In his 2020 book Let Us Dream: The Path to a Better Future, the late Pope Francis described the demographic winter in many Western countries as the result of a complacent culture of selfish well-being. However, the reality behind this demographic decline in developed nations also stems from a range of other factors beyond the personal decision of couples not to have a second child.

However, one must ask: Who are the families that choose to have two or more children? Who are those willing to temporarily sacrifice their own well-being to give that only child – often treated as a little king or queen – a sibling? According to the results of Malta’s 2021 Census of Population and Housing, the distribution of mothers with three or more children shows a distinctly bimodal pattern.

High concentrations of third, fourth and higher-parity children are found among two distinct groups of Maltese mothers: those with very low levels of education and those with the highest levels of education. Among all Maltese mothers aged 35–39 at the time of the 2021 Census, the largest share of third-born children was attributed to mothers whose highest level of education was lower secondary or less (ISCED level 2 or below), accounting for 29.5% of all third-born children residing with their parents. This group also accounted for the highest share of fourth and higher-parity children, at 41.9% (source: NSO, internal correspondence).

The second-highest shares of mothers with three children and with four or more children are found among those with a high level of education (ISCED level 6 or higher, corresponding to bachelor’s to doctoral degrees), accounting for 30.4% and 19.3% respectively.

Unemployed or inactive mothers account for a significant proportion of those with larger families – 27.7% of all mothers with three children and 42.8% of those with four or more children. In contrast, mothers employed in highly skilled, non-manual occupations (ISCO levels 1 to 3) represent the largest shares among mothers with one child (44.5%), two children (44.8%) and three children (36%).

Therefore, it is clear that, as in other EU member states, the potential to increase fertility lies primarily with middle-class parents – those who are educated and hold competitive occupations. These parents often aspire to be “better parents to fewer children” but, due to various factors, including work-life balance challenges, find it nearly impossible to realise their personal ideal of having a second child while maintaining their current quality of life.

Employers play a crucial role in achieving this nationally important goal. For far too long, calls have been made for greater flexibility, empathy and attentiveness to the needs of young parents as they juggle multiple life-defining challenges that often coincide in early adulthood: education, career development, parenting, homeownership and the vital pursuit of personal growth and fulfilment beyond the workplace or household duties.

The potential to increase fertility lies primarily with middle-class parents- Maja Miljanic Brinkworth

Employers have the power to provide support in ways that no government monetary compensation can match. Ultimately, it’s not just about money.

The challenge is to address the demographic deficit occurring among younger age groups, due to the factors mentioned earlier, by encouraging compensation for this ‘loss’ during the remaining reproductive years, where possible. The lack of population momentum will cast a long shadow, as smaller cohorts often give rise to similarly fewer offspring. For example, the baby boom of the 1950s and 1960s led to a baby bust in the 1970s and 1980s, with birth rates rarely exceeding replacement levels since.

Recent concerns expressed in the press and on social media about the future of the Maltese population are certainly valid – provided they do not become unduly alarmist.

Assuming a closed population (no immigration or emigration) and a total fertility rate (TFR) of 1.3 – which sits at the upper end of the ‘lowest-low fertility’ range, defined as the average number of children a woman would bear over her lifetime – the population would shrink dramatically over time. Given a 30-year generational span, it would take just three generations for the initial child population to decline to only 15% of its original size.

However, if we apply the TFR of 1.13 – the rate observed among Maltese mothers at the time of the 2021 Census of Population and Housing – the long-term impact is even more severe: after three generations, the child population would decline to just 8.4% of its initial size.

The above hypothetical situation should serve as a warning, as Australian demographer Peter McDonald (2008) wisely stated: “Every nation facing this situation is very likely to take action to stop the trend at some time. However, delay of action has important consequences.”

Maja Miljanic Brinkworth lectures on demography at the University of Malta.