pull down to refresh

Counterpoint would be that many other developing countries also experienced economic shocks but didn't see a decline in birth rates. If I had to bet money I'd say it's more cultural than economic
Some of it is definitely cultural, but the section of the doc that mentions these economic shocks (across time) segues into the pattern of unexpected / unwanted childlessness. These would be populations where the cohort of 0 children (as opposed to just fewer children) surged. I gather the point it was making was that where and when the childless statistics surged it was largely due to economic shocks.
The 0 children cohort is important because in many places it surged rapidly, it brought down the rate to below replacement levels. It also signals a failure to "get off the ground" as opposed to having 1 kid and stopping by choice.
EDIT: It's the section of the 'vitality curve'
reply