Fertility rates have been decreasing around the world for decades, especially in economically developed countries, to the point that two-thirds of the world is now below the replacement rate — i.e., the average number of children per woman necessary to keep a population size stable across generations without depending on immigration. This number is typically set at 2.1 births per woman in developed countries. 

Fertility is influenced by both biological fecundity (which can be pretty hard to measure) and socioeconomic factors. 

Among the latter, shifting societal norms, labor precarization, and the rising costs of parenthood and childcare are often cited as reasons for the decline in fertility rates. Other factors play a role too, such as smartphones (oh, who could’ve imagined that doomscrolling isn’t great for dating habits and sexual lives?)

Even prosperity could be in the mix — as wages rise, one has less incentive to spend time on all the unpaid activities related to parenting. 

The trend is so serious that even China, which previously had to control its population’s fertility with the famous one-child policy, has seen birth rates decline for four consecutive years and reach an all-time low in 2025. Now the government is putting a 13% tax on condoms and other contraceptives. 

Governments in developed countries have been trying various policies to encourage their populations to have children. So far, the impact has been moderate, slowing the speed of decline in birth rates but not reaching the replacement rate. 

Recent studies, however, point to a surprising new ally in addressing declining fertility rates: remote work. 

And no, the reason isn’t what you might be thinking. It’s not because workers are using their work-from-home days to make out — well, even if they are, it’s not because of that. 

What the data shows 

Researchers at Stanford, Princeton, and other institutions found a positive association between remote work and having children or planning to have them. 

They analyzed data from two samples: 19,000 workers across 38 countries on all five continents, and 102,000 workers in the United States. Respondents who work remotely at least one day per week had more biological children from 2021 to early 2025, and were planning to have more children in the future, compared to similar individuals who do not work remotely. 

It’s not surprising that remote workers are more willing to start or expand a family than those working fully in-office. Parents who work remotely don’t have to spend hours commuting and can instead spend that time with their families. They can also have lunch with their children at home. Breastfeeding mothers can use work breaks to feed their babies. Remote work may help parents reduce childcare expenses while also providing a sense of fulfillment.

Another survey of 3,000 U.S. women aged 18-44 shows that among workers who are doing relatively well, there is a connection between remote work and fertility. Women whose household finances have gotten “much better” in the previous year are more than 10 percentage points more likely to report being pregnant or trying to be so if they are working remotely. For women with stable or deteriorating financial situations, there seems to be no difference between remote and non-remote settings. “Remote work seems to help women in improving circumstances to capitalize on those improvements and convert financial success into family life,” according to the Economic Innovation Group, a think tank based in Washington, D.C. that took part in the survey.

But wait, why is the decline in fertility even a problem? 

For a society, there are potential pros and cons to declining fertility, and credible researchers on both sides. 

The two main pros would be reduced resource consumption and pollution, and a qualitative improvement in the population’s average human capital. The latter would result from the increased time and resources that parents can invest in each child’s health and skills (in developed countries, parents are spending twice as much time with their children as 50 years ago). In this scenario, quality would trump quantity, boosting economic growth in the long run.

The two main cons: a smaller workforce suffocated by high taxes needed to fund pensions for a growing retired population, and a shortage of workers, which could put economic growth at risk. 

Young adults still want children 

A recent report by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the UN agency for reproductive rights, shows that a majority of respondents want to find a partner, get married, and have children.

The survey interviewed more than 108,000 internet-connected young adults across 73 countries and territories. The primary factors influencing young adults’ feeling of readiness for parenting were financial security, cited by 88% of participants, and stable employment, cited by 87%. Emotional readiness came third, cited by 85%, suggesting that practical matters weigh slightly more heavily than emotional ones. 

Joy and happiness are the key motivation for parenthood, mentioned by 80% of respondents. Interestingly, government encouragement and the idea of contributing to the future workforce are less likely to be motivations, ranking among the lowest-rated ones. 

People are having fewer children than they desire 

In 2025, the same UN agency released a survey revealing that one in five adults of reproductive age believes they will be unable to have the number of children they desire. 

Among people aged 50 or older, 31% reported they ended up with fewer children than they originally aspired to. 

The survey interviewed 14,000 people in 14 countries — Brazil, Germany, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, Thailand, and the United States — which together account for 37% of the global population. 

Remote work can be a long-term incentive for parenthood 

Experts often distinguish between “pronatalist” measures, like baby bonuses or tax breaks, and “structural” approaches, such as access to childcare, stable employment, and adequate housing. Critics argue that the former can lead to adverse effects on gender equality. 

As for remote work, it’s reasonable to include it among the latter, as it changes how people balance work and family, rather than serving as a one-off financial incentive.

The two UNFPA reports mentioned earlier point to the same conclusion: the desire for children hasn’t disappeared, but people are weighing the economic aspects with care.

Remote work won’t eliminate the costs or difficulties of raising a child, but by cutting commute time and easing the daily logistics, it can serve as a long-term incentive for parenthood. 

Is there a contradiction between being a pronatalist and mandating RTO? 

The U.S. president Donald Trump has embraced pronatalist rhetoric and even called himself “the fertilization president.” He has proposed “baby bonuses” and a “National Medal of Motherhood” for mothers with six or more kids. Yet in January 2025, he ordered federal employees back to the office full-time.

Elon Musk, another enthusiastic pronatalist, requires fully in-office work at his companies — understandable at Tesla, given its manufacturing nature, but harder to justify at X, a social media platform.

Both Trump and Musk have walked the talk at a personal level: Musk has 14 children, Trump five. But workers typically have to weigh more trade-offs when deciding whether to have children, and that’s where remote work can tip the scales. 

Wrapping up 

Existing research does not yet fully prove that remote work causes people to have more children. People who already have or plan to have children may deliberately seek remote jobs. Plus, some factors could influence remote-work access itself. 

However, research does establish a connection between workplace flexibility and people realizing their family plans. 

For policymakers, that makes remote work worth considering alongside childcare, housing, employment security, and parental leave — not as the standalone solution for low fertility, but as one element of a family-compatible society. 

For employers, the implication is more immediate. Organizations trying to attract and retain workers during their prime family-building years may find that remote or hybrid options are a meaningful benefit. 

Subscribe to our newsletter 

Join 30,000+ HR professionals and tech leaders: subscribe to the TechTalents Insights newsletter and get our best articles and interviews, completely free.