The second is the *inframarginal* choice -- the probability of having a second child conditional on having a first. Very limited changes here (if anything, going up), suggesting that a lot of the big fertility changes are on the extensive margin.

9/7/25, 12:05 pm2 reposts16 likes

Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham

@paulgp.com

9 July 2025

That kind of heterogeneity seems pretty remarkable.

Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham

@paulgp.com

9 July 2025

Also @econmsk.bsky.social these graphs are a tad hard to read!!

Nicholas D.E. Mark

@nickdemark.bsky.social

9 July 2025

That’s pretty standard fare for a fertility postponement transition.

Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham

@paulgp.com

9 July 2025

Good for me to know! Didn't realize. You mean the heterogeneity (no kids vs. inframarginal) is well known?

Nicholas D.E. Mark

@nickdemark.bsky.social

9 July 2025

There are definitely contexts where it doesnt happen, but in the US where the 2-child norm is strong it’s to be expected

Nicholas D.E. Mark

@nickdemark.bsky.social

9 July 2025

Yep! It’s partially a function of postponement being postponement of first birth to a point where two is still quite feasible. Most people in surveys who say that they want kids want 2 or more, so if we believe them, then it’s unlikely that things will fall as much as people make it seem

Nicholas D.E. Mark

@nickdemark.bsky.social

9 July 2025

For example, check out the trend in the US 1983-1987 cohorts. Why shouldn’t we expect that to hit the line from the 1968-72 cohorts? Kearney waves at “biological limits” but these cohorts are only ~38!

Nicholas D.E. Mark

@nickdemark.bsky.social

9 July 2025

Also not me being salty about having written a paper on cohort fertility in the US that this doesn’t engage with at all