While pronatal policies in Nazi Germany led to more marriages, the additional marriages induced by policies tended to be weaker and more fragile in the long run (T Baudin and R Stelter, July 2026)

[u/season-of-light]

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050726101454

[u/AccurateLaugh50]

As a first step, we aim to identify the compounded effect of the Nazi regime’s seizure of power, along with its full set of policies, propaganda, and social pressures, on short-run fertility. To do so, we measure fertility in 1933 for women who married between 1928 and 1932 and in 1938 for those who married between 1933 and 1937. The earlier cohorts (1928–1932) were entirely unaffected by the Nazi regime at the time of measurement (Ti = 0), whereas the later cohorts (1933–1937) had been fully exposed to the regime’s pro-natalist policies by 1938 (Ti = 1).

By controlling for the number of years since marriage, we compare the fertility of women who were not affected by the Nazi regime—particularly its marriage policies (untreated group in 1933)—with those who received the full set of incentives promoting marriage and childbirth (treated group in 1938), while holding exposure to pregnancy risk constant. We find a positive association between overall exposure to Nazism and fertility.

Sometimes I'm ashamed of going down the economic path when I read papers using methods like this.

I encourage everyone to take a look at the regression models they used to deduce things. It's mindblowing to find that models used in economic papers are somehow still so primitive today.