CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 90Family Dynamics and RelationshipsDemographic Trends and Gender PreferencesGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics

Postindustrial Fertility Ideals, Intentions, and Gender Inequality: A Comparative Qualitative Analysis

Open access
Brinton, Mary C., Bueno, Xiana, Oláh, Livia, Hellum, Merete·2018·Population and Development Review
DOI 10.1111/padr.12128
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We are grateful for financial support from the National Science Foundation (grant no. SES1123885) to Mary Brinton for the Japanese, Spanish, and U.S. portions of the project and from the Reischauer Institute of Japanese Studies and the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs at Harvard University for additional support of the Japan portion of the project. We also appreciate the financial support from the Agency for Administration of University and Research Grants (grant # 2013-BP-A-00043) and from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Grant Agreement No. 657030 to Xiana Bueno for the Spanish portion of the project, and the financial support from Riksbankens Jubileumsfond/Swedish Foundation for the Humanities and Social Sciences (grant no. P11-1049:1) to Livia Oláh for the Swedish portion. An earlier draft of the paper benefited from the constructive comments of Eunsil Oh, Yun Zhou, and an anonymous reviewer.\n\t\t\tFertility ideals remain centered on two children in most postindustrial societies, presenting a puzzle for demographers interested in very low fertility. This paper explores the conditions producing a gap between fertility ideals and intentions among young highly-educated adults in different postindustrial contexts. We employ in-depth interviews to analyze reasoning about fertility ideals and intentions in two countries with very low fertility (Japan and Spain) and two with slightly higher fertility (the U.S. and Sweden). We find that American and Swedish female interviewees are more likely than those in Japan and Spain to cite work-family conflict as a reason for their ideals-intentions gap. Our results also suggest that gender inequality is more important in generating low fertility intentions among highly-educated interviewees in Japan than Spain. Taken together, these findings suggest complexities in how gender inequality affects fertility intentions among the highly-educated in postindustrial contexts.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/padr.12128

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In qualitative studies, participants' narratives of their obstacles to fertility include financial considerations (cost of children and cost of childcare), job stability, housing, work-family conflict, and gender equality.

    “This includes financial considerations (cost of children and cost of childcare), job stability, housing, workfamily conflict, and gender equality.”

    From Family Policies in Low Fertility Countries: Evidence and Reflections (2025) · cites this paper as Brinton et al. 2018

    The “Reasoning for ideals and intentions” section reports interviewees’ concerns about the cost of raising children, childcare costs, stable jobs, and housing. The section on gender inequality reports work-family conflict in women’s accounts, but says gender-inequality concerns were barely evident in interviewees’ stated reasoning. The paper largely identifies gender inequality through its analysis rather than as an obstacle participants explicitly named. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 67

  1. Ahn, Namkee, and Pedro Mira. 2001. "Job Bust, Baby Bust? Evidence from Spain." Journal of Population Economics 14: 505-521.
  2. Anderson, Thomas, and Hans-Peter Kohler. 2015. "Low Fertility, Socioeconomic Development, and Gender Equity." Population and Development Review 41 (3): 381-407.
  3. Arpino, Bruno, Gøsta Esping-Andersen, and Léa Pessin. 2015. "How Do Changes in Gender Role Attitudes Towards Female Employment Influence Fertility? A Macro-Level Analysis." European Sociological Review 31 (3): 370-382.
  4. Bachrach, Christine A., and S. Philip Morgan. 2013. "A Cognitive-Social Model of Fertility Intentions." Population and Development Review 39 (3): 459-485.
  5. Becker, Gary S., and H. Gregg Lewis. 1973. "On the Interaction between the Quantity and Quality of Children." Journal of Political Economy 81 (2): S279-88.
  6. Bernardi, Laura, Andreas Klärner, and Holger von der Lippe. 2008. "Job Insecurity and the Timing of Parenthood: A Comparison between Eastern and Western Germany." European Journal of Population 24 (3): 287-313.
  7. Blair-Loy, Mary. 2005. Competing Devotions: Career and Family among Women Executives. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  8. Blake, Judith. 1974. "Can We Believe Recent Data on Birth Expectations in the United States?" Demography 11 (1): 25-44.
  9. Bongaarts, John. 2001. "Fertility and Reproductive Preferences in Post-Transitional Societies." Population and Development Review 27 (Supplement: Global Fertility Transition): 260-281.
  10. -------. 2002. "The End of the Fertility Transition in the Developed World." Population and Development Review 28(3): 419-443.
  11. Bongaarts, John, and Griffith Feeney. 1998. "On the Quantum and Tempo of Fertility." Population and Development Review 24 (2): 271-291.
  12. Brinton, Mary C. 2011. Lost in Transition: Youth, Work, and Instability in Postindustrial Japan. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  13. --------. 2016. "Intentions into Actions: Norms as Mechanisms Linking Macro-and Micro-Levels." American Behavioral Scientist 60 (10): 1146-1167.
  14. --------. 2017. "Happiness at Work? Japanese Housewives' and Employed Wives' Marital Happiness." Pp. 138-157 in Life Course, Happiness, and Well-Being in Japan, edited by Barbara Holthus and Wolfram Manzenreiter. London: Routledge.
  15. Brinton, Mary C., and Dong-Ju Lee. 2016. "Gender-Role Ideology, Labor Market Institutions, and Post-industrial Fertility." Population and Development Review 42 (3): 405-433.
  16. Brodmann, Stefanie, Gøsta Esping-Andersen, Maia Güell. 2007. "When Fertility is Bargained: Second Births in Denmark and Spain." European Sociological Review 23: 599-613.
  17. Budig, Michelle J., and Melissa J. Hodges. 2010. "Differences in Disadvantage: Variation in the Motherhood Penalty across White Women's Earnings Distribution." American Sociological Review 75 (5): 705-728.
  18. Charles, Maria and David B. Grusky. 2004. Occupational Ghettos: The Worldwide Segregation of Men and Women. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  19. Chesnais, Jean-Claude. 2000. "Determinants of Below Replacement Fertility." Population Bulletin of the United Nations 40 (41): 126-136.
  20. Coast, Ernestina, Natalie Mondain, and Clementine Rossier. 2009. "Qualitative Research in Demography: Quality, Presentation and Assessment." Paper presented at the XXVI IUSSP International Population Conference, September 2009, Marrakech, Morocco.
  21. Cooke, Lynn P. 2004. "The Gendered Division of Labor and Family Outcomes in Germany." Journal of Marriage and Family 66 (5): 1246-1259.
  22. ---. 2008. "Gender Equity and Fertility in Italy and Spain." Journal of Social Policy 38 (1): 123- 140.
  23. De la Croix, David, and Matthias Doepke. 2004. "Public versus Private Education When Differential Fertility Matters." Journal of Development Economics 73 (2): 607-29.
  24. DiMaggio, Paul. 2014. "Comment on Jerolmack and Khan, 'Talk is Cheap': Ethnography and the Attitudinal Fallacy." Sociological Methods and Research 43 (2): 232-235.
  25. Dominguez-Folgueras, Marta, and Teresa Castro-Martin. 2013. "Cohabitation in Spain: No Longer a Marginal Path to Family Formation." Journal of Marriage and Family 75 (2): 422-37.
  26. Easterlin, Richard A. 1976. "The Conflict between Aspirations and Resources." Population and Development Review 2 (3/4): 417-25.
  27. England, Paula. 2010. "The Gender Revolution: Uneven and Stalled." Gender and Society 24 (2): 149- 166.
  28. Esping-Andersen, Gøsta, Bruno Arpino, and Pau Baizán. 2013. The Fertility Gap in Europe: Singularities of the Spanish Case. Barcelona, Spain: La Caixa Foundation, Social Studies Collection, No. 36. Esping-Andersen, Gøsta, and Francesco C. Billari. 2015. "Re-Theorizing Family Demographics." Population and Development Review 41 (1): 1-31.
  29. Fuwa, Makiko. 2004. "Macro-level Gender Inequality and the Division of Household Labor in 22 Countries." American Sociological Review 69: 751-767.
  30. Goldscheider, Frances, Eva Bernhardt, and Trude Lappegård. 2015. "The Gender Revolution: A Framework for Understanding Changing Family and Demographic Behavior." Population and Development Review 41 (2): 207-39.
  31. Goldstein, Joshua R., Wolfgang Lutz, and Maria Rita Testa. 2003. "The Emergence of Sub- Replacement Family Size Ideals in Europe." Population Research and Policy Review 22 (5-6): 479-496.
  32. Hagewen, Kellie J., and S. Philip Morgan. 2005. "Intended and Ideal Family Size in the United States, 1970-2002." Population and Development Review 31 (3): 507-27.
  33. Harknett, Kristen, and Caroline Sten Hartnett. 2014. "The Gap between Births Intended and Births Achieved in 22 European Countries, 2004-07." Population Studies 68 (3): 265-282.
  34. Hertog, Ekaterina. 2009. Tough Choices: Bearing an Illegitimate Child in Japan. Stanford University Press.
  35. Jerolmack, Colin, and Shamus Kahn. 2014. "Talk is Cheap: Ethnography and the Attitudinal Fallacy." Sociological Methods and Research 43 (2): 178-209.
  36. Lachance-Grzela, Mylène, and Geneviève Bouchard. 2010. "Why Do Women Do the Lion's Share of Housework? A Decade of Research." Sex Roles 63(11-12): 767-780.
  37. Liefbroer, Aart C. 2005. "The Impact of Perceived Costs and Rewards of Childbearing on Entry into Parenthood: Evidence from a Panel Study." European Journal of Population 21 (4): 367-91.
  38. -------. 2009. "Changes in Family Size Intentions Across Young Adulthood: A Life-Course Perspective." European Journal of Population 25: 363-386.
  39. McDonald, Peter. 2000a. "Gender Equity, Social Institutions and the Future of Fertility." Journal of Population Research 17 (1): 1-16.
  40. -------. 2000b. "Gender Equity in Theories of Fertility Transition." Population and Development Review, 26(3): 427-439.
  41. -------. 2006. "Low Fertility and the State: The Efficacy of Policy." Population and Development Review 32 (3), 485-510.
  42. -------. 2013. "Societal Foundations for Explaining Fertility: Gender Equity." Demographic Research 28 (34): 981-94.
  43. Mencarini, Letizia, and Maria Letizia Tanturri. 2004. "Time Use, Family Role-Set and Childbearing among Italian Working Women." Genus 60 (1):111-137.
  44. Miller, Amanda J., and Daniel L. Carlson. 2016. "Great Expectation? Working-and Middle-Class Cohabitors' Expected and Actual Divisions of Housework." Journal of Marriage and the Family 78: 346-363.
  45. Miller, Warren B., and David J. Pasta. 1995. "Behavioral Intentions: Which Ones Predict Fertility Behavior in Married Couples?" Journal of Applied Social Psychology 25 (6): 530-555.
  46. Mills, Melinda. 2010. "Gender Roles, Gender (In)equality and Fertility: An Empirical Test of Five Gender Equity Indices." Canadian Studies in Population 37 (3-4): 445-474.
  47. Morgan, S. Philip, and Miles G. Taylor. 2006. "Low Fertility at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century." Annual Review of Sociology 32: 375-399.
  48. Oláh, Livia Sz. 2003. "Gendering Fertility: Second Births in Sweden and Hungary." Population Research and Policy Review 22: 171-200.
  49. Olivetti, Claudia, and Barbara Petrongolo. 2008. "Unequal Pay or Unequal Employment? A Cross- Country Analysis of Gender Gaps." Journal of Labor Economics 26 (4): 621-654.
  50. Philipov, Dimiter. 2009. "Fertility Intentions and Outcomes: The Role of Policies to Close the Gap." European Journal of Population 25 (4): 355-361.
  51. Philipov, Dimiter, and Laura Bernardi. 2011. "Concepts and Operationalisation of Reproductive Decisions Implementation in Austria, Germany and Switzerland." Comparative Population Studies 36 (2-3): 495-530.
  52. Puur, Allan, Livia Sz. Oláh, Mariam Irene Tazi-Preve, and Jürgen Dorbritz. 2008. "Men's Childbearing Desires and Views of the Male Role in Europe at the Dawn of the 21st Century." Demographic Research 19 (56): 1883-1912.
  53. Quesnel-Vallée, Amélie, and S. Philip Morgan. 2003. "Missing the Target? Correspondence of Fertility Intentions and Behavior in the U.S." Population Research and Policy Review 22 (5/6): 497- 525.
  54. Randall, Sara, and Todd Koppenhaver. 2004. "Qualitative Data in Demography: The Sound of Silence and Other Problems." Demographic Research 11 (3): 57-93.
  55. Régnier-Lollier, Arnaud, and Daniele Vignoli. 2011. "Fertility Intentions and Obstacles to their Realization in France and Italy." Population-E 66 (2): 361-390.
  56. Rindfuss, Ronald R., Minja Kim Choe, Larry L. Bumpass, and Noriko O. Tsuya. 2004. "Social Networks and Family Change in Japan." American Sociological Review 69 (6): 838-861.
  57. Sassler, Sharon, and Amanda J. Miller. 2011. "Class Differences in Cohabitation Processes." Family Relations 60 (2): 163-77.
  58. Schoen, Robert, Young J. Kim, Constance A. Nathanson, Jason Fields, and Nan Marie Astone. 1997. "Why Do Americans Want Children?" Population and Development Review 23 (2): 333-58.
  59. Schoen, Robert, Nan Marie Astone, Young J. Kim, Constance A. Nathanson, and Jason M. Fields. 1999. "Do Fertility Intentions Affect Fertility Behavior?" Journal of Marriage and Family 61 (3): 790-99.
  60. Schoppa, Leonard. 2006. Race for the Exits: Women, Firms, and the Unraveling of Japan's System of Social Protection. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
  61. Shang, Qingyan, and Bruce A. Weinberg. 2013. "Opting for Families: Recent Trends in the Fertility of Highly Educated Women." Journal of Population Economics 26 (1): 5-32.
  62. Stone, Pamela, and Pamela Lovejoy. 2004. "Fast-Track Women and the 'Choice' to Stay Home." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 596: 62-83.
  63. Symeonidou, Haris. 2000. "Expected and Actual Family Size in Greece: 1983-1997." European Journal of Population 16 (4): 335-352.
  64. Takahashi, Mieko, Saori Kamano, Tomoko Matsuda, Setsuko Onode, and Kyoko Yoshizumi. 2014. "Worklife Balance in Japan: New Policies, Old Practices. Pp. 92-125 in Barbara Hobson, ed., Worklife Balance: The Agency and Capabilities Gap. New York: Oxford University Press.
  65. Torr, Berna Miller, and Susan E. Short. 2004. "Second Births and the Second Shift: A Research Note on Gender Equity and Fertility." Population and Development Review 30 (1): 109-130.
  66. Tsuya, Noriko O., and Larry L. Bumpass. 2004. "Gender and Housework." Pp. 114-133 in
  67. Noriko O. Tsuya and Larry L. Bumpass, eds., Marriage, Work, and Family Life in Comparative Perspective: Japan, South Korea, and the United States. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brinton, M. C., Bueno, X., Oláh, L., & Hellum, M.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Gothenburg (SE)
ORCID
Venue
Population and Development Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-03-06
Volume
44
Issue
2
Pages
281-309
ISSN
  • 0098-7921 (ISSN-L)
  • 1728-4457
DOI
10.1111/padr.12128
OpenAlex
W2790452229
Cited by
90
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
11.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Population and Development Review (publishedVersion)
  • Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Riksbankens Jubileumsfond (P11‐1049:1)
  • Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences (SES1123885)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Demographic Trends and Gender Preferences
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Keywords
fertility intentions, gender inequality, post-industrial society, Japan, Spain, United States

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review