Canadian Fertility Trends and Policies: A Story of Regional Variation

  • Sarah R. Brauner-OttoEmail author


Fertility in Canada has been declining since the peak of the baby boom in the late 1950s. The period total fertility rate (TFR) was almost 4.00 births per woman in 1959, reached a low of 1.51 in 2000, and currently stands at 1.61. The decline was greatest during the 1960s and then slowed considerably, and Canada’s TFR has been fairly stable since the 1970s. The full story of Canadian fertility is not in this dramatic decline, however, but rather in the variation across provinces. Provinces have considerable freedom to implement their own policies and shape their own social institutions. As a result, the varying institutional contexts have supported different fertility trends and levels. Alberta and provinces or territories with relatively large Aboriginal populations have higher fertility, while British Columbia and Ontario have the lowest levels. Québec’s fertility was the lowest in the 1980s but has seen a recent increase, likely at least partly a result of pro-natalist policies such as tax incentives, allowances, very low-cost childcare, and expansive parental leave.


Canada Sub-regional variation Childcare Family benefits Family policies 



I would like to thank Jesse Shuster-Leibner for his research assistance, particularly with helping me understand the French documents; Anne Gauthier for her comments and help identifying important resources; Ron Rindfuss and Minja Choe for their comments; and the four reviewers of this chapter for their detailed, thoughtful, and constructive comments.


  1. Adsera, A., & Ferrer, A. (2013). The fertility of recent immigrants to Canada. Discussion Paper No. 7289. Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor.Google Scholar
  2. Adsera, A., & Ferrer, A. (2014). Factors influencing the fertility choices of child immigrants in Canada. Population Studies, 68(1), 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ang, X. L. (2015). The effects of cash transfer fertility incentives and parental leave benefits on fertility and labor supply: Evidence from two natural experiments. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 36(2), 263–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beaujot, R., & Wang, J. (2010). Low fertility in Canada: The Nordic model in Québec and the U.S. model in Alberta. Canadian Studies in Population, 37, 375–410.Google Scholar
  5. Beaujot, R., & Woldemicael, G. (2010). Fertility behavior of immigrants in Canada: Converging trends. Discussion Paper No. 10-05. London: University of Western Ontario, Population Studies Centre.Google Scholar
  6. Beaujot, R., Du, C. J., & Ravanera, C. R. (2013). Family policies in Québec and the rest of Canada: Implications for fertility, child-care, women’s paid work, and child development indicators. Canadian Public Policy, 39(2), 221–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bélanger, C. (2000). The quiet revolution. Accessed June 15, 2015.
  8. Bélanger, A. (Ed.). (2006). Report on the demographic situation in Canada, 2002. 91-209-XIE. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
  9. Bélanger, A., & Gilbert, S. (2006). The fertility of immigrant women and their Canadian-born daughters: Report on the demographic situation in Canada 2002. Catalogue number 91-209-XIE. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
  10. Bélanger, A., & Ouellet, G. (2005). A comparative study of recent trends in Canadian and American Fertility, 1980–1999. In A. Bélanger (Ed.), Report on the demographic situation in Canada 2001 (pp. 107–136). 91–209-XIE. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
  11. Casas, F. R., & Meaghan, D. E. (1996). A study of repeated courses among secondary students in Ontario. The Journal of Educational Research, 90(2), 116–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Castles, F. G. (2003). The world turned upside down: Below-replacement fertility, changing preferences and family-friendly public policy in 21 OECD countries. Journal of European Social Policy, 13(3), 209–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chandola, T., Coleman, D. A., & Hiorns, R. W. (2002). Distinctive features of age-specific fertility profiles in the English-speaking world: Common patterns in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. Population Studies, 56, 181–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chiuri, M. C., & Jappelli, T. (2003). Financial market imperfections and home ownership: A comparative study. European Economic Review, 47(5), 857–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cleveland, G., Forer, B., Hyatt, D., Japel, C., & Krashinsky, M. (2008). New evidence about child care in Canada: Use patterns, affordability, and quality. IRPP Choices, 14(12), 1–42.Google Scholar
  16. Conseil de la famille et de l’enfance Québec. (2008). La politique familiale au Québec: Visée, portée, durée et rayonnement. Québec: Conseil de la famille et de l’enfance.Google Scholar
  17. Crompton, S., & Keown, L.-A. (2009). Do parental benefits influence fertility decisions? Statistics Canada. Accessed June 1, 2015.
  18. Denton, F. T., Feaver, C. H., & Spencer, B. G. (2000). The future population of Canada and its age distribution. In F. T. Denton, D. Fretz, & B. G. Spencer (Eds.), Independence and economic security in old age (pp. 27–56). Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
  19. Dickinson, J. A., & Young, B. J. (2003). A short history of Québec. Montréal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Duclos, E., Lefebvre, P., & Merrigan, P. (2001). A “natural experiment” on the economics of storks: Evidence on the impact of differential family policy on fertility rates in Canada. Working Paper 136. Montréal: Université du Québec à Montréal, Centre De Recherche Sur l’Emploi Et Les Fluctuations Économiques Cahier De recherche/Center for Research on Economic Fluctuations and Employment.Google Scholar
  21. Éditeur officiel du Québec. (2015). Chapter A-29.011. An Act Respecting Parental Insurance. Accessed June 4, 2015.
  22. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  23. Finkle, M., Climaco, C., Khadduri, J., & Steele, M. (2006). Housing allowance options for Canada. Research Report: Housing Affordability and Finance Series. Ottawa: Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.Google Scholar
  24. Fortin, P., Godbout, L., & St-Cerny, S. (2012). Impact of Québec’s universal low-fee childcare program on female labour force participation, domestic income, and government budgets. Working Paper 02. Sherbrooke: Chaire de recherche en fiscalité et en finances publiques.Google Scholar
  25. Frejka, T., & Westoff, C. F. (2007). Religion, religiousness and fertility in the US and in Europe. European Journal of Population, 24(1), 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gauvreau, D. (2006). Religious diversity and the onset of the fertility transition: Canada, 1870–1900. In R. Derosas & F. van Poppel (Eds.), Religion and the decline of fertility in the Western World (pp. 235–258). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gauvreau, D., & Gossage, P. (2001). Canadian fertility transitions: Québec and Ontario at the turn of the twentieth century. Journal of Family History, 26(2), 162–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Government of Canada, Justice Laws Website. (2015). Employment Insurance Act S.C. 1996, c. 23. Accessed June 4, 2015.
  29. Halli, S. S., Dai, S. Y., George, M. V., & Verma, R. B. P. (1996). Visible minority fertility in Canada, 1981–1986. Genus, 52(1/2), 181–189.Google Scholar
  30. Hayford, S. R., & Morgan, S. P. (2008). Religiosity and fertility in the United States: The role of fertility intentions. Social Forces, 86(3), 1163–1188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hofmann, B., & Hohmeyer, K. (2013). Perceived economic uncertainty and fertility: Evidence from a labor market reform. Journal of Marriage and Family, 75, 503–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hulchanski, J. D. (2006). What factors shape Canadian housing policy? The intergovernmental role in Canada’s housing system. In R. Young & C. Leuprecht (Eds.), Canada: The state of the federation 2004, municipal-federal-provincial relations (pp. 221–250). Kingston: Queen’s University, Institute of Intergovernmental Relations.Google Scholar
  33. Kerr, D., Moyser, M., & Beaujot, R. (2006). Marriage and cohabitation: Demographic and socioeconomic differences in Québec and Canada. Canadian Studies in Population, 33(1), 83–117.Google Scholar
  34. Kim, Y.-I. A. (2014). Lifetime impact of cash transfer on fertility. Canadian Studies in Population, 41(1–2), 97–110.Google Scholar
  35. Krull, C. (2000). Fertility change in Quebec: 1931–1991. Canadian Studies in Population (Special Issue on Family Demography), 27(1), 159–181.Google Scholar
  36. Krull, C. (2007). Perspectives and initiatives: Placing families first: The state of family policies in La Belle Province. Canadian Review of Social Policy, 59, 93–99.Google Scholar
  37. Krull, C., & Trovato, F. (2003). Where have all the children gone? Québec’s fertility decline: 1941–1991. Canadian Studies in Population, 30(1), 193–220.Google Scholar
  38. Laplante, B. (2006). The rise of cohabitation in Québec: Power of religion and power over religion. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 31(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
  39. Laplante, B., & Fostik, A. L. (2014). The recent evolution of fertility within marriage and consensual union in two Canadian provinces: Disentangling the Québec fertility paradox. Paper presented at the Population Association of America Annual Meeting, Boston, May 1–3, 2014.Google Scholar
  40. Le Bourdais, C., & Lapierre-Adamcyk, E. (2004). Changes in conjugal life in Canada: Is cohabitation progressively replacing marriage? Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(4), 929–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Le Bourdais, C., & Marcil-Gratton, N. (1996). Family transformations across the Canadian/American Border: When the laggard becomes the leader. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 27(3), 415–436 + iii.Google Scholar
  42. Lefebvre, P., & Merrigan, P. (2008). Child-care policy and the labor supply of mothers with young children: A natural experiment from Canada. Journal of Labor Economics, 26(3), 519–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lefebvre, P., Merrigan, P., & Roy-Desrosiers, F. (2011). Québec’s childcare universal low fees policy 10 years after: Effects, costs and benefits. Working Paper 11–01. Montréal: Université du Québec à Montréal, Centre Interuniversitaire Sur Le Risque, Les Politiques Économiques Et l’Emploi (CIRPÉE).Google Scholar
  44. Lutz, W., & Skirbekk, V. (2005). Policies addressing the tempo effects of low-fertility countries. Population and Development Review, 31(4), 699–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Marshall, K. (2010). Employer top-ups. Perspectives on Labour and Income, 11(2), 5–12.Google Scholar
  46. Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research and Vienna Institute of Demography. (2014). Human fertility database. Accessed December 2014.
  47. McDonald, P., & Moyle, H. (2010). Why do English-speaking countries have relatively high fertility? Journal of Population Research, 27(4), 247–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. McNicoll, G. (2009). Legacy, policy and circumstance in fertility transition. Population and Development Review, 35(4), 777–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McNown, R., & Ridao-Cano, C. (2004). The effect of child benefit policies on fertility and female labor force participation in Canada. Review of Economics of the Household, 2, 237–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Milan, A. (2013). Fertility: Overview, 2009 to 2011. Component of Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 91-209-X: Report on the Demographic Situation in Canada. Accessed June 2, 2015.
  51. Milligan, K. (2005). Subsidizing the stork: New evidence on tax incentives and fertility. Review of Economics and Statistics, 87(3), 539–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Murdoch, L. (2009). Young aboriginal mothers in Winnipeg. Accessed June 15, 2015.
  53. Nordberg, A., Delva, J., & Horner, P. (2014). Adolescent pregnancy in Canada: Multicultural considerations, regional differences, and the legacy of liberalization. In A. L. Cherry & M. E. Dillon (Eds.), International handbook of adolescent pregnancy. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  54. Parent, D., & Wang, L. (2007). Tax incentives and fertility in Canada: Quantum vs. tempo effects. Canadian Journal of Economics, 40(2), 371–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pearce, L. D. (2002). The influence of early life course religious exposure on young adults’ dispositions toward childbearing. Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion, 41(2), 325–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Philipov, D., Speder, Z., & Billari, F. C. (2006). Soon, later, or ever? The impact of anomie and social capital on fertility intentions in Bulgaria (2002) and Hungary (2001). Population Studies, 60, 289–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Phipps, S. A. (2000). Maternity and parental benefits in Canada: are there behavioural implications? Canadian Public Policy, 26(4), 415–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pollard, M. S., & Wu, Z. (1998). Divergence of marriage patterns in Québec and elsewhere in Canada. Population and Development Review, 24(2), 329–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pulkingham, J., & van der Gaag, T. (2004). Maternity/parental leave provisions in Canada: We’ve come a long way, but there’s further to go. Canadian Woman Studies/Les Cahiers de la Femme, 116–125.Google Scholar
  60. Quinless, J. M. (2012). Aboriginal women in Canada: A statistical profile from the 2006 census. Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada. Accessed June 2, 2015.
  61. Rajulton, F. (2011). Households and housing in Canada. In B. Edmonston & E. Fong (Eds.), The changing Canadian population (pp. 60–82). Montréal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Regie des rentes Québec. (2015). Amount of the child assistance payment. Accessed June 2, 2015.
  63. Rindfuss, R. R., & Brauner-Otto, S. R. (2008). Institutions and the transition to adulthood: Implications for fertility tempo in low-fertility settings. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 1, 57–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rindfuss, R. R., Choe, M. K., & Brauner-Otto, S. R. (2016). The emergence of two distinct fertility regimes in economically advanced countries.Population Research and Policy Review, 1–18. doi:  10.1007/s11113-016-9387-z.
  65. Roy, L., & Bernier, J. (2007). Family policy, social trends and fertility in Québec: Experimenting with the Nordic model?. Québec: Ministère de la Famille, des Aînés et de la Condition féminine.Google Scholar
  66. Skirbekk, V., Kohler, H.-P., & Prskawetz, A. (2004). Birth month, school graduation, and the timing of births and marriages. Demography, 41(3), 547–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Stalker, G., & Ornstein, M. (2013). Québec, daycare, and the household strategies of couples with young children. Canadian Public Policy, 39(2), 241–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Statistics Canada. (2005). Census of population 2005. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
  69. Statistics Canada. (2008a). Canadian demographics at a glance (91-003-X). Accessed June 2, 2015.
  70. Statistics Canada. (2008b). Aboriginal identity population by age groups, median age and sex, 2006 counts for both sexes, for Canada, provinces and territories—20 % sample data. Accessed June 2, 2015.
  71. Statistics Canada. (2008c). Table 106-9002: Pregnancy outcomes, by age group, Canada, provinces and territories, terminated, annual. Accessed June 2, 2015.
  72. Statistics Canada. (2009). Definitions, data sources, and methods. Accessed June 15, 2015.
  73. Statistics Canada. (2010). Interrupting high school and returning to education. Education indicators in Canada: Fact sheets, 81-599-X, number 5. Accessed June 2, 2015.
  74. Statistics Canada. (2011b). Aboriginal peoples in Canada: First Nations people, Métis and Inuit: National Household Survey, 2011. Analytic document, number 99-011-X2011001. Accessed June 2, 2015.
  75. Statistics Canada. (2011c). Figures for fertility: Overview, 2008: Figure 3. Fertility by age group, Canada, 1926 to 2008. Accessed June 2, 2015.
  76. Statistics Canada. (2011d). French and the francophonie in Canada: Language, 2011 Census of Population. Census in Brief, number 98-314-X2011003. Accessed June 2, 2015.
  77. Statistics Canada. (2011e). Immigration and ethnocultural diversity in Canada: National Household Survey, 2011. Analytic document, number 99-010-X2011001. Accessed June 2, 2015.
  78. Statistics Canada. (2012). Learning—School drop-outs. Accessed June 15, 2015.
  79. Statistics Canada. (2013a). Table 102-4503: Live births, by age of mother, Canada, provinces and territories, annual. Accessed June 2, 2015.
  80. Statistics Canada. (2013b). Table 102-4504: Mean age of mother at time of delivery (live births), Canada, provinces and territories annual, (years). Accessed June 2, 2015.
  81. Statistics Canada. (2014a). Table 051-0001: Estimates of population, by age group and sex for July 1, Canada, provinces and territories, annual (persons unless otherwise noted). Accessed June 2, 2015.
  82. Statistics Canada. (2014b). Table 051-0004: Components of population growth, Canada, provinces and territories, annual (persons). Accessed June 2, 2015.
  83. Statistics Canada. (2015a). Table 282-0087: Labour force survey estimates (LFS), by sex and age group, seasonally adjusted and unadjusted monthly, (persons unless otherwise noted). Accessed June 2, 2015.
  84. Statistics Canada. (2015b). Vital statistics—Birth database. Record number 3231. Accessed June 15, 2015.
  85. Statistics Canada, Centre for Education Statistics. (2014). Undergraduate tuition fees for full-time Canadian students, by discipline, by province (Canada). Accessed June 2, 2015.
  86. Suwal, J., & Trovato, F. (1998). Canadian aboriginal fertility. Canadian Studies in Population, 25(1), 69–86.Google Scholar
  87. Thornton, A., & Camburn, D. (1987). The influence of the family on premarital sexual attitudes and behavior. Demography, 24(3), 323–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Thornton, A., Axinn, W. G., & Hill, D. H. (1992). Reciprocal effects of religiosity, cohabitation, and marriage. American Journal of Sociology, 98(3), 627–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Tremblay, D.-G. (2009). More time for daddy: Québec leads the way with its new parental leave policy. Our Schools, Our Selves, 18(3), 223–228.Google Scholar
  90. Trovato, F. (2010). Fertility in Alberta in a context of rapid economic growth, 1997–2007. Canadian Studies in Population, 37(3–4), 497–525.Google Scholar
  91. Trovato, F. (2011). Canada’s age and sex composition. In B. Edmonston & E. Fong (Eds.), The changing Canadian population (pp. 41–59). Montréal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  92. Turcotte, M. (2011a). Life in metropolitan areas: The city/suburb contrast: How can we measure it? Canadian Social Trends—Statistics Canada, 11-008, 2–19.Google Scholar
  93. Turcotte, M. (2011b). Women and education. In Women in Canada: A gender-based statistical report (pp. 89–110). Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 89-503-X. Accessed June 2, 2015.
  94. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. (2012). World population prospects: The 2012 revision. Accessed June 4, 2015.
  95. Weise, R. W., Jr. (1972). Canada’s new unemployment insurance act. Social Security Bulletin, 35(2), 31–34, 37.Google Scholar
  96. Woldemicael, G., & Beaujot, R. (2012). Fertility behavior of immigrants in Canada: Converging trends. International Migration and Integration, 13, 325–341.Google Scholar
  97. Wu, Z., & Baer, D. E. (1996). Attitudes toward family and gender roles: A comparison of English and French Canadian women. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 27(3), X2-452 + iii–iv.Google Scholar
  98. Wu, Z., & Schimmele, C. M. (2011). Changing Canadian families. In B. Edmonston & E. Fong (Eds.), The changing Canadian population (pp. 235–252). Montréal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyMcGill UniversityMontréalCanada

Personalised recommendations