Legal Commentary

One of the first moves of Japan's new ruling party has been a proposal to pay Japanese families to have more children.  The proposal would pay families approximately $3,400 per child per year, but it is unlikely to work.  Although Japan's falling birthrate is one of the lowest in the world, 1.3 children per couple, which is well below the replacement level of 2.1, Japan is far from unique in this area.  Many European countries have been experiencing birth rates significantly below replacement levels for decades, and a number have instituted  cash for kids programs with little success.  Both Russia ($9,200) and  Italy (as much as 10,000 Euros)  have similar baby bonus programs, yet they continue to have some of the lowest birth rates in Europe.

Given the pervasiveness of this problem in Europe, European countries have been researching the phenomenon of declining birth rates for years and this research indicates the that problem of declining birth rates is not one that can be solved with an extra few  thousand a year.  The problems are monetary, but they are also cultural. Causes vary between countries, but typically include gender inequality, lack of workplace flexibility and lack of affordable, high quality child care. Addressing these factors is feasible, but not without significant money and, most likely, serious opposition. 

For example, Norway's solution is both expensive and radical yet has resulted in one of the highest birthrates in Europe. Norway guarantees 54 weeks of paid maternity leave, 6 weeks of paternity leave and is considering mandating paternity leave so that the career costs of having a child are shared more equally between the genders.  It is hard to imagine a country like Japan, or even the US adopting such a plan, but it appears to be working.  In contrast, the bonuses of Russia and Italy are not.

Given these facts, which Japan is most certainly aware of, why is Japan proposing a solution unlikely to work?  Is it simply a publicity stunt? A way for the government to appear to be addressing the issue of declining birth rates without having to tackle the real causes of Japan's infertility?  Is it possible to imagine a Japan where there is true part-time work, where both fathers and mothers are expected to share the burdens of child rearing and where the state provides the needed support services?  Maybe Japan doesn't have to make all these changes,  but it seems unlikely that the current plan will make much of a difference.