Communities where people report high levels of social support and frequent social contact tend to have higher birth rates, regardless of financial circumstances, according to a new study published in the scientific journal Biodemography and Social Biology. The finding suggests that strong social networks in an area may help maintain population levels even as birth rates decline worldwide.
Birth rates are falling across much of the developed world. Many countries are approaching what demographers call “lowest-low fertility”, meaning fewer than 1.3 children per woman. Finland is facing this sharp decline, with its fertility rate falling from 1.87 in 2010 to 1.30 in 2025. This rapid trend has challenged the assumption that strong social welfare programs naturally protect against falling birth rates — Finland offers paid parental leave, subsidized childcare and home care allowances, yet its fertility has fallen faster than in many neighboring countries.
Researchers often examine economic conditions, such as recessions or housing costs, to explain why people choose smaller families. However, economic indicators do not fully explain recent demographic shifts, particularly in Scandinavian countries, where financial safety nets are strong. Starting a family is an inherently social process, which led the scientists to investigate how the social environment influences childbearing.
Eetu Soini, a psychology researcher at the University of Helsinki, led the team that analyzed data from a large national health survey conducted between 2012 and 2017, involving 100,750 adults from 299 Finnish municipalities. The researchers calculated seven components of social capital: perceived social support, frequency of social interactions, community participation, cultural engagement, general trust, trust in people and loneliness. They then compared these measures with municipal fertility data from 2018 to 2020, using a three-year time lag and spatial statistical models to filter out hidden variables that cluster geographically.
The results showed that municipalities with higher levels of expected social support had higher total fertility rates. Areas where residents reported more frequent social interactions also recorded more births. These associations remained even after adjusting for all demographic and socioeconomic variables, including population size, density, religious affiliation and a composite socioeconomic status index combining taxable income, education levels and unemployment rates.
Notably, local socioeconomic status showed no association with fertility rates in any model. The specific source of social support did not change the main result: support from romantic partners, relatives, friends and other acquaintances was all linked to higher regional birth rates.
The link between social support and higher fertility was strongest among people aged 20 to 39, peaking among those aged 20 to 29. The researchers argue that young adults often face greater uncertainty in their careers and finances, and this insecurity may make a supportive social environment particularly important for their transition to parenthood. Older age groups, who may already have established careers and stable incomes, appear to depend less on support from the wider community.
Not all forms of social capital were linked to birth rates. The researchers found no association between an area's fertility and its levels of general trust or trust in people. Community participation — such as involvement in sports clubs, health organizations or political groups — was also unrelated to fertility. Engagement in cultural events and regional loneliness rates showed a similar lack of association. These null findings suggest that the recent rise in loneliness among the public may not be a driving force behind demographic changes.
The researchers carried out additional calculations to ensure that simply delaying childbearing did not distort the results — what demographers call the “tempo effect”, in which the average age of mothers rises and temporarily suppresses the annual birth rate. Even after adjusting for changes in the average age at childbirth, areas with greater social support from relatives and more frequent social interactions still showed higher fertility rates.
The study is based on cross-sectional data, meaning it captures a snapshot of the population at a particular point in time. This design prevents the researchers from determining whether high social capital directly causes more births. The reverse is equally possible: having children often connects parents to new community networks, such as schools, nurseries and youth sports clubs, which could increase overall interactions in a region. Future research will need to distinguish individual influences from neighborhood effects.
The study, titled “Regional social capital and fertility rate: Municipality-level analysis in Finland”, was written by Eetu Soini, Kateryna Golovina, Hans Hämäläinen, Anna Rotkirch, Venla Berg, Suvi Parikka and Markus Jokela. The findings offer a new perspective on understanding demographic decline: they suggest that social context — and not just financial security — may play a crucial role in people's decisions to start a family.
Comments