SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 72

Determinants of Fertility Rates in OECD Countries: A Panel Data Analysis (1991–2023)

OECD Ülkelerinde Doğurganlık Oranlarının Belirleyicileri: Panel Veri Analizi (1991–2023)

Çetin Görür(VAN YÜZÜNCÜ YIL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-9556-5068
Pages
1–19
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings revealed the presence of cross-sectional dependence and parameter heterogeneity.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Fertility dynamics hold critical importance in terms of demographic sustainability, labor market trends, and the long-term viability of social protection systems.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, the economic and institutional determinants of fertility rates in OECD countries for the period 1991–2023 were examined using panel data analysis techniques.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings revealed the presence of cross-sectional dependence and parameter heterogeneity.
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Doğurganlık hızı · Panel veri analizi · Kesitsel bağımlılık

Abstract

Fertility dynamics hold critical importance in terms of demographic sustainability, labor market trends, and the long-term viability of social protection systems. In this study, the economic and institutional determinants of fertility rates in OECD countries for the period 1991–2023 were examined using panel data analysis techniques. First, pooled OLS, fixed effects, and random effects models were applied, followed by diagnostic tests specific to the panel data structure. The findings revealed the presence of cross-sectional dependence and parameter heterogeneity. Therefore, the Common Correlated Effects Mean Group (CCEMG) estimator, which accounts for both issues, was employed. According to the results, unemployment was found to have a significant and negative effect on fertility. Similarly, the increase in per capita income was shown to reduce fertility, and this was associated with the rising opportunity cost of childbearing. The Women, Business and the Law Index showed a positive and significant effect on fertility, suggesting that the legal empowerment of women may facilitate fertility-related decisions. On the other hand, a high rate of female wage employment was found to reduce fertility. This study is considered to contribute to the literature through its multidimensional analytical framework and strong methodological approach and to offer important implications for policymakers.

Özet

Doğurganlık dinamikleri, demografik sürdürülebilirlik, işgücü piyasası eğilimleri ve sosyal koruma sistemlerinin uzun vadeli sürdürülebilirliği açısından kritik öneme sahiptir. Bu çalışmada, 1991–2023 dönemi için OECD ülkelerindeki doğurganlık oranlarını etkileyen ekonomik ve kurumsal belirleyiciler panel veri analiz teknikleriyle incelenmiştir. İlk olarak havuzlanmış OLS, sabit etkiler ve rassal etkiler modelleri uygulanmış, ardından panel veri yapısına özgü tanısal testler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bulgular, çapraz kesit bağımlılığı ve parametre heterojenliğinin varlığını ortaya koymuştur. Bu nedenle, her iki sorunu da dikkate alan Common Correlated Effects Mean Group (CCEMG) tahmincisi kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre, işsizliğin doğurganlık üzerinde anlamlı ve negatif etkiye sahip olduğu sonucu elde edilmiştir. Aynı şekilde kişi başına gelirdeki artışın da doğurganlığı düşürdüğü ve bu durum çocuk sahibi olmanın artan fırsat maliyetiyle ilişkilendirilebileceğini ortaya koymuştur. Kadın, İş ve Hukuk Endeksi ise doğurganlık üzerinde pozitif ve anlamlı bir etki göstermiş ve bu durum kadınların yasal güçlenmesinin doğurganlık kararlarını kolaylaştırabileceği sonucunu doğurmuştur. Öte yandan, kadın ücretli istihdam oranının yüksekliği doğurganlığı düşürüldüğü tespit edilmiştir. Bu çalışmanın, çok boyutlu analiz çerçevesi ve güçlü metodolojik yaklaşımıyla literatüre katkı sunacağı ve politika yapıcılar için önemli çıkarımlar sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Görür, Ç. (2026). Determinants of Fertility Rates in OECD Countries: A Panel Data Analysis (1991–2023). Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı: 72, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.53568/yyusbed.1752249

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (41)

  1. Adsera, A. (2004). Changing fertility rates in developed countries. The impact of labor market institutions. Journal of Population Economics, 17(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-003-0166-x
  2. Ali, N., Ali, S., Rabbi, F., & Bilal, H. (2022). On the interaction between socioeconomic development and fertility rate: A cross-country analysis. J Public Affairs, 22(2), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2366
  3. Alola, A. A. (2019). Prescience evidence of the housing market and production sector performance nexus Insights from Malta. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 12(1), 131-147. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHMA-06-2018-0046
  4. Altun, Y., İşleyen, Ş., & Görür, Ç. (2018). Türkiye’de eğitim ve sağlık harcamalarının ekonomik büyümeye etkisi: 1999-2017. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 39, 223-244.
  5. Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. (3rd ed.). Wiley.
  6. Baltagi, B. H. (2021). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. (6th ed.). Springer.
  7. Becker, G. S. (1960). An Economic Analysis of Fertility. NBER Chapters, in: Demographic and Economic Change in Developed Countries. National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, 209-248.
  8. Becker, G. S. (1981). A Treatise on the Family. Harvard University Press. Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1980). The Lagrange Multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239–253.
  9. Comolli, C.L. (2023). Social Climate, Uncertainty and Fertility Intentions: from the Great Recession to the Covid‑19 Crisis. European Journal of Population, 39(35), 1-57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-023-09684-1
  10. De Hoyos, R. E., & Sarafidis, V. (2006). Testing for cross-sectional dependence in panel-data models. Stata Journal, 6(4), 482–496.
  11. Demir, Y., & Görür, C. (2020). OECD Ülkelerine Ait Çeşitli Enerji Tüketimleri ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişkinin Panel Eşbütünleşme Analizi ile İncelenmesi. EKOIST Journal of Econometrics and Statistics, 32, 15-33. https://doi.org/10.26650/ekoist.2020.32.0005
  12. Demir, Y., İşleyen, Ş., & Özen, K. (2023). Determining the Effect of Selected Energy Consumptions on Carbon Dioxide Emissions by ARDL Limit Test. Van Yüzüncü Yıl University the Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 59, 80 – 107.
  13. Demirci, Ş., Konca, M., & İlgün, G. (2025). Determinants of Fertility Rates in OECD Countries: A Panel ARDL Bounds Testing Approach. Journal of Health Management, 27(2) 195–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/09720634251328092
  14. Doepke, M., Kindermann, F., & Tertilt, M. (2022). The Economics of Fertility: A New Era. NBER Working Paper No. 30856.
  15. Eberhardt, M. & Teal, F. (2010). Productivity analysis in global manufacturing production. Economics Series Working Papers, University of Oxford.
  16. Esping-Andersen, G. (2009). The Incomplete Revolution: Adapting to Women’s New Roles. Polity Press.
  17. Furceri, D., Pizzuto, P., & Yarveisi, K. (2024). The effect of pandemic crises on fertility. Journal of Population Economics, 37(3), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-024-00983-3
  18. Goldin, C. (2025). Glorify fatherhood to make more babies, suggests Nobel laureate. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/dab50a47-af20-40fa-9d5c-76a8349fcbc0
  19. Greene, W. H. (2012). Econometric Analysis. (7th ed.). Pearson.
  20. Hausman, J. A. (1978). Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica, 46(6), 1251–1271.
  21. İşleyen, Ş., Altun, Y., & Görür, Ç. (2017). The causality relationship between interest rate and income with investment in Usa: 1965-2016. The Journal of Academic Social Science, 60(5), 146-163. http://dx.doi.org/10.16992/ASOS.13112
  22. König-Castillo, D.M., Ott, J., König, D., Hager, M., Kahr, M.K., & Dorffner, G. (2022). Influence of Obesity and Unemployment on Fertility Rates: A Multinational Analysis of 30 Countries from 1976 to 2014. J. Clin. Med., 11, 1152, 2-10. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11051152
  23. Kreyenfeld, M. (2010). Uncertainties in Female Employment Careers and the Postponement of Parenthood in Germany. European Sociological Review, 26(3), 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcp026
  24. Mimi, M. B., Kibria, Md. G. & Selim, Md. M. I. (2024). How do economic, health, environmental and demographic factors affect life expectancy? – a novel attempt for developed and developing economies. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 31(7), 776-791. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2024.2335269
  25. Mincer, J. (1963). Market Prices, Opportunity Costs, and Income Effects. In C. Christ (Ed.), Measurement in Economics, Stanford University Press.
  26. Mukherjee, A., & Sarkhel, S. (2025). Motherhood and Labour Market Penalty: A Study on Indian Labour Market. Journal of South Asian Development, 20(1), 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/09731741251320760
  27. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross-section dependence in panels. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics, No. 0435.
  28. Pesaran, M.H. (2006). Estimation and Inference in Large Heterogeneous Panels with a Multifactor Error Structure. Econometrica, 74, 967-1012. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00692.x
  29. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross‐section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265–312.
  30. Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50–93.
  31. Reina, J. C., Cuaresma, J.C., Fenz, K., Zellmann, J., Yankov, T., & Taha, A. (2024). Gravity Models for Global Migration Flows: A Predictive Evaluation. Population Research and Policy Review, 43(29), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-024-09867-6
  32. Smulyanskaya, N.S. (2020). Factors of fertility ageing rate. Population and Economics, 4(1), 60-74. https://doi.org/10.3897/popecon.4.e53039
  33. Sobotka, T., Skirbekk, V., & Philipov, D. (2011). Economic Recession and Fertility in the Developed World. Population and Development Review, 37(2), 267–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2011.00411.x.
  34. Wang, Y., Gozgor, G., & Lau, C.K.M. (2022). Effects of pandemics uncertainty on fertility. Front. Public Health, 10, 854771, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.854771
  35. Willis, R. J. (1973). A New Approach to the Economic Theory of Fertility Behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 81(2), 14–64.
  36. Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. (2nd ed.). MIT Press.
  37. World Bank (2024, June 25). Women, Business and the Law 2024. The World Bank. https://wbl.worldbank.org/en/wbl
  38. World Bank (2025, May 25). World Bank Databank. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators
  39. Yakita, A. (2018). Female labor supply, fertility rebounds, and economic development. Rev Dev Econ., 22(4), 1667–1681. https://doi.org/10.1111/rode.12411
  40. Zhang, T.-T., Cai, X.-Y., Shi, X.-H., Zhu,W., & Shan, S.-N. (2023). The Effect of Family Fertility Support Policies on Fertility, Their Contribution, and Policy Pathways to Fertility Improvement in OECD Countries. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 20, 4790, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064790
  41. Zimmer, D. M. (2024). The long-run effects of recessions on fertility. Rev Econ Household. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-024-09713-w