South Korea's Extraordinary Fertility Decline

In 2021, South Korea's total fertility rate (TFR)—the number of children born to a typical woman over her lifetime—fell to 0.81, the lowest ever recorded in a highly developed democratic nation (see Figure 1). Of all 38 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), South Korea stands alone as the sole nation with TFR below 1 (the global average is 2.4; the OECD average is 1.61).

Fertility rates for Israel, Mexico, China, United States, Japan, South Korea, and the OECD average for 1970 through 2020.

Location	Year	Fertility Rate
Japan	1960	2
Japan	1961	1.96
Japan	1962	1.98
Japan	1963	2
Japan	1964	2.05
Japan	1965	2.14
Japan	1966	1.58
Japan	1967	2.23
Japan	1968	2.13
Japan	1969	2.13
Japan	1970	2.13
Japan	1971	2.16
Japan	1972	2.14
Japan	1973	2.14
Japan	1974	2.05
Japan	1975	1.91
Japan	1976	1.85
Japan	1977	1.8
Japan	1978	1.79
Japan	1979	1.77
Japan	1980	1.75
Japan	1981	1.74
Japan	1982	1.77
Japan	1983	1.8
Japan	1984	1.81
Japan	1985	1.76
Japan	1986	1.72
Japan	1987	1.69
Japan	1988	1.66
Japan	1989	1.57
Japan	1990	1.54
Japan	1991	1.53
Japan	1992	1.5
Japan	1993	1.46
Japan	1994	1.5
Japan	1995	1.42
Japan	1996	1.43
Japan	1997	1.39
Japan	1998	1.38
Japan	1999	1.34
Japan	2000	1.36
Japan	2001	1.33
Japan	2002	1.32
Japan	2003	1.29
Japan	2004	1.29
Japan	2005	1.26
Japan	2006	1.32
Japan	2007	1.34
Japan	2008	1.37
Japan	2009	1.37
Japan	2010	1.39
Japan	2011	1.39
Japan	2012	1.41
Japan	2013	1.43
Japan	2014	1.42
Japan	2015	1.45
Japan	2016	1.44
Japan	2017	1.43
Japan	2018	1.42
Japan	2019	1.36
Japan	2020	1.33
South Korea	1960	6
South Korea	1961	5.8
South Korea	1962	5.6
South Korea	1963	5.4
South Korea	1964	5.2
South Korea	1965	5
South Korea	1966	4.8
South Korea	1967	4.66
South Korea	1968	4.52
South Korea	1969	4.53
South Korea	1970	4.53
South Korea	1971	4.54
South Korea	1972	4.12
South Korea	1973	4.07
South Korea	1974	3.77
South Korea	1975	3.43
South Korea	1976	3
South Korea	1977	2.99
South Korea	1978	2.64
South Korea	1979	2.9
South Korea	1980	2.82
South Korea	1981	2.57
South Korea	1982	2.39
South Korea	1983	2.06
South Korea	1984	1.74
South Korea	1985	1.66
South Korea	1986	1.58
South Korea	1987	1.53
South Korea	1988	1.55
South Korea	1989	1.56
South Korea	1990	1.57
South Korea	1991	1.71
South Korea	1992	1.76
South Korea	1993	1.65
South Korea	1994	1.66
South Korea	1995	1.63
South Korea	1996	1.57
South Korea	1997	1.54
South Korea	1998	1.46
South Korea	1999	1.43
South Korea	2000	1.48
South Korea	2001	1.31
South Korea	2002	1.18
South Korea	2003	1.19
South Korea	2004	1.16
South Korea	2005	1.09
South Korea	2006	1.13
South Korea	2007	1.26
South Korea	2008	1.19
South Korea	2009	1.15
South Korea	2010	1.23
South Korea	2011	1.24
South Korea	2012	1.3
South Korea	2013	1.19
South Korea	2014	1.21
South Korea	2015	1.24
South Korea	2016	1.17
South Korea	2017	1.05
South Korea	2018	0.98
South Korea	2019	0.92
South Korea	2020	0.84
Mexico	1960	6.77
Mexico	1961	6.76
Mexico	1962	6.76
Mexico	1963	6.75
Mexico	1964	6.75
Mexico	1965	6.76
Mexico	1966	6.77
Mexico	1967	6.79
Mexico	1968	6.81
Mexico	1969	6.83
Mexico	1970	6.83
Mexico	1971	6.79
Mexico	1972	6.7
Mexico	1973	6.56
Mexico	1974	6.37
Mexico	1975	6.13
Mexico	1976	5.86
Mexico	1977	5.59
Mexico	1978	5.32
Mexico	1979	5.06
Mexico	1980	4.84
Mexico	1981	4.64
Mexico	1982	4.46
Mexico	1983	4.3
Mexico	1984	4.15
Mexico	1985	4.02
Mexico	1986	3.9
Mexico	1987	3.79
Mexico	1988	3.68
Mexico	1989	3.57
Mexico	1990	3.47
Mexico	1991	3.37
Mexico	1992	3.27
Mexico	1993	3.18
Mexico	1994	3.1
Mexico	1995	3.02
Mexico	1996	2.95
Mexico	1997	2.88
Mexico	1998	2.82
Mexico	1999	2.77
Mexico	2000	2.72
Mexico	2001	2.67
Mexico	2002	2.62
Mexico	2003	2.58
Mexico	2004	2.54
Mexico	2005	2.5
Mexico	2006	2.46
Mexico	2007	2.42
Mexico	2008	2.39
Mexico	2009	2.36
Mexico	2010	2.34
Mexico	2011	2.32
Mexico	2012	2.3
Mexico	2013	2.27
Mexico	2014	2.24
Mexico	2015	2.22
Mexico	2016	2.19
Mexico	2017	2.16
Mexico	2018	2.13
Mexico	2019	2.1
Mexico	2020	2.08
USA	1960	3.65
USA	1961	3.62
USA	1962	3.46
USA	1963	3.32
USA	1964	3.19
USA	1965	2.91
USA	1966	2.72
USA	1967	2.56
USA	1968	2.46
USA	1969	2.46
USA	1970	2.48
USA	1971	2.27
USA	1972	2.01
USA	1973	1.88
USA	1974	1.84
USA	1975	1.77
USA	1976	1.74
USA	1977	1.79
USA	1978	1.76
USA	1979	1.81
USA	1980	1.84
USA	1981	1.81
USA	1982	1.83
USA	1983	1.8
USA	1984	1.81
USA	1985	1.84
USA	1986	1.84
USA	1987	1.87
USA	1988	1.93
USA	1989	2.01
USA	1990	2.08
USA	1991	2.06
USA	1992	2.05
USA	1993	2.02
USA	1994	2
USA	1995	1.98
USA	1996	1.98
USA	1997	1.97
USA	1998	2
USA	1999	2.01
USA	2000	2.06
USA	2001	2.03
USA	2002	2.01
USA	2003	2.04
USA	2004	2.05
USA	2005	2.06
USA	2006	2.11
USA	2007	2.12
USA	2008	2.07
USA	2009	2
USA	2010	1.93
USA	2011	1.89
USA	2012	1.88
USA	2013	1.86
USA	2014	1.86
USA	2015	1.84
USA	2016	1.82
USA	2017	1.77
USA	2018	1.73
USA	2019	1.71
USA	2020	1.64
China	1960	5.76
China	1961	5.91
China	1962	6.06
China	1963	6.21
China	1964	6.32
China	1965	6.39
China	1966	6.38
China	1967	6.32
China	1968	6.18
China	1969	5.99
China	1970	5.73
China	1971	5.4
China	1972	5.04
China	1973	4.64
China	1974	4.24
China	1975	3.86
China	1976	3.51
China	1977	3.2
China	1978	2.94
China	1979	2.75
China	1980	2.61
China	1981	2.55
China	1982	2.54
China	1983	2.56
China	1984	2.61
China	1985	2.65
China	1986	2.67
China	1987	2.64
China	1988	2.58
China	1989	2.46
China	1990	2.31
China	1991	2.14
China	1992	1.98
China	1993	1.84
China	1994	1.73
China	1995	1.66
China	1996	1.62
China	1997	1.61
China	1998	1.6
China	1999	1.6
China	2000	1.6
China	2001	1.6
China	2002	1.6
China	2003	1.6
China	2004	1.61
China	2005	1.61
China	2006	1.62
China	2007	1.62
China	2008	1.62
China	2009	1.62
China	2010	1.63
China	2011	1.63
China	2012	1.64
China	2013	1.65
China	2014	1.66
China	2015	1.67
China	2016	1.68
China	2017	1.68
China	2018	1.69
China	2019	1.7
China	2020	1.7
Israel	1960	3.95
Israel	1961	3.8
Israel	1962	3.77
Israel	1963	3.81
Israel	1964	3.93
Israel	1965	3.99
Israel	1966	3.89
Israel	1967	3.64
Israel	1968	3.82
Israel	1969	3.83
Israel	1970	3.97
Israel	1971	3.94
Israel	1972	3.71
Israel	1973	3.68
Israel	1974	3.71
Israel	1975	3.68
Israel	1976	3.7
Israel	1977	3.47
Israel	1978	3.28
Israel	1979	3.21
Israel	1980	3.14
Israel	1981	3.06
Israel	1982	3.12
Israel	1983	3.21
Israel	1984	3.13
Israel	1985	3.12
Israel	1986	3.09
Israel	1987	3.05
Israel	1988	3.06
Israel	1989	3.03
Israel	1990	3.02
Israel	1991	2.91
Israel	1992	2.93
Israel	1993	2.92
Israel	1994	2.9
Israel	1995	2.88
Israel	1996	2.94
Israel	1997	2.93
Israel	1998	2.98
Israel	1999	2.94
Israel	2000	2.95
Israel	2001	2.89
Israel	2002	2.89
Israel	2003	2.95
Israel	2004	2.9
Israel	2005	2.84
Israel	2006	2.88
Israel	2007	2.9
Israel	2008	2.96
Israel	2009	2.96
Israel	2010	3.03
Israel	2011	3
Israel	2012	3.05
Israel	2013	3.03
Israel	2014	3.08
Israel	2015	3.09
Israel	2016	3.11
Israel	2017	3.11
Israel	2018	3.09
Israel	2019	3.01
Israel	2020	2.9
OECD Average	1960	3.34
OECD Average	1961	3.33
OECD Average	1962	3.3
OECD Average	1963	3.3
OECD Average	1964	3.28
OECD Average	1965	3.2
OECD Average	1966	3.1
OECD Average	1967	3.03
OECD Average	1968	2.95
OECD Average	1969	2.9
OECD Average	1970	2.84
OECD Average	1971	2.8
OECD Average	1972	2.71
OECD Average	1973	2.63
OECD Average	1974	2.58
OECD Average	1975	2.5
OECD Average	1976	2.43
OECD Average	1977	2.36
OECD Average	1978	2.3
OECD Average	1979	2.29
OECD Average	1980	2.25
OECD Average	1981	2.19
OECD Average	1982	2.15
OECD Average	1983	2.11
OECD Average	1984	2.06
OECD Average	1985	2.03
OECD Average	1986	2.01
OECD Average	1987	1.99
OECD Average	1988	2
OECD Average	1989	1.98
OECD Average	1990	1.98
OECD Average	1991	1.95
OECD Average	1992	1.92
OECD Average	1993	1.86
OECD Average	1994	1.81
OECD Average	1995	1.77
OECD Average	1996	1.75
OECD Average	1997	1.72
OECD Average	1998	1.7
OECD Average	1999	1.69
OECD Average	2000	1.7
OECD Average	2001	1.66
OECD Average	2002	1.65
OECD Average	2003	1.65
OECD Average	2004	1.67
OECD Average	2005	1.67
OECD Average	2006	1.7
OECD Average	2007	1.72
OECD Average	2008	1.76
OECD Average	2009	1.74
OECD Average	2010	1.75
OECD Average	2011	1.71
OECD Average	2012	1.71
OECD Average	2013	1.68
OECD Average	2014	1.69
OECD Average	2015	1.68
OECD Average	2016	1.68
OECD Average	2017	1.66
OECD Average	2018	1.63
OECD Average	2019	1.61
OECD Average	2020	1.59

Author's calculations using OECD data: Demography - Fertility rates - OECD Data

South Korea's demographic history, like its economic development, has been nothing short of extraordinary. When the nation exited the Korean War in 1953, it had a largely rural population and a TFR above 6. In the decades that followed, rapid growth and urbanization were matched by family planning policies, launched in the 1960s, but accelerating in the 70s and 80s, aimed at reducing birth rates. Fertility collapsed—leading to concerns over the potential social and economic repercussions. By the early 2000s, policymakers had dramatically reversed course, favoring a host of pro-natalist policies. But there is no evidence that these are working, and demographic trends look increasingly bleak.

Studies suggest that the complicated history of family planning as well as socioeconomic and political factors, including gender inequality, evolving familial structures and norms (PDF), and extremely high levels of social competition may all play roles in depressing birth rates (PDF) in South Korea. Yet, the nation's fertility decline is just one piece in a complicated gender puzzle.

In 2020, the United Nations' primary gender indices ranked the nation 11th and 26th highest in the world, on the surface portraying an egalitarian Korean society when measured by international standards for women's education, health care access, and income. But indices which capture inequities in agency, norms, rights, behaviors, and in relative achievement within the labor market and politics paint a different picture. One such index ranks the country an abysmal 108th, suggesting women are very often marginalized in the workplace, in the household, and throughout society.

Scope for policy targeting gender inequality is complicated by generational divides and the vehement politicization of gender in society. But the COVID-19 pandemic has provoked policy reflections and reform globally—and it may yet provide an opening for transformative policy changes in South Korea.

So far, the acute impact of the pandemic appears to have exacerbated gender disparities and reduced fertility around the world. South Korea is no exception. For an economy with historically high costs of homeownership and the world's highest cost of child rearing, pandemic stress is complicating marriage prospects in a society where men and women's socioeconomic status is highly scrutinized.

Social distancing efforts have delayed marriage gatherings, already at historically low rates. Statistics gathered by the Korean Women's Development Institute suggest that women have disproportionately faced career interruptions, adjusted their job, or ceased work for childcare since the COVID-19 pandemic began. Women have also faced greater food insecurity, increases in unpaid labor, and declines in health care access, particularly for sexual and reproductive health.

However, the pandemic also brings promise. For example, it has significantly accelerated telework, telehealth, and e-learning. Because households can opt to live in cheaper areas, remote work could place downward pressure on one major stressor, housing prices. Postponing marriage and childbirth is associated with difficulties maintaining a work-family balance, so any post-COVID workplace that encourages greater flexibility could also de-emphasize norms regarding excessive and inflexible work hours for both men and women. Closed schools during COVID-19 provided reminders that improvements in childcare access are vital social investments. Pandemic-induced workforce shortages may facilitate appreciation for women's workplace contributions, and improved worker bargaining power may yield additional full-time formal positions which attract more women to pursue careers.

Leveraging these outcomes could require consensus building and informed policymaking. Whether South Korea can do so to seize this opportunity remains to be seen.

---

Daniel Hicks is an applied economist; Jennifer Bouey is a senior policy researcher, Tang Chair for China Policy Studies, and an epidemiologist; and Jessie Wang is an adjunct labor and population fellow at the nonprofit, nonpartisan RAND Corporation.