News · Australia · fertility
Australia’s record-low fertility rate: what does it tell us about the future of developed societies?
New official demographic statistics confirm a further decline in Australia’s fertility rate and raise a wider question facing many developed countries: can low fertility be reversed in the long term?
Ljubljana, July 2026 · IDP Analysis
Low fertility is no longer only a European issue.
Australia’s case shows that even economically successful and migration-open countries are facing a long-term decline in fertility. This confirms that low fertility is a complex development challenge that cannot be explained by one factor or solved by one policy instrument.
The demographic future of developed societies will not be shaped only by how many children are born today, but also by how societies create long-term conditions for family life, work, housing, health and intergenerational stability.
The public debate began in the media, but the underlying trend is confirmed by official data.
Australia’s demographic future has returned to public debate after Australian media highlighted the continued decline in fertility and the long-term consequences this trend may bring for the country’s development. The immediate trigger was the story of a father of three seeking to encourage a broader conversation about families and fertility, but the core issue is best understood through official demographic data.
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), Australia’s total fertility rate in 2024 was 1.481 births per woman. This is the lowest recorded value in the country’s history and remains well below the level commonly used in demography as the threshold for simple population replacement.
Although countries differ in their economic conditions, family policies and migration patterns, it is increasingly clear that low fertility is not the challenge of one country alone. It is one of the central development questions of the developed world.
The data point to a historic fertility low and the continued postponement of parenthood.
Australia’s total fertility rate in 2024.
The number of births registered in 2024, according to the ABS.
The median age of mothers giving birth in 2024.
The value of 2.1 children per woman is often used in demographic literature as an indicative replacement-level fertility threshold. However, this threshold is not by itself a guarantee of long-term demographic stability, because actual population renewal is also shaped by age structure, mortality, migration and other demographic processes.
Fertility is not only a family issue. It is a development issue for society as a whole.
Fertility directly affects the future size of generations, the availability of labour, the sustainability of pension systems, healthcare provision, the development of local communities and the long-term competitiveness of the economy.
When low fertility lasts for decades, its consequences do not appear immediately. First, the number of births declines, then the number of children in early education and schools falls, and years later the number of young people entering the labour market begins to shrink. At the same time, the share of older people increases, changing the balance between the active and inactive population.
The experience of many developed countries shows that demographic trends are far easier to monitor and address early than to reverse once they have become deeply embedded.
Where does Australia stand compared with other developed countries?
The comparison shows that Australia is not an isolated case. Fertility below the replacement level is now characteristic of a large part of the developed world. Differences between countries also show that fertility must be understood in the wider context of housing, work, family policy, culture, migration and life expectations.
Australia will need to balance family policy, housing affordability and migration.
In the decades ahead, Australia will need to devote even greater attention to housing affordability, the reconciliation of work and family life, childcare, intergenerational solidarity and the long-term planning of public services.
At the same time, the country will continue to seek a balance between natural population increase and migration, which already plays an important role in overall population growth. Migration can help cushion some consequences of low fertility in the short term, but it cannot by itself answer the deeper question of long-term social and generational stability.
Australia’s case shows that low fertility is not the result of a single policy or one economic factor.
Slovenia is facing similar long-term demographic trends to many other developed countries. Fertility remains below the level that would allow the long-term renewal of the population without other demographic factors, while the share of older people continues to increase.
Australia’s example matters for Slovenia because it shows that low fertility is not exclusively a European phenomenon and that even economically successful countries struggle to reverse it. This makes it even more important for countries to monitor demographic change over the long term and shape policy on the basis of data, research and international experience.
Demographic challenges cannot be understood through one indicator alone.
In the view of the Institute for Demographic Future, Australia’s case confirms that demographic challenges cannot be explained by one factor alone. Fertility is the result of economic, social, cultural and psychological conditions, which means that responses must also be comprehensive and long-term.
In demographic literature, the value of 2.1 children per woman is often used as an indicative replacement-level fertility threshold. However, in the Institute’s research view, this value is a simplified indicator that does not, by itself, capture all the factors relevant to long-term demographic stability.
In the study Beyond 2.1 – Effective Replacement Fertility, published on the Institute’s website, we present a broader approach to population renewal. The study argues that fertility must be considered alongside age structure, mortality, migration and other demographic processes.
Australia’s case is therefore important not only because of one number. It is a reminder that demography is a long-term process. Decisions taken today will reveal their consequences only decades later.
IDP will continue to examine whether developed countries can find more effective responses to low fertility.
The Institute for Demographic Future will continue to monitor fertility trends in developed countries, compare the effectiveness of different family policies and analyse how demographic change affects the long-term development of society and the economy.
💭 IDP opens the question
Can developed countries reverse the long-term trend of low fertility?
Sources and research framework
- Australian Bureau of Statistics – Births, Australia, 2024
- Centre for Population – Fertility decline in Australia: Is it here to stay?
- News.com.au – media trigger for the public discussion
- Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia – Births, 2024
- Eurostat – Fertility statistics
Prepared by:
Institute for Demographic Future
This contribution is based on an analysis of publicly available data and official publications by international institutions. Its purpose is to provide a professional explanation of demographic trends and their significance for Slovenia and Europe.
Understanding demographic trends is the first step towards responsible planning for the future.
Read the study Beyond 2.1
The IDP study explains why the traditional threshold of 2.1 children per woman is not always sufficient for understanding long-term demographic stability.
Low fertility is not only a number. It is a signal of long-term change in the way developed societies live.
Australia’s case shows that the demographic future will require more than short-term measures. It will require an understanding of the whole social system.
Back to News