Although INSEE recorded a historic drop in births in 2023, Laurent Toulemon, research director at INED, explains that the French population will continue to increase in the coming years.
A drop of more than 6% in one year. In 2023, 678,000 babies were born in France, or 6.6% less than the previous year, which corresponds to the lowest number of births over one year since 1946, according to the latest demographic study published by the Insee Tuesday January 16. The same day, Emmanuel Macron announced the establishment of a “big plan” against infertility, as well as that of birth leave, shorter than the current parental leave but “better paid”Who “will allow both parents to be with their child for six months if they wish”, justified the head of state. Objective, according to the Elysée: “unblock the economic and social obstacles to the desire to have children”.
How should we interpret this historical decline? To answer these questions, franceinfo spoke with demographer Laurent Toulemon, research director at the National Institute of Demographic Studies (INED).
Franceinfo: In its study published Tuesday, INSEE reports a decrease in the number of births of 6.6% in 2023 compared to 2022. What explains this decrease?
Laurent Toulemon: First of all, it is important to remember that there are many countries where the decline from one year to the next is greater than 6% and that fertility in France is not collapsing at all. However, if this decline continues over several years, it can be explained by concerns about the future, economic problems, and the sacrifices required of parents, and particularly women, when they have children.
The causes at the individual level are complex. Today couples form around the age of 24, with no immediate prospect of having children. The first births take place around the age of 29 of the parents. The “neutral” situation, thanks to contraception and abortion, is to have an emotional and sexual life without fear of an unplanned birth. The possible decision to have a child is postponed, and adults can devote themselves to other activities than caring for one or more children. Births then result from the decision, for heterosexual couples, to have sexual relations to obtain a pregnancy (or for single women or in same-sex couples, to resort to assisted reproduction). Potential parents must “feel ready”.
On the other hand, fears linked to global warming and the depletion of resources are not necessarily very credible reasons. These are reasons given either by people who are already too old to have children, or as a justification for the fact that they have remained childless, or by people who are very young, but who may change their minds over time.
During his press conference on Tuesday evening, Emmanuel Macron placed a lot of emphasis on the revival of the birth rate. Is this an emergency?
I am not sure that boosting the French birth rate is a priority. Certainly, the number of births is decreasing, but is this really a problem? Is the current level too low? Should he go back up? For the moment, the fertility rate stands at 1.68 children per woman, which is more than enough for the country’s population to remain almost constant. We are not at all in the worrying situation of other countries, which are seeing in the short term a reduction in their active population, with a very significant increase in the number of elderly people.
With the current migration balance [différence entre le nombre de personnes qui sont entrées sur le territoire et le nombre de personnes qui en sont sorties] of 180,000 people per year – a figure higher than INSEE projections, which is based on a range of 20,000 to 120,000 people – and a fertility rate of 1.68 children per woman, the population would continue to increase. It is important to point out that this net migration of 180,000 more people each year is much lower than that of our Italian, German and English neighbors. If we compared their migratory balance to the French population, it should rather be between 400,000 and 800,000 people.
The Head of State notably announced the creation of birth leave. Is this a good solution to increase the number of births?
This is a good initiative, but it will only have repercussions on the birth rate if it is accompanied by other measures. The objective of such leave is above all to improve the situation of young parents, provided that a childcare system is put in place after the baby is 6 months old, with places in crèches that are of good quality. quality. However, this subject was absolutely not discussed during this press conference.
This leave would, on the other hand, be an important element in the fight against inequalities between women and men, and it would improve the well-being of young parents. By being shorter, it can also limit the risk of not finding a job or not being able to pursue a career. Parenthood has a cost, the majority of which is paid by women.
So what would be its added value compared to the parental leave that already exists?
This birth leave would make it possible to move from a very poorly paid allowance to a shorter, better paid leave and therefore more attractive for women who receive a high salary. Today, parental leave is competitive only for those at the bottom of the salary hierarchy, with difficult working conditions and/or atypical hours. But overall, whether for women who earn a decent salary or for men, it is not at all attractive.
However, it should be noted that this birth leave will increase inequalities between women. For the moment, practically all measures to combat inequalities between women and men automatically lead to an increase in inequalities between women. We have not yet found a solution to act on both gender inequalities and those between women.
Emmanuel Macron also announced the launch of a “major plan” against infertility. What is the situation in France?
This is a phenomenon that has been studied extensively by demographers. Indeed, more and more couples are facing infertility problems. To remedy this, there is medically assisted procreation (AMP, or PMA). In terms of demographics, the overall results of this MPA remain quite mixed for two reasons. Firstly, it does not work every time and it is a path of the cross, especially for women, who undergo egg retrievals and heavy hormonal treatments. Success rates are around 40%.
Secondly, we realize that many couples are not completely infertile and that they manage to have children without ART. [entre 18 et 24% des couples en désir d’enfants ne parviennent pas à obtenir une grossesse après 12 mois d’essai, selon Santé publique France (SPF), qui précise que ce taux retombe à une fourchette de 8% à 11% après 24 mois de tentatives]. They are just impatient and the doctors are offering them an opportunity to speed up the process. Please note, I am not underestimating the medical problem or the public health problem that this poses. From an individual point of view, for couples, it is very painful. But at the population level, the demographic impact is very weak.
Finally, it is false to believe that the number of births is falling because women, whose fertility declines with age, wait too long to have children. It’s a nice joke. Having young children is very bad for their professional situation.
“Women’s strategy of having a career first and then having children is perfectly rational.”
Laurent Toulemon, demographerat franceinfo
If we want things to change, instead of lecturing women by telling them “Be careful, if you don’t hurry, you will become sterile,” It would be better to ensure that having children at a younger age is no longer so penalizing for women.
What are the effective levers to boost births?
Explicitly pronatalist policies, whose aim is only to increase the number of births, do not really work. Typically, these policies have been tried by authoritarian or conservative governments. They are linked to immediate financial advantages, such as birth bonuses, allowances or tax advantages, and to paternalistic injunctions oriented towards women. But they forget the fact that women want to be treated like adults and full citizens. They also obscure the fact that having children has an extremely high cost for women, some of whom refuse to pay the price. If we want to limit this cost, men must take part of the burden.
In France, the idea that you can have children while having a career remains strong, even if in practice this is not so true, unlike in other countries. To remedy this, policies should be put in place to improve the working conditions of parents, by facilitating the balance between family and professional life, or by increasing the number of childcare providers. This may also concern working hours, the protection of employees against atypical or very irregular working hours, or even specific arrangements for parents who raise their child alone. We know that single-parent families are in particularly delicate situations and that the majority are women.
What consequences would this increase in the birth rate have?
If there were a mini baby boom, in the short and medium term, this would pose financial problems, due to benefit payments and tax advantages given to parents. This would also pose concerns for childcare arrangements, then, in three years, in terms of the number of places in schools, then in college. These are exactly the problems encountered during the post-war baby boom. But in the longer term, it will be beneficial, since it will lead to an increase in the active population.
Conversely, when the number of births decreases, the State makes savings. But in the longer term, this creates economic problems, because these fewer children will become fewer workers. To summarize, from the point of view of administrations, it is better for these rates to remain constant and to avoid demographic shocks, whether they concern an increase or a decrease in births.