Journal of Population Economics

, Volume 26, Issue 1, pp 109–145 | Cite as

The causal relationship between female labor supply and fertility in the USA: updated evidence via a time series multi-horizon approach

  • Paraskevi K. Salamaliki
  • Ioannis A. VenetisEmail author
  • Nicholas Giannakopoulos
Original Paper


The purpose of this paper is to investigate the causality between female labor supply and fertility in the presence of auxiliary variables such as education, female wages, and male relative cohort size. We employ annual time series data spanning the period 1948 to 2007 for both an aggregate and an age-specific group. Our econometric specification follows closely the concepts and procedures proposed by Dufour and Renault (Econometrica 66(5):1099–1125, 1998) and Dufour et al. (J Econom 132:337–362, 2006) in that we conduct multi-horizon causality tests that allow for direct and indirect effects to take place. The sign and economic importance of our results is assessed via the estimation of impulse response functions. Our results establish bidirectional indirect causality between female labor supply and fertility and suggest interesting causal chains among the system variables. Causality effects are stronger for the age-specific group.


Female labor supply Fertility Multi-horizon causality 

JEL Classification

C32 J13 J21 



The authors gratefully acknowledge the detailed and constructive comments of two anonymous referees that led to substantial improvements. All remaining errors, if any, are of course ours.


  1. Becker GS (1960) An economic analysis of fertility. In: Demographic and economic change in developed countries. Universities-N.B.E.R. conference series No. 11. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker GS (1981) A treatise on the family. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Bratti M, Tatsiramos K (2012) The effect of delaying motherhood on the second childbirth in Europe. J Popul Econ 25:291–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Butz WP, Ward MP (1979) The emergence of countercyclical fertility. Am Econ Rev 69(3): 318–328Google Scholar
  5. Cheng BS (1996a) An investigation of cointegration and causality between fertility and female labor force participation. Appl Econ Lett 3(1):29–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cheng BS (1996b) The causal relationship between African American fertility and female labor supply: policy implications. Rev Black Polit Econ 25:77–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cheng BS, Hsu RC, Chu Q (1997) The causality between fertility and female labor force participation in Japan. Appl Econ Lett 4(2):113–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dickey DA, Fuller W (1979) Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. J Am Stat Assoc 74(366):427–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dolado JJ, Lütkepohl H (1996) Making Wald tests work for cointegrated VAR systems. Econom Rev 15(4):369–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Doornik JA (2007) Object-oriented matrix programming using Ox, 3rd edn. Timberlake Consultants Press, London. Google Scholar
  11. Dufour JM, Renault E (1998) Short-run and long-run causality in time series: theory. Econometrica 66(5):1099–1125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dufour JM, Pelletier D, Renault E (2006) Short run and long run causality in time series: inference. J Econom 132:337–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dufour JM, Taamouti A (2010) Short and long run causality measures: theory and inference. J Econom 154:42–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Easterlin RA (1973) Relative economic status and the american fertility swing. In: Sheldon EB (ed) Family economic behavior: problems and prospects. Lippincott, Philadelphia, pp 170–223Google Scholar
  15. EasterlinRothenberg TJ, Stock JH RA (1980) American population since 1940. In: Feldstein M (ed) The American economy in transition. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 275–321Google Scholar
  16. Elliott G, Rothenberg TJ, Stock JH (1996) Efficient tests for an autoregressive unit root. Econometrica 64:813–836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Engelhardt H, Kögel T, Prskawetz A (2004) Fertility and women’s employment reconsidered: a macro-level time-series analysis for developed countries, 1960–2000. Popul Stud 58(1):109–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Engelhardt H, Prskawetz A (2004) On the changing correlation between fertility and female employment over space and time. Eur J Popul 20:35–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ermisch J (1979) The relevance of the ‘Easterlin hypothesis’ and the ‘new home economics’ to fertility movements in Great Britain. Popul Stud 33:39–58Google Scholar
  20. Ermisch J (1980) Time costs, aspirations and the effect of economic growth on german fertility. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 42:125–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Giles JA (2002) Testing for two-step Granger non-causality in trivariate VAR models. In: Ullah A, Wan AK, Chaturvedi A (eds) Handbook of applied econometrics and statistical inference. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 371–399 (Chapter 18)Google Scholar
  22. Granger CWJ (1969). Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica 37(3):424–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hill JB (2005) Causation delays and causal neutralization up to three steps ahead: the money-output relationship revisited. Department of Economics, Florida International University. Available:
  24. Hill JB (2007) Efficient tests of long-run causation in trivariate var processes with a rolling window study of the money–income relationship. J Appl Econom 22:747–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hotz VJ, Klerman JA, Willis RJ (1997) The economics of fertility in developed countries. In: Rosenzweig MR, Stark O (eds) Hanbook of population and family economics. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 275–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jeon Y, Shields MP (2008) The impact of relative cohort size on U.S. fertility 1913–2001. IZA discussion paper no. 3587Google Scholar
  27. Johansen S (1991) Estimation and hypothesis testing of cointegrating vectors in Gaussian vector autoregressive models. Econometrica, 59:1551–1580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Johansen S (1995) Likelihood based inference in cointegrated vector autoregressive models. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kilian L, Ohanian LE (1998) Is there a trend break in U.S. GNP? A macroeconomic perspective. Fed Reserve Bank Minneap Staff Rep 244Google Scholar
  30. Kilian L, Ohanian LE (2002) Unit roots, trend breaks, and transitory dynamics: a macroeconomic perspective. Macroecon Dyn 6:614-632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Klijzing E, Sieger J, Keilman N, Groot L (1988) Static versus dynamic analysis of the interaction between female labour force participation and fertility. Eur J Popul 4:97–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kohler HP, Billari FC, Ortega JA (2002) The emergence of lowest–low fertility in Europe during the 1990’s. Popul Dev Rev 28(4):641–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Korenman S, Neumark D (2000) Cohort crowding and youth labor markets (a cross-national analysis). In: Blanchflower DG, Freeman RB (eds)Youth employment and joblessness in advanced countries. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 57–106Google Scholar
  34. Kwiatkowski D, Phillips PCB, Schmidt P, Yongcheol S (1992) Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root. J Econom 54:159–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lehrer E, Nerlove M (1986) Female labor force behaviour and fertility in the United States. Annu Rev Sociol 12:181–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lütkepohl H (1993) Testing for causation between two variables in higher dimensional VAR models. In: Schneeweiss H, Zimmermann K (eds) Studies in applied econometrics. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  37. Macunovich DJ (1996a) Relative income and price of time: exploring their effects on fertility and female labor force participation. Popul Dev Rev (Supplement) 22:223–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Macunovich DJ (1996b) A review of recent developments in the economics of fertility. In: Menchik P (ed) Household and family economics. Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp 91–150Google Scholar
  39. Macunovich DJ (1998) Fertility and the Easterlin hypothesis: an assessment of the literature. J Popul Econ 11:53–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Macunovich DJ (1999) The fortunes of one’s birth: relative cohort size and the youth labor market in the United States. J Popul Econ 12:215–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McNown R (2003) A cointegration model of age-specific fertility and female labor supply in the United States. South Econ J 70(2):344–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McNown R, Rajbhandary S (2003) Time series analysis of fertility and female labor market behavior. J Popul Econ 16:501–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McNown R, Ridao-Cano C (2005) A time series model of fertility and female labour supply in the UK. Appl Econ 37(5):521–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Michael RT (1985) Consequences of the rise in female labor force participation rates: questions and probes. J Labor Econ 3(1) Part 2: Trends in Women’s Work, Education, and Family Building:S117–S146Google Scholar
  45. Mishra V, Smyth R (2010) Female labor force participation and total fertility rates in the OECD: new evidence from panel cointegration and Granger causality testing. J Econ Bus 62:48–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mishra V, Nielsen I, Smyth R (2010) On the relationship between female labour force participation and fertility in G7 countries: evidence from panel cointegration and Granger causality. Empir Econ 38:361–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Montgomery M, Trussell J (1986) Models of marital status and childbearing. In: Ashenfelter O, Layard R (eds) Handbook of labor economics, volume I. Elsevier Science, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  48. Ng S, Perron P (2001) Lag length selection and the construction of unit root tests with good size and power. Econometrica 69(6):1519–1554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Phillips PCB, Perron P (1988) Testing for unit roots in time series regression. Biometrika 75: 423–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Toda HY, Yamamoto T (1995) Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes. J Econom 66:225–250Google Scholar
  51. Waldorf B, Byun P (2005) Meta-analysis of the impact of age structure on fertility. J Popul Econ 18:15–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Willis RJ (1973) A new approach to the economic theory of fertility behavior. J Polit Econ 81: S14–S64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zimmermann KF (1985) Familienökonomie. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zivot E, Andrews DWK (1992) Further evidence on the great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. J Bus Econ Stat 10(3):251–270Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paraskevi K. Salamaliki
    • 1
  • Ioannis A. Venetis
    • 1
    Email author
  • Nicholas Giannakopoulos
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity of PatrasRioGreece

Personalised recommendations