The Dutch Fertility Paradox: How the Netherlands Has Managed to Sustain Near-Replacement Fertility

  • Melinda C. MillsEmail author


Fertility in the Netherlands has never dipped to the extremely low levels observed in some other European countries. The Netherlands has always maintained a total fertility rate (TFR, average number of children per woman) above 1.7. In 2009, the TFR was 1.88. The absence of direct family policies and the fact that the Netherlands is a highly secular society both make the country’s relatively high fertility, in a European context, appear as a paradox. The Dutch government provides substantial welfare benefits, but, given concerns about high population density, no specific policies have been implemented to raise fertility. Dutch society is characterized by a strong value preference for fathers to be the primary breadwinners and mothers to care for children at home. As a result, the Netherlands stands out as having the world’s highest fraction of women in the labor force who are part-time workers. Women tend to work in occupations that allow part-time work and higher work-family reconciliation, resulting in what has been termed unequal work for unequal pay. The state has had a paternalistic role—supporting mothers to work part time and providing child allowances and, until recently, free higher-level education and generous benefits. The Netherlands shows that religion is not necessarily a prerequisite for fertility and that work-life reconciliation and individual control of fertility can sustain moderate fertility levels. The recent financial crisis, however, has called the sustainability of this system into question and has signaled the end of many generous state policies, combined with increased calls for women to become less reliant on their husbands and more economically independent.


Netherlands Fertility Family policy Secularization Welfare state Political regimes Gender roles Education Housing Immigrant fertility 


  1. Abels, R. (2013, November 5). Minister Bussemaker: “Te veel vrouwen teren op hun man” [Minister Bussemaker: “Too many women live off their husbands”]. Trouw.Google Scholar
  2. Adsera, A. (2006). Religion and changes in family-size norms in developed countries. Review of Religious Research, 47(3), 271–286.Google Scholar
  3. Allmendinger, J. (1989). Educational systems and labor market outcomes. European Sociological Review, 5(3), 231–250.Google Scholar
  4. Bail, C. A. (2008). The configuration of symbolic boundaries against immigrants in Europe. American Sociological Review, 73, 37–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balbo, N., Billari, F. C., & Mills, M. (2013). Fertility in advanced societies: A review. European Journal of Population, 29, 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beerthuizen, R. J. C. M. (2003). Anticonceptie op maat: Van puberteit tot overgang [Contraception to size: From puberty until menopause]. Houten: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum.Google Scholar
  7. Begall, K. H., & Mills, M. (2011). The impact of perceived work control, job strain and work-family conflict on fertility intentions: A European comparison. European Journal of Population, 27(4), 433–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Begall, K. H., & Mills, M. (2013). The influence of educational field, occupation and occupational sex segregation on fertility in the Netherlands. European Sociological Review, 29(4), 720–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Belkin, L. (2013, December 8). What mothers really want: To opt in between. Huffington Post. Accessed 24 July 2014.
  10. Berghammer, C. (2009). Religious socialization and fertility: Transition to third birth in the Netherlands. European Journal of Population, 25, 297–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bryant, C. (1981). Depillarisation in the Netherlands. British Journal of Sociology, 32(1), 56–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Buehler, C., & Philipov, D. (2005). Social capital related to fertility: Theoretical foundation and empirical evidence for Bulgaria. In Vienna Yearbook of Population Research (pp. 53–82). Wien: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
  13. Bulatao, R. A., & Casterline, J. B. (Eds.). (2001). Global fertility transition. Population and Development Review, 27(suppl).Google Scholar
  14. Castiglioni, M., & Dalla Zuanna, G. (1994). Innovation and tradition: Reproductive and marital behavior in Italy in the 1970s and 1980s. European Journal of Population, 10(2), 107–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. CBS (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek). (2004). Kinderloosheid en opleidingsnivea [Childlessness and educational level]. Accessed 23 July 2014.
  16. CBS (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek). (2010). Veel Antilliaanse en Surinaamse tienermoders [More Antiliean and Surinamese teenage mothers]. Accessed 8 Sept 2014.
  17. CBS (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek). (2011). Niet-gehuwd samenwonen in de Europese Unie [Unmarried cohabitation in the European Union]. Accessed 8 Sept 2014.
  18. CBS (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek). (2012). Kinderen van niet gehuwde ouders vaker erkend [Children born from unmarried parents more often legally recognized]. Accessed 8 Sept 2014.
  19. Chiuri, M. C., & Jappelli, J. (2003). Financial market imperfections and home ownership: A comparative study. European Economic Review, 47(5), 857–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Clark, W. A. V., Deurloo, M. C., & Dieleman, F. M. (1994). Tenure changes in the context of micro level family and macro level economic shifts. Urban Studies, 31(1), 137–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Cook, A., & Minnotte, K. L. (2008). Occupational and industry sex segregation and the work–family interface. Sex Roles, 59, 800–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. De Bruin, E. (2007). Dutch women don’t get depressed: Hoe komen vrouwen zo stoer? [How is that women are so tough?]. Amsterdam: Contact.Google Scholar
  24. De Graaf, N. D., & Te Grotenhuis, M. (2008). Traditional Christian belief and belief in the supernatural: Diverging trends in the Netherlands between 1979 and 2005? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 47(4), 585–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. De Valk, H., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2007). Timing preferences for women’s family-life transitions: Intergenerational transmission among migrants and Dutch. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 190–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. De Valk, H., Liefbroer, A. C., Esveldt, I., & Henkens, K. (2004). Family formation and cultural integration among migrants in the Netherlands. Genus, 55, 9–36.Google Scholar
  27. De Vries, M. R., & Wolbers, M. H. J. (2005). Non-standard employment relations and wages among school leavers in the Netherlands. Work, Employment and Society, 19, 503–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dekker, P., & Ester, P. (1996). Depillarization, deconfessionalization, and the de-ideologization: Empirical trends in Dutch society, 1958–1992. Review of Religious Research, 37(4), 325–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Den Dulk, L. (2001). Work-family arrangements in organisations: A cross-national study in the Netherlands, Italy, the United Kingdom and Sweden. Amsterdam: Rozenberg.Google Scholar
  30. Dorbritz, J., Höhn, C., & Naderi, R. (2005). The demographic future of Europe—Facts, figures, policies: Results of the Population Policy Acceptance Study (PPAS). Stuttgart: Robert Bosch Foundation/Federal Institute for Population Research.Google Scholar
  31. Duvander, A.-Z., Lappegård, T., & Andersson, G. (2010). Family policy and fertility: Fathers’ and mothers’ use of parental leave and continued childbearing in Norway and Sweden. Journal of European Social Policy, 20, 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Dykstra, P. A., & Komter, A. E. (2006). Structural characteristics of Dutch kin networks. In P. A. Dykstra, M. Kalmijn, T. C. M. Knijn, A. E. Komter, A. C. Liefbroer, & C. H. Mulder (Eds.), Family solidarity in the Netherlands (pp. 21–42). Amsterdam: Dutch University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Engelen, T. L. M., & Hillebrand, J. H. A. (1986). Fertility and nuptiality in the Netherlands, 1850–1960. Population Studies-Journal of Demography, 40(3), 487–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. European Council. (2002). Presidency conclusions, Barcelona European Council, 15–16 Mar 2002. Document SN 100/1/02 REV 1. Accessed 9 Oct 2014.
  35. European Union. (2011). Eurostat: Your key to European statistics. Accessed 22 Mar 2012.
  36. Feijten, P., & Mulder, C. H. (2002). The timing of household events and housing events in the Netherlands: A longitudinal perspective. Housing Studies, 17(5), 773–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. FNV Bondgenoten. (2014). Bezuinigingen kinderopvang—feiten en cijfers [Cuts in childcare—facts and numbers]. Accessed 22 July 2014.
  38. Fokkema, T., de Valk, H., de Beer, J., & van Duin, C. (2008). The Netherlands: Childbearing within the context of a “Poldermodel” society. Demographic Research, 19(21), 743–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fokkema, C. M., & Esveldt, I. (2006). Child-friendly policies (Work Package 7). Wiesbaden: Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung.Google Scholar
  40. Fokkema, T., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2008). Trends in living arrangements in Europe: Convergence or divergence? Demographic Research, 19, 1351–1418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Frejka, T. (2008). Birth regulation in Europe: Completing the contraceptive revolution. Demographic Research, 19(5), 73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Frejka, T., & Westoff, C. F. (2008). Religion, religiousness, and fertility in the US and in Europe. European Journal of Population, 24(1), 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Garssen, J., & Nicolaas, H. (2006). Recente trends in de vruchtbaarheid van niet-westers allochtone vrouwen [Recent fertility trends of non-Western foreign women]. Bevolkingstrends, 54(1), 15–31.Google Scholar
  44. Garssen, J., & van Duin, C. (2006). Bevolkingsprognose 2006–2050: Belangrijke uitkomsten [Population projections 2006–2050: Important outcomes]. Bevolkingstrends, 54(4), 85–92.Google Scholar
  45. Government of the Netherlands. (1999). National Report submitted to the Regional Population conference, Budapest, December 1998. In: UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) (Ed.), Population in Europe and North America on the eve of the Millennium: Dynamics and policy responses (pp. 131–136). Geneva: UNECE.Google Scholar
  46. Hakim, C. (2000). Work-lifestyle choices in the 21st century: Preference theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Hakim, C. (2003). Models of the family in modern societies: Ideals and realities. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  48. Hoem, J. M., Neyer, G., & Andersson, G. (2006). Educational attainment and childlessness: The relationship between educational field, educational level, and childlessness among Swedish women born in 1955–59. Demographic Research, 14, 331–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. ILO (International Labour Organization). (2013). Working conditions laws report 2012: A global review. Geneva: ILO.Google Scholar
  50. Ivanova, K., Mills, M., & Veenstra, R. (2014). Parental residential and partnering transitions as triggers of adolescent romantic relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 76(3), 465–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Jones, G. W. (2007). Delayed marriage and very low fertility in Pacific Asia. Population and Development Review, 33, 453–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kalmijn, M., & Luijkx, R. (2006). Changes in women’s employment and occupational mobility in the Netherlands: 1995 to 2000. In H.-P. Blossfeld & H. Hofmeister (Eds.), Globalization, uncertainty and women’s careers: An international comparison (pp. 84–112). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  53. Kendig, H. L. (1984). Housing careers, life cycle and residential mobility: Implications for the housing market. Urban Studies, 21, 271–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Kohler, H. P., Billari, F. C., & Ortega, J. A. (2002). The emergence of lowest-low fertility in Europe during the 1990s. Population and Development Review, 28, 641–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Kontula, O., & Miettinen, A. (2005). Synthesis report on demographic behaviour, existing population related policies, and expectations men and women have concerning the state (Working Paper E 19/2005). Helsinki: Population Research Institute/Family Federation of Finland.Google Scholar
  56. Kool-Smit, J. E. (1967). Het onbehagen bij de vrouw [The discomfort of women]. De Gids, 130(9/10), 267–281.Google Scholar
  57. Lappegård, T., & Rønsen, M. (2005). The multifaceted impact of education on entry into motherhood. European Journal of Population, 21, 31–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lebeau, Y., Stumpf, R., Brown, R., Lucchesi, M. A. S., & Kwiek, M. (2012). Who shall pay for the public good? Comparative trends in the funding crisis of public higher education. Compare, 42(1), 137–157.Google Scholar
  59. Lesthaeghe, R. (1995). The second demographic transition in Western countries: An interpretation. In K. O. Mason & A. M. Jensen (Eds.), Gender and family change in industrialized countries (pp. 17–62). Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  60. Liefbroer, A. C. (2005). The impact of perceived costs and rewards of childbearing on entry into parenthood: Evidence from a panel study. European Journal of Population, 21(4), 367–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Liefbroer, A. C., & Dykstra, P. (2000). Levenslopen in verandering: Een studie naar ontwikkelingen in de levenslopen van Nederlanders geboren tussen 1900 en 1970 [The changing life course: A study of the development of the life course of Dutch persons born between 1900 and 1970]. WRR Voorstudies en achtergronden V107. Den Haag: Sdu Uitgevers.Google Scholar
  62. Longman, P. (2006). The return of patriarchy. Foreign Policy, 153, 56–65.Google Scholar
  63. Luijkx, R., Kalmijn, M., & Muffels, R. J. A. (2006). The impact of globalization on job and career mobility of Dutch men: Life-history data from the mid-1950s to the year 2000. In H.-P. Blossfeld, M. Mills, & F. Bernardi (Eds.), Globalization, uncertainty, and men’s careers: An international comparison (pp. 117–144). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  64. Martin-Garcia, T. (2010). The impact of occupational sex-composition on women’s fertility in Spain. European Societies, 12, 113–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research/Vienna Institute of Demography. (2014). The human fertility database. Accessed 6 June 2014.
  66. Mills, M., & Blossfeld, H.-P. (2005). Globalization, uncertainty, and the early life course: A theoretical framework. In H.-P. Blossfeld, E. Klijzing, M. Mills, & K. Kurz (Eds.), Globalization, uncertainty and youth in society (pp. 1–24). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  67. Mills, M., & Praeg, P. (2013). The role of gender in school-to-work transitions in Europe (Short Statistical Report 4). Brussels: European Commission Directorate-General, Justice and Fundamental Rights.Google Scholar
  68. Mills, M., & Täht, K. (2010). Nonstandard work schedules and partnership quality: Quantitative and qualitative findings. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 860–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Mills, M., Mencarini, L., Tanturri, M. L., & Begall, K. (2008). Gender equity and fertility intentions in Italy and the Netherlands. Demographic Research, 18(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Mills, M., Rindfuss, R. R., McDonald, P., & te Velde, E. (2011). Why do people postpone parenthood? Reasons and social policy incentives. Human Reproduction Update, 17(6), 848–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Mills, M., Praeg, P., Tsang, F., Begall, K., Derbyshire, J., Kohle, L., Miani, C., & Hoorens, S. (2013). Use of childcare services in the EU Member States and progress towards the Barcelona targets (Short Statistical Report 1). Brussels: European Commission Directorate-General, Justice and Fundamental Rights.Google Scholar
  72. Mooi-Reci, I., & Mills, M. (2012). Gender inequality and unemployment reforms: Lessons from twenty years of unemployment insurance benefit experiments. Social Forces, 91(2), 583–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Mulder, C. H. (2006). Home-ownership and family formation. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 21, 281–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Mulder, C. H., & Billari, F. C. (2010). Home-ownership regimes and lowest-low fertility. Housing Studies, 25, 527–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Mulder, C. H., & Wagner, M. (1998). First-time home-ownership in the family life course: A West German-Dutch comparison. Urban Studies, 35(4), 687–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Mulder, C. H., & Wagner, M. (2001). The connections between family formation and first-time home ownership in the context of West Germany and the Netherlands. European Journal of Population, 17, 137–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Murphy, M. J., & Sullivan, O. (1985). Housing tenure and family formation in contemporary Britain. European Sociological Review, 1(3), 230–243.Google Scholar
  78. Need, A., & de Graaf, N. D. (1996). “Losing my religion:” A dynamic analysis of leaving the church in the Netherlands. European Sociological Review, 12(1), 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Poortman, A.-R., & Mills, M. (2012). Joint investments in marriage and cohabitation: The role of legal and symbolic factors. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74(2), 357–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Portegijs, W., Hermans, B., & Lalta, V. (2006). Emancipatiemonitor 2006: Veranderingen in de leefsituatie en levensloop [Emancipation monitor 2006: Changes in the living situation and life course]. Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.Google Scholar
  81. Remery, C., van Doorne-Huiskes, A., & Schippers, J. (2002). Labor market flexibility in the Netherlands: Looking for winners and losers. Work, Employment and Society, 16, 477–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Rijksoverheid. (2014). Kinderbijslag [Child allowances]. Accessed 22 July 2014.
  83. Rindfuss, R. R., Bumpass, L., & St John, C. (1980). Education and fertility: Implications for the roles women occupy. American Sociological Review, 45, 431–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Rindfuss, R. R., St. John, C., & Bumpass, L. L. (1984). Education and the timing of motherhood: Disentangling causation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 46(4), 981–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Rindfuss, R. R., Morgan, S. P., & Offutt, K. (1996). Education and the changing age pattern of American fertility: 1963–1989. Demography, 33(3), 277–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Schippers, J. J. (1987). Beloningsverschillen tussen mannen en vrouwen: Een economische analyse [Pay gap between men and women: An economic analysis]. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.Google Scholar
  87. SCP (Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau). (2006). Emancipatiemonitor 2006 [Emancipation monitor 2006]. Den Haag: SCP.Google Scholar
  88. Shavit, Y., & Müller, W. (Eds.). (1997). From school to work: A comparative study of educational qualifications and occupational destinations. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  89. Sobotka, T. (2004). Postponement of childbearing and low fertility in Europe. Amsterdam: University of Groningen/Thela Thesis.Google Scholar
  90. Somers, A., & Van Poppel, F. (2003). Catholic priests and the fertility transition among Dutch Catholics, 1935–1970. Annales de Demographie Historique, 2, 57–88.Google Scholar
  91. Statistics Netherlands. (2007). Statistical yearbook of the Netherlands 2007. Voorburg/Heerlen: Statistics Netherlands.Google Scholar
  92. Triandafyllidou, A., Gropas, R., & Vogel, D. (2007). Introduction. In A. Triandafyllidou & R. Gropas (Eds.), European immigration: A sourcebook (pp. 1–19). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  93. UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe). (2014). Statistical database: Mean age of women at birth of first child. Accessed 6 June 2014.
  94. UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund). (2013). Child well-being in rich countries: A comparative overview. Accessed 22 July 2014.
  95. Uunk, W. (2004). The economic consequences of divorce for women in the European Union: The impact of welfare state arrangements. European Journal of Population, 20, 251–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Van Bavel, J. (2010). Choice of study discipline and the postponement of motherhood in Europe: The impact of expected earnings, gender composition, and family attitudes. Demography, 47(2), 439–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Van Poppel, F. (1985). Late fertility decline in the Netherlands: The influence of religious denomination, socio-economic group, and region. European Journal of Population, 1(4), 347–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Visser, J. (2002). The first part-time economy in the world: A model to be followed? Journal of European Social Policy, 12(1), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Visser, J., & Hemerijck, A. (1999). A Dutch miracle. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  100. Wielers, R. J. J., & Mills, M. (2011). The flexibilization of the Dutch labor market: The impact of globalization on the life course and inequality. In H.-P. Blossfeld, S. Buchholz, D. Hofaecker, & K. Kolb (Eds.), Globalized markets and social inequality in Europe (pp. 46–75). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Sociology, Nuffield CollegeUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations