What is this "baby boom" so coveted by conservatives around the world

The issue of demographic decline has become central to the agendas of several conservative parties and major right-wing movements across Western countries. In fact, Trump already addressed the need for renewed population growth back in 2023, during the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), one of the most important political events for the conservative movement, proposing financial incentives for families who choose to have children. The data clearly shows a slowdown in demographic growth: between 2010 and 2020, the U.S. population grew by only 7%, whereas in the 1990s the increase was 13%. This was the slowest population growth decade since the Great Depression of the 1930s, mainly due to the decline in birth rates. Trump recently returned to the topic, proposing a $5,000 “baby bonus” for expectant mothers. But the "pro-natal" movement isn't limited to the United States: the same issue has long been debated in Europe and many other industrialized countries, especially among right-wing circles, which have historically been deeply concerned with the phenomenon.

The decline in births is influenced by a wide range of factors, some of which are global in nature, making it difficult to identify effective solutions. One of the most debated aspects is the effectiveness of government measures to encourage higher birth rates, such as bonuses, tax breaks, or other policies. Despite efforts, in no context have these initiatives proven sufficient to reverse the long-term trend. Still, proponents argue that it’s impossible to know whether the decline would have been even more dramatic without them. According to a 2019 report by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), half of the world’s population lives in countries where the fertility rate has fallen below replacement level: that is, below 2.1 children per woman, the threshold needed to maintain population stability in the absence of immigration and factoring in infant mortality.

Japan represents one of the most emblematic cases of institutional response to falling birth rates. Since the 1990s, the Japanese government has introduced a range of measures to support the desire to have children: among other things, mandatory parental leave for one year was introduced, public nursery availability was expanded, companies were encouraged to reduce working hours, and bimonthly family allowances were implemented for households with one or more children. Nevertheless, none of these measures had a lasting impact, and the situation has even worsened over time. In 2023, Japan’s fertility rate fell to 1.2, and births declined by 5.6% compared to the previous year, marking the lowest number recorded since 1899, the year the first official census system was established. This trend concerns many analysts, as population decline can have significant economic and social consequences: an increasingly elderly population shrinks the available workforce, raises tax burdens, and reduces the resources available to support the welfare system.

Another important example is South Korea, which has the lowest fertility rate in the world—0.72 children per woman. In 1970, births exceeded one million, but in 2023, there were only 230,000. In such a scenario, it is estimated that each person born today will, throughout their working life, have to economically support the equivalent of four retirees, as the New York Times summed up. The issue, therefore, is not just the number of births, but also the balance between generations and the overall sustainability of the socioeconomic system. That said, the lowest birth rates generally correspond to indicators of social progress. In Europe and the United States, for example, the drop in births has coincided with rising female participation in the labor market, higher education levels, and a general shift away from traditional religion-based models, along with the wider availability of contraception.