Skip to main content
Guttmacher Institute

Search

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Highlights

  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • US policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Reports

  • Global
  • United States

Articles

  • Global research
  • US research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Opinion

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • United States
  • US State Laws and Policies

Tools

  • Interactive Map: US Abortion Policies and Access After Roe
  • Safe Abortion Calculator
  • Family Planning Investment Impact Calculator
  • Monthly Abortion Provision Study Dashboard
  • Public-use data sets

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

US

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work by Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases
  • Videos

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Ways to Give
  • Guttmacher Guardians
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • Impact Report 2025

Awards & Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship
Donate
Guttmacher Institute
Donate

Highlights

  • Reproductive Health Impact Study
  • Adding It Up
  • Abortion Worldwide
  • Guttmacher-Lancet Commission
  • US policy resources
  • State policy resources
  • International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1975–2020)
  • Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (1969–2020)

Reports

  • Global
  • United States

Articles

  • Global research
  • US research
  • Policy analysis
  • Guttmacher Policy Review
  • Opinion

Fact Sheets

  • Global
  • United States
  • US State Laws and Policies

Tools

  • Interactive Map: US Abortion Policies and Access After Roe
  • Safe Abortion Calculator
  • Family Planning Investment Impact Calculator
  • Monthly Abortion Provision Study Dashboard
  • Public-use data sets

Global

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

US

  • Abortion
  • Contraception
  • Pregnancy
  • Teens

Our Work by Geography

  • Global
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & the Caribbean
  • Northern America
  • Oceania

Who We Are

  • About
  • Staff
  • Board
  • Job opportunities
  • Newsletter
  • History
  • Contact
  • Conflict of Interest Policy

Media

  • Media office
  • News releases
  • Videos

Support Our Work

  • Make a gift today
  • Monthly Giving Circle
  • Ways to Give
  • Guttmacher Guardians
  • Guttmacher Legacy Circle
  • Financials
  • Impact Report 2025

Awards & Scholarships

  • Darroch Award
  • Richards Scholarship
  • Bixby Fellowship
Donate
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact
The Journal of Population and Sustainability

Why pronatalism fails the planetary health test

Authors

Celine Delacroix, University of Ottawa Marleen Temmerman, Aga Khan University Nandita Bajaj, Antioch University Ann M. Moore, Guttmacher Institute Phoebe Barnard, University of Cape Town William Ripple, Oregon State University William Rees, University of British Columbia Michael Gerrard, Columbia Law School Diana Coole, Birkbeck, University of London Robert Engelman, Population Institute Helen Kopnina, Northumbria University Nkechi Owoo, University of Ghana Peter Lindsey, University of Pretoria

Summary

Pronatalist policies aimed at reversing fertility decline have gained traction globally, framed as necessary responses to aging populations and shrinking workforces. This perspective article argues that such policies overlook both reproductive self-determination and the ecological costs of continued population growth.  
 
Drawing on climate science and demographic data, the authors demonstrate that the concern is misguided, as the world’s population is still projected to increase until the 2080s, and that policy responses to the economic consequences of lower fertility are easier to implement than the long-term consequences of ecological overshoot. Respecting reproductive rights while crafting responsive policies offers better solutions to the current demographic shift. They call for continued investment in reproductive rights, education, and healthcare as sound policy for both human and planetary health.

Read the full article here.

First published on The Journal of Population and Sustainability: July 7, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3197/whpjps.63887831800459
Source / Available for Purchase
Read the full article here.

Share

Read More

Report

Adding It Up 2024: Investing in Sexual and Reproductive Health in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Opinion

Fertility Tracking Must Be Grounded In Evidence And Reproductive Justice

Health Affairs Forefront
Research Article

Editorial: Contraception special issue on the emergence of "FemTech" within the sexual and reproductive health landscape

Contraception

Topic

Global

Geography

  • Global
Guttmacher Institute

Center facts. Shape policy.
Advance sexual and reproductive rights.®

Donate Now
Newsletter Signup  Contact Us 
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • Contact

Footer

  • Privacy Policy
  • Accessibility Statement
© 2026 Guttmacher Institute. The Guttmacher Institute is registered as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization under the tax identification number 13-2890727. Contributions are tax deductible to the fullest extent allowable.