In the context of rapidly ageing populations and declining birth rates, developed countries are increasingly facing the need for large-scale demographic reforms. However, the experience of South Korea shows that even huge public investments do not guarantee the desired result.
South Korea is one of the most vivid examples of the demographic crisis. With a birth rate of 0.7-0.8 children per woman (data from 2023-2024), the country has reached an anti-record among industrialised nations. At the same time, the government has invested the equivalent of more than $200 billion in population programmes over the past 16 years.
More infant benefits, housing and employment schemes for couples, more availability of kindergartens and child care are all part of the minimum package of government aid. In addition, even as early as 2005, Korea passed the Low Fertility Framework Act, established the Presidential Committee on Population Policy, and starting from 2021 has been implementing its fourth five-year population development plan. Nonetheless, the population condition continues to worsen.
The failure of South Korea’s population plans reflects a failure of structure in most solutions, which are obsessed with economic incentives and overlook deeper social and cultural origins. As Korean researchers and citizens themselves have emphasised, the root of the problem lies in values and lifestyles, not just the cost of child support. Contemporary South Korean women increasingly perceive government measures as pressure to reduce them to a ‘tool for childbearing’. This perception is the result of years of social transformation: the prioritisation of career, the lack of equality in family responsibilities, the overburdening of women with household and childcare, and the high cost of living and education all influence the decision not to have children at all or to limit themselves to one child.
It is no wonder that in 2023, South Korea’s president called for ‘emergency thinking’ in population policy. Clearly, previous methods have exhausted themselves. State policy should take into account not only economic calculations, but also psychological and socio-cultural factors: creating equality in the distribution of family responsibilities, supporting work-life balance for both parents, changing the image of family and parenthood in the public consciousness. Demography is not only maths, but also culture. And if society does not see children as valuable, state subsidies will remain a useless figure in the budget.
