The US fertility rate has been trending down for decades, leaving researchers and policymakers searching for causes that may help pinpoint solutions. There have been all kinds of theories, including soaring costs of childcare, the rise of birth control and even the role of car seat regulations. A new study links the introduction of smartphones to a sharp drop in US fertility rates between 2007 and 2011, reports BritPanorama.
A new paper offers a provocative culprit in a succinct package: the smartphone. However, some researchers remain skeptical that this single factor could play such an outsized role in a much longer-term trend. 2007 marked a particularly significant “inflection point” in the US fertility rate, said Caitlin Myers, an economist with Middlebury College and the National Bureau of Economic Research, who is the lead author on the new paper.
The Great Recession started at the end of that year, just a few months after Apple began rolling out the iPhone in the US – the first modern smartphone. “We initially all just assumed it was the global recession. Births have long been known to be pro-cyclical, and the conventional wisdom was they’ll come back up,” she said. “Then we had a baby-less recovery.”
In the years since, Myers noted she would often raise the topic of “iGen” — a term for the first generation to grow up entirely in a world with smartphones — and wonder about the drop in so-called risky behaviors in this group, who tend to have less sex and use fewer substances. Her stepson, Ezekiel Hooper, observed that his younger siblings engaged in different forms of social interaction compared to his generation, with much more happening through screens rather than in person — interactions that created “no chance of having a kid,” he said.
Hooper began exploring the connection between smartphones and fertility rates for his senior thesis while studying at Middlebury a couple of years ago, and co-authored the working paper published last week. In it, he and Myers tracked the spread of AT&T mobile broadband — initially the only network available for the iPhone — and compared changes in the fertility rate between 2007 and 2011 with the proportion of the population living with access to the network.
They found that in counties where over 90% of residents had early smartphone access, the fertility rate fell significantly more than it did in counties where less than 10% of residents had the network. The difference was particularly pronounced among teenagers; the birth rate among 15- to 19-year-olds fell about 26% between 2007 and 2011 in counties with broad smartphone access, compared to a 14% drop in counties with limited access.
For women in their 20s, the birth rate declined by 15% in counties with widespread access, versus 10% in areas with limited access. Notably, for women in their 30s, the birth rate decreased in counties with broader access while it rose elsewhere. Overall, researchers estimate that the early diffusion of the iPhone accounted for between a third and half of the decline in the general US fertility rate during the studied period.
The study does not specify exactly why smartphones would lower fertility rates, but the authors theorize that this may relate to how technology has shifted time and attention — particularly in ways that could lead to less sexual activity and fewer pregnancies. Drops in unintended births among young people are key contributors to the broader decline in fertility rates in the US, the researchers note. The smartphone may have replaced certain physical interactions that previously led to unintended pregnancies.
“Instead of looking to somebody else for that interaction, they might be looking to online pornography,” Hooper said. “Maybe instead of going out and just having those physical interactions with their friends and peers, they’re having those interactions through their phone instead.”
A long history of declining fertility
Other experts focused on the social and health aspects of fertility agree that smartphones have introduced changes in relationship patterns leading to lower fertility rates; however, they stress the importance of the broader context. “It’s true that people are marrying later, partnering later, and spending less of adulthood in stable relationships, and smartphones may contribute to those trends. But they occur alongside major changes in housing costs, education, labor markets, gender norms, and social life,” said Dr. Alison Gemmill, an associate professor of epidemiology at the UCLA School of Public Health.
When considering wider timeframes, the 2007 inflection point appears less significant. Fertility decline trends in the US began decades before the iPhone’s release, especially in relation to teen birth rates, which have been decreasing since the 1950s. “Looking at that longer history gives us a better sense of the scope of explanations that make sense,” noted Dr. Sarah Hayford, director of the Institute for Population Research and a professor of sociology at The Ohio State University.
Additionally, there is a historical precedent for linking technological change with birth rates. Studies from the 1960s and 1970s investigated how the introduction of radio and television influenced societal views on family size.
“The bigger picture view is that exposure to technology changes your sources of information and ideals about desirable family structures,” Dr. Gemmill stated. “To suggest such a sharp effect would arise from a specific technology in 2007 is somewhat dubious.”
This period also saw an expansion of access to IUDs and injectable contraceptives among young people in the US, leading many to connect this directly to lower teen birth rates and decreased unintended pregnancies more than to smartphones.
The smartphone’s functions have significantly evolved since its inception. The first iPhone allowed users to browse the internet and take photographs, but lacked many apps and widespread social media use. Dating apps gained popularity in the mid-2010s, with services like OnlyFans emerging in 2016.
“People often associate smartphones with addictive scrolling, personalized content, and digital substitutes for face-to-face interaction, yet this study predates many of those features,” Gemmill added.
A difficult policy question
The researchers behind the new study emphasize that smartphones do not entirely account for the decline in US fertility rates. “We’re not saying this is the only factor. We’re saying it’s a major factor,” Myers clarified, noting the study aimed to consider various confounding factors. Nonetheless, addressing the issue remains a complex policy challenge for enhancing fertility rates.
“I think it’s policy-relevant because I’m worried that we’re not fully understanding why fertility is down and may be looking in the wrong places,” Myers said. “However, I don’t have a clear policy solution related to smartphones. No one believes the government will confiscate everyone’s phones, nor do I suggest they should.”
A pronatalist movement has gained traction under the Trump administration, supported by policies encouraging higher birth rates. “Perhaps the solutions lie in fostering more face-to-face interactions rather than simply incentivizing births financially,” Hooper concluded.
