All Articles

How much have birth rates fallen? How do Iowa rates compare to the nation? Are rural birth rates lower than in metro areas? What are the causes of falling birth rates? To answer these questions, I present trends in birth rates for regions of the US and rural-metro differences across Iowa. Data are from the US Census Bureau’s Population Estimates Program for years 2000 to 2025. Estimates are based on birth certificates maintained by the National Center for Health Statistics at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (NCHS CDC). Births for 2024 and 2025 use provisional data, as official counts from NCHS are lagged two years. Geographic definitions can be found in the methods note at the end of this page.

Birth rates are the total number of live births (excluding stillbirths and miscarriages) divided by the number of women age 15-44 years, which is converted to a rate per 1,000 for interpretation (see methods note). Birth and fertility rates are different measures. Fertility rates are the average number of births childbearing age women will have over their lifetime, where birth rates are the average number of births by childbearing age women in a given year. For detailed information on births and fertility in the US, refer to the recent CDC report.

National Trends

Birth rates fell nationally. Western states had the steepest declines. States in the West region had the highest birth rates during the decade of the 2000s, but fell sharply during the 2010s and first half of the 2020s. Western births plummeted by 26.8% over the past 25 years, falling from 69.6 births per 1,000 women age 15-44 in 2000-01, down to 50.9 in 2024-25. Birth rates also fell in the South and Midwest regions, but at a slower pace.  Southern birth rates fell by 17.1% (from 67.0 to 55.6); and Midwest births declined a bit slower at 15.2% (from 64.4 to 54.6).

Northeast no longer the only “baby desert”. Northeastern states traditionally have had the lowest birth rates, but this deficit has narrowed over the past decades. For example, the West had 10 more births per 1,000 childbearing women than the Northeast in the early 2000s, but by the mid-2020s Western birth rates fell to parity with the Northeast. In other words, Western states saw birth rates fall from the highest in the US down to one of the lowest in the span of 25 years.

What might cause falling birth rates in different regions of the US? The West has seen fewer births despite a large increase in women of childbearing age. What may be preventing births in the West are the high costs of housing and other living expenses; quality of life issues related to schools, childcare, and social conditions; and perhaps the threat of drought and wildfires. In the Midwest and Northeast, what is preventing births is a shrinking number of women age 15-44. Outmigration of young adults and an aging population are likely causes of fewer childbearing age women in these regions.

Births used to follow the business cycle, but less so today. Birth rates in the US have typically followed business or economic cycles, which are periods of expansions and recessions. Birth rates dipped during the short-lived Early 2000s Recession in 2001 (dot-com bubble and 9/11 terrorist attacks), but rebounded strongly the next year as the economy recovered. Then the Great Recession hit in 2008, causing a large loss in GDP and high unemployment brought on by a housing bubble and resulting financial crisis. As expected, birth rates fell sharply during the recession. However, the post-recession economic expansion in 2010 did not result in higher birth rates. In fact, birth rates started to fall in 2016 despite growing employment and GDP. The COVID-19 Recession only worsened already falling birth rates, as families delayed childbearing due to the pandemic and economic uncertainty. Despite a one-year post-pandemic jump in 2021-22, birth rates have fallen and stalled during the mid-2020s.

Iowa and Midwest Trends

Iowa birth rates have outperformed the nation. Through the 2000s and early 2010s, Iowa birth rates were below those of most other states. Since then, birth rates in Iowa have either held steady or have declined more slowly than the rest of the nation. The result is that Iowa birth rates have outpaced other US regions since the mid-2010s. Today, births in Iowa are only 5.5% below levels in 2000-01, only falling from 62.8 to 59.3 per 1,000 over 25 years. This small decline in birth rates is far better than losses of 15% to 27% seen in other regions of the US.

Birth rates are higher in rural Iowa and the rural Midwest. In Iowa in 2000-01, metro and rural birth rates were nearly identical at 63 per 1,000 women age 15-44. Over the past 25 years, however, births in metro Iowa fell by 11.3% down to 55.7 per 1,000. At the same time, in rural Iowa births grew by 6.2%, rising to a rate of 66.7—a nearly 10 birth gain. This metro-rural birth gap persists across the Midwest, with rural birth rates outpacing metro ones. Midwest metro birth rates fell below 2000-01 levels during the Great Recession in 2010-11, while Iowa metro rates went negative in 2016-17 during an expanding economy. Possible causes for the difference in rural versus metro birth rates is discussed in the next section.

Iowa Trends Across the Rural-Metro Continuum

Baby boom in the country. Birth rates in Iowa’s most rural counties have surged by 13.2% since 2000-01, rising from 62.0 to 70.2 per 1,000 women today. Semi-rural counties with a large town of 5,000 or more people also grew births, but at a more modest rate of 7.9%, posting a birth rate of 66.3 per 1,000 in 2024-25. What might cause higher birth rates in rural Iowa? Larger shares of immigrants who work in agricultural production, especially in the livestock sector. Specific religious communities tied to agriculture, especially Amish and Mennonites. Return of young adults to certain areas of the state, drawn by quality of life, family, and a robust local economy with ties to metro areas. In particular, the northwest corner of Iowa is a strong draw of young adults. All three tend to have younger populations of childbearing age with a desire for family formation; and many choose to stay in rural communities for social reasons and/or economic opportunities.

Micropolitan ups and downs. Iowa’s micropolitan counties have a city of 10,000 to 49,999 people. These counties have had no change in birth rates since 2000-01, standing at 64.4 per 1,000. However, this masks ups and downs of the past 25 years. Micropolitan birth rates rose during the first half of the 2000s, fell during the Great Recession, then rebounded some during the mid-2010s. Since then, birth rates have fallen and have remained stable since the COVID-19 pandemic. What might cause swings in micropolitan birth rates? Most counties are heavily dependent on goods-producing industries, particularly manufacturing, food processing, and construction. These industries are more vulnerable to recessions and changes in the farm economy, which likely affects decisions on family formation and births.

Baby bust in the big city. The only part of Iowa that has seen falling birth rates are in central metro counties, or the 10 counties with a city of 50,000 or more people that corresponds to the largest cities in the state. Birth rates in metros have dropped by 12.7% over the past quarter-century, falling from 62.9 per 1,000 childbearing women in 2000-01, down to 54.9 by 2024-25. The decline began during the latter half of the 2010s, and continued through and after the pandemic. Downward trends are surprising given the large number of adults of childbearing age, strong economies and job growth, availability of quality health and child care services, and a plethora of social and cultural amenities. This same paradox in metro Iowa also applies to other metro areas in the Midwest. What might cause falling birth rates in metro areas? Central cities are home to the state’s major universities and employers (especially healthcare, finance, professional services, and government), drawing in college students and younger adults whose focus is on establishing careers, not families. This would account for the sharp increase in childbearing age women, but the flat numbers of births found in central metros. Other reasons for delayed childbearing may include higher housing and childcare costs; and lack of family support if they moved in from elsewhere.

Causes of Declining Birth Rates

There has been a lot of political debate and media coverage about the causes and consequences of falling birth rates. While all sides agree with the data showing a decline in birth rates, many groups differ markedly on why it is happening, and more importantly, what should be done about it. Below I briefly identify some possible causes of falling birth rates. Some are amendable to policy, while others are not.

Primary Causes

One defensible explanation for falling birth rates are changes in decisions to have children. First, CDC reports that declines in US birth rates are largely due to reductions in teen pregnancies and births, an altogether positive trend that reduces child poverty.  Second, more younger adults are focused on establishing their careers through education and/or work. The postindustrial services economy requires greater skills and knowledge, requiring higher education; and has created many more job opportunities for women. As a result, many couples delay family formation until their careers are established. Third, many people are highly mobile in the 21^st century, relocating for job opportunities, natural amenities, and social and cultural activities. Migration also means being distant from family and social support networks, which are essential when deciding to start a family. This may delay childbearing until people establish new support networks.

Concerns about the economy and cost of living are a likely cause of falling birth rates. People will delay family formation if they feel their job, pay, and benefits are not secure. Having a child is an 18 year commitment or more, requiring economic stability. Concerns include: threat of layoffs or reduction in hours; poor labor markets that prevent finding another or better paying job; wages not keeping pace with inflation; worries over healthcare costs if families have inadequate health insurance; and the rapid rise in the cost of housing and childcare. Taken together, this makes starting a family an expensive endeavor for younger adults, which delays childbearing until people are in their 30s. These issues can be addressed by targeted actions by government and the private sector.

Generational culture values may cause younger people to delay or abandon having children altogether. One are concerns, real or imagined, regarding political instability in the US, conflicts and wars abroad, and fear of climate change and environmental damage. Ever-present social media can amplify every issue into a crisis, whereas prior generations were more unaware of social issues. A second is that younger adults may no longer see starting a family and owning a home as markers of adulthood and success, as it was in prior generations. A third may be expectations for a high standard of living before having children, which requires younger adults to delay starting families to build their careers and wealth. This overlaps with broader concerns about the economy and cost of living.

Delayed family formation is one cause of rising infertility. There are good reasons why many younger adults delay childbearing, but one important consequence is higher risk of infertility. Women under age 30 have an 85% chance of conceiving within a year. This falls to 75% at age 30, to 66% at age 35, and down to 44% at age 40 (see article). Higher infertility is another cause of falling birth rates nationally, as some older couples struggle to conceive and start families.   

Secondary Causes

Birth rates may appear to be declining because our understanding of a “normal” birth rate is due to unique historical circumstances. After the twin traumas of the Great Depression in the 1930s and the Second World War in the 1940s, the Greatest Generation started families and had children in record numbers, what we now call the Baby Boomers. In turn, the large boomer generation also had larger families. In short, birth rates in the last half of the 20^th century were inflated due to the post-war Baby Boom and its associated social values of larger families, which have waned in the 21^st century.

The decline in birth rates may be seen as a sign of progress, as women now have more opportunities in the workforce and more control over family formation. Women’s rights and empowerment, including birth control, began in the 1960s, developed into a national movement in the 1970s, and started to be formalized in the 1980s. As more educational and employment opportunities opened up to women, along with social acceptance of birth control and family planning, many women delayed childbearing to establish careers previously unavailable to them. This likely caused birth rates to fall, but it also made families with children more prosperous with dual-incomes.

Falling birth rates may be a statistical artifact, having more to do with the number of childbearing women than the number of births. For example, the count of births in metro Iowa grew by 0.3% since 2000, but the number of women age 15-44 grew much faster over the same period at 15%. Stated differently, metro birth rates may have fallen as the number of women (denominator) increased, even though the number of births (numerator) grew slightly.  We see the opposite in rural Iowa, where birth rates may have risen because the number of births shrank slower (9.3% decline) than the number of childbearing women (17% decline), making the numerator larger than the denominator. However, this does not fully explain why more metro women have fewer births, and why fewer rural women have more births.

Lastly, immigration enforcement will likely lower birth rates in the future. In President Trump’s second term in 2025, the federal government imposed immigration restrictions and greatly expanded immigration enforcement actions across the nation. In Iowa, this cut immigration into the state by 50% last year, causing population growth to fall. According the US Census Bureau data, fertility rates for immigrant women are about 27% higher than for US-born women (2.2 versus 1.7 children per woman); and about 25 to 33% of births in some states are to immigrant women and families (see report).  

Methods Notes

This report uses a modified birth rate. County data does not report births by age of mother due to confidentiality, which would allow for a precise birth rate for women age 15-44. Instead, this report takes total live births, regardless of the mother’s age, and divides by the total population of women age 15-44. This results in a higher birth rate, and should be interpreted as an approximation of the true estimate.

Definitions of US regions and their corresponding states are from the US Census; and definitions of metropolitan, micropolitan, and rural in 2023 are from the US Office of Management and Budget and the USDA Economic Research Service.

***

Analysis and writing by:
Dr. David Peters, Professor and Extension State Specialist: Agriculture and Rural Policy
email: dpeters@iastate.edu | tel. 515-294-6303  

This institution is an equal opportunity provider. For the full non-discrimination statement or accommodation inquiries, go to www.extension.iastate.edu/legal
Esta institución ofrece igualdad de oportunidades. Para ver la declaración completa de no discriminación o para consultas de acomodación, siga a este vinculo: www.extension.iastate.edu/legal