A demanding work culture could be quietly undermining efforts to raise birth rates

China’s falling birth rate has become a major national concern, and a new study published in Biodemography and Social Biology suggests that the country’s demanding work culture may be partly to blame. The research shows that working more than 40 hours a week significantly reduces people’s desire to have children. Overtime, night shifts, and being constantly on call make it harder for people to imagine balancing work and family life — a finding that has important implications for future population policies.

China’s fertility rate has continued to fall even as the government has introduced a series of policies aimed at encouraging childbirth. After decades of strict population control, including the well-known one-child policy, China has now moved to allow two, and even three children per family.

However, these efforts have had limited success. The birth rate remains low, and the country is now facing the social and economic challenges of an aging population, including a shrinking workforce and increased pressure on social support systems. While financial constraints and housing costs are often cited as obstacles to starting a family, the study’s authors argue that time scarcity — particularly due to long working hours — may be just as important.

To investigate this issue, researchers at Nankai University and Henan University of Technology used data from the 2020 China Family Panel Studies (CFPS), a large-scale survey of over 20,000 people from across the country. The CFPS collects detailed information on demographics, employment, income, health, and family life. In this study, the researchers focused on respondents’ reported weekly working hours and their responses to a question about whether they intended to have a child within the next two years. People working more than 40 hours per week were classified as doing overtime, based on standards from both international labor guidelines and Chinese labor laws.

The team then analyzed how overtime affected fertility intentions, taking into account a wide range of other factors including age, sex, ethnicity, income, marital status, and region. They used both provincial and city-level data to examine regional variations, and also explored how different kinds of overtime work — such as weekend shifts, night shifts, and on-call duties — might affect people’s willingness to start or expand their families.

Free daily newsletter

The results were clear: overtime work had a strong and statistically significant negative effect on fertility intentions. This pattern held across nearly every province and city analyzed. The more hours people worked beyond the standard 40-hour week, the less likely they were to say they planned to have children in the near future. This trend was especially pronounced for people working 40–50 hours per week, where fertility intentions dropped the most sharply. Those working more than 60 hours a week showed more varied responses, but the overall effect was still negative.

When the researchers broke down working hours into smaller segments, they found that moderate work schedules — especially those between 0 and 20 hours per week — were actually associated with higher fertility intentions. Between 20 and 40 hours, the effect was mixed: some people were more willing to have children as hours increased, while others were not. But once work passed the 40-hour threshold, the negative effects on fertility became much stronger.

The type of overtime also mattered. People who regularly worked on weekends, at night, or were expected to be reachable 24/7 were significantly less likely to plan for children. These types of schedules interfere not just with physical rest, but also with family and social life. Weekend work and night shifts disrupt routines, reduce time with partners, and can create chronic fatigue. Being constantly on-call added another layer of stress, keeping people mentally tethered to their jobs even during off hours. The authors suggest that this erosion of personal time leaves little room for planning or raising a family.

There were also differences based on gender and marital status. Women showed a stronger negative response to overtime than men, suggesting that long hours may be especially burdensome for women who still shoulder more of the childcare and household responsibilities. Unmarried individuals were also more affected than those who were already married, possibly because they are still in the phase of life where fertility decisions are more flexible.

To explore whether certain workplace conditions could ease the conflict between work and family goals, the researchers examined a few potential moderating factors. Flexible working arrangements — where employees could choose their start and end times — had a positive effect on fertility intentions. When people had more control over their schedules, they were more likely to consider having children.

Similarly, satisfaction with career advancement opportunities and wages was linked to stronger fertility intentions. Transparent promotion paths and fair pay may help employees feel that their career won’t be derailed by having children. Another important factor was maternity insurance, which was also associated with greater willingness to have children. These workplace benefits can reduce the financial and psychological burden of childbearing.

But there are limitations to consider. The study is based on cross-sectional data from a single year, so it cannot track changes in fertility intentions over time or definitively prove cause and effect. Fertility intentions do not always translate into actual births, and personal circumstances — such as relationships or health — may also influence family planning decisions. Additionally, although the CFPS is a large and representative survey, it may not capture all forms of informal or unreported work, which is still common in some parts of China.

The study, “Reasons for the continued decline in fertility intentions: explanations from overtime work,” was authored by Jiawei Zhao, Yuxuan Li, and Wenqi Li.