The Ministry of Social Affairs' analysis on supporting childbirth and parenting has struck a nerve, linking our existential fears of national disappearance with a dystopia in which women are ordered to give birth for the good of the state.

The number of births in Estonia has declined and will continue to decline, and one factor is a shift in people's values. In his commentary "Why are Old Men Worried About the Birth Rate," Raul Eamets asked: who are we buying weapons systems and bullets for if there are no men and women to send to the front?

I am convinced that there are very few young people in Estonia who would want to have children based on that kind of value system. And rightly so, because children should be born out of happy relationships and a desire to raise the next generation. It is the state's role to create an environment where every last person, young or old, is valued throughout their life. It is the responsibility of local governments to create safe spaces where children can climb, play, fall and get back up again — that is, grow and become independent.

Is population decline even a problem? The survival of a nation does not depend on the number of people, but on the environment those people live in. Iceland's population is smaller than Tallinn's, yet its language and culture are thriving and it is one of the richest and most egalitarian countries in the world.

In discussions about nationalism and sustainability, people often refer to the preamble of the Constitution of the Republic of Estonia, which sets the goal of ensuring the preservation of the Estonian people, language and culture through the ages. Yet in the same conversation, people frequently overlook the preamble's preceding idea — that the constitution is also a pledge to future generations for their social advancement.

Preserving a nation does not mean a race to increase birth rates, but rather ensuring the quality of society: whether young people feel that their lives, work and family relationships are valued. Children are born into families where there is a sense of security, not into families that are morally lectured by politicians.

Economy needs smart solutions more than just people

A common argument is that a smaller generation means slower economic growth, fewer taxpayers and a threat to the pension system. But that's only true if society itself doesn't change. The world — and the economy that goes with it — is in constant flux. Figuratively speaking, economic growth in the 21st century won't depend on how many factory workers we have, but on how successfully we can get artificial intelligence and robots to work alongside us. To make that happen, it's essential for the state to invest in world-class, accessible education and science, as well as in a high-quality living environment.

Academics Corey J. A. Bradshaw and Shana M. McDermott (2025) studied, on a global scale, whether slower population growth or aging populations are linked to poorer economic or social outcomes in countries.

Using nine different socioeconomic indicators, they found that countries with lower or even negative population growth tend to achieve better outcomes on average. Their results show that long-term prosperity depends more on how societies invest in education, skills and technology than on the sheer size of the population.

The findings suggest that smaller populations are actually beneficial for most of society and that political rhetoric around a birthrate crisis and economic decline is unnecessary.

Young people realistic rather than egotistical

Young people want to have children with the right partner, but they want to raise them in an environment where doing so doesn't mean giving up their lives, incomes, futures or mental health. The state must create incentives that support family-friendly work conditions, affordable housing and the assurance that the surrounding natural environment will be livable for future generations as well.

While Eamets suggested in the aforementioned article that young people's concern over global climate change is little more than grandstanding, the 2025 Eurobarometer Youth Survey shows that one-third of young people in Estonia want the environment and climate change to be a priority for the European Union over the next five years.

In my own work, I've engaged with young researchers and advocacy organizations dealing with climate issues both in Estonia and abroad, and I can say with full confidence that this is far from posturing. The concern is backed by clear data and young people are often the ones advancing climate-related knowledge.

Worries about the future must be taken seriously. Ridiculing those concerns or burying one's head in the sand — by claiming, for example, that "human-caused climate change doesn't exist" — is essentially the same as saying that smoking doesn't affect health because people have always gotten sick. You might fool yourself that way, but state policy must be rooted in knowledge and evidence.

I often hear the narrative that population decline equals national decline. In reality, a smaller but smarter and fairer society can be much more resilient than a larger but unjust one. The question isn't how many of us there are — but how well we take care of one another.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!