<p>Common sense would indicate that the replacement level fertility of Norway ought to be lower than that of Sudan due to fewer children dying there. Why, then, is the replacement fertility rate universally taken as 2.1?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-08-20T20:31:54.887Z
I was referring to this article https://www.livemint.com/news/india/what-are-india-s-challenges-as-its-fertility-rate-falls-1563907229812.html about India, which says that the fertility rate of India is 2.2 at present. Isn't it safe to say that it is already below replacement level?
Siddhartha
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-08-20T20:47:23.380Z
I don't know who livemint is but they don't look like a scientific publication. https://www.prb.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/india-population-bulletin.pdf gives replacement level of 2.23 for India versus 2.06 in Europe. I'd expect there is a lot of regional variation within India.
Bryan Krause
<population-economics>
How can the replacement level fertility be 2.1 everywhere in the world?
Siddhartha
# How can the replacement level fertility be 2.1 everywhere in the world?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-08-20)

Common sense would indicate that the replacement level fertility of Norway ought to be lower than that of Sudan due to fewer children dying there. Why, then, is the replacement fertility rate universally taken as 2.1?

**Tags:** population-economics
> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I was referring to this article https://www.livemint.com/news/india/what-are-india-s-challenges-as-its-fertility-rate-falls-1563907229812.html about India, which says that the fertility rate of India is 2.2 at present. Isn't it safe to say that it is already below replacement level?  
> **username_1**: I don't know who livemint is but they don't look like a scientific publication. https://www.prb.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/india-population-bulletin.pdf gives replacement level of 2.23 for India versus 2.06 in Europe. I'd expect there is a lot of regional variation within India.  

---

## 0 answers

