placestats

Contraceptive use (any method) vs. Population growth

Fades after adjusting for income

Across 148 countries, Contraceptive use (any method) and Population growth rise and fall together at r = -0.51 (on a scale from −1 to +1, where 0 means no link). Comparing only countries with similar income (GDP per person) shrinks it to -0.31, which could easily be chance (q = 0.26, allowing for the many pairs tested, and allowing for countries in the same region being alike). So the first figure mostly shows richer countries differing from poorer ones, not a link between these two things. Caution: direction is not consistent across regions.

Comparing countries across the middle half of population growth, 0.444% to 2.17% per year, contraceptive use (any method) is 15.3% lower at the top of that range than the bottom. Comparing only countries with similar national income, the gap is 8.84%.

Link before adjusting (r)-0.508p = 4.4e-11 · 148 countries
After adjusting for national income-0.307p = 0.000 · likely range [-0.45, -0.15]
p, allowing for regions0.067standard error 0.138 · 7 regions
Check for luck (q)0.256across 14,952 pairs

How to read these.r runs from −1 (one goes up as the other goes down) to +1 (they rise together), and 0 means no link. Adjusting for national income means comparing countries with the same GDP per person, so differences in wealth can’t explain the link. Income is used in percentage terms, since an extra $1,000 means more to a poor country than to a rich one. p is how likely a link this strong would be if there were really none. Below 0.05 means it is unlikely to be chance. Very small values are written in short form: 1.1e-32 means a decimal point followed by 31 zeros and then 11, so very close to zero. The likely range is where the true figure probably lies, and a range that crosses zero means the link could easily be chance. Countries in the same region tend to resemble each other, so the third figure allows for that, which gives a fairer p. The standard error is the typical size of the error in r. Finally, testing this many pairs means some will look strong by luck alone. A q below 0.05 means this link is unlikely to be one of those.

Contraceptive use (any method) · %link with income +0.56 · moderate
Population growth · % per yearlink with income -0.50 · moderate

“Link with income” is how closely each measure tracks GDP per person across countries, from −1 to +1.

Every country as a dot

Contraceptive use (any method) · % →Population growth · % per year →6.9%85.5%-1.75%4.63%Afghanistan: 22.5%, 2.77% per yearAngola: 13.7%, 3% per yearAlbania: 46%, -1.17% per yearArgentina: 70.1%, 0.339% per yearArmenia: 57.1%, 1.74% per yearAustralia: 66.9%, 1.53% per yearAustria: 65.7%, 0.328% per yearAzerbaijan: 54.9%, 0.432% per yearBurundi: 28.5%, 2.41% per yearBelgium: 66.7%, 0.699% per yearBenin: 22.4%, 2.4% per yearBurkina Faso: 34%, 2.21% per yearBangladesh: 64%, 1.22% per yearBosnia and Herzegovina: 46%, -0.766% per yearBelarus: 52.6%, -0.512% per yearBelize: 51.4%, 1.39% per yearBolivia: 66.5%, 1.35% per yearBrazil: 80.2%, 0.383% per yearBarbados: 59.2%, 0.0552% per yearBhutan: 65.6%, 0.65% per yearBotswana: 67.4%, 1.61% per yearCentral African Republic: 17.8%, 3.37% per yearSwitzerland: 71.6%, 0.96% per yearChile: 76.3%, 0.48% per yearChina: 84.5%, -0.17% per yearCote d'Ivoire: 32%, 2.4% per yearCameroon: 19.3%, 2.56% per yearCongo, Dem. Rep.: 28.1%, 3.2% per yearCongo, Rep.: 30.1%, 2.36% per yearColombia: 81%, 1.01% per yearComoros: 11.6%, 1.85% per yearCabo Verde: 55.8%, 0.466% per yearCosta Rica: 70.9%, 0.448% per yearGermany: 80.3%, -0.0304% per yearDjibouti: 19%, 1.31% per yearDominican Republic: 62.8%, 0.81% per yearAlgeria: 53.6%, 1.32% per yearEcuador: 77.9%, 0.848% per yearEgypt, Arab Rep.: 58.5%, 1.56% per yearSpain: 62.1%, 1.03% per yearEstonia: 75.1%, -0.428% per yearEthiopia: 36.1%, 2.55% per yearFinland: 85.5%, 0.471% per yearFiji: 35.4%, 0.469% per yearFrance: 78.4%, 0.246% per yearGabon: 24.8%, 2.11% per yearUnited Kingdom: 76.1%, 0.297% per yearGeorgia: 39.3%, 3.18% per yearGhana: 36.3%, 1.83% per yearGuinea: 10.9%, 2.31% per yearGambia, The: 18.9%, 2.23% per yearGuinea-Bissau: 21.2%, 2.16% per yearEquatorial Guinea: 12.6%, 2.4% per yearGuatemala: 60.6%, 1.52% per yearGuyana: 29.9%, 0.588% per yearHong Kong SAR, China: 66.7%, -0.335% per yearHonduras: 69.4%, 1.65% per yearHaiti: 34.3%, 1.13% per yearIndonesia: 52.6%, 0.785% per yearIndia: 66.7%, 0.887% per yearIreland: 73.3%, 1.63% per yearIran, Islamic Rep.: 77.4%, 0.924% per yearIraq: 52.8%, 2.1% per yearItaly: 65.1%, -0.0629% per yearJamaica: 60.6%, -0.0739% per yearJordan: 60.1%, -0.279% per yearJapan: 58.3%, -0.492% per yearKazakhstan: 53%, 1.21% per yearKenya: 62.5%, 1.93% per yearKyrgyz Republic: 39.4%, 1.66% per yearCambodia: 61.9%, 1.18% per yearKiribati: 33.6%, 1.45% per yearKorea, Rep.: 84.2%, -0.129% per yearLao PDR: 56.3%, 1.32% per yearLiberia: 24.9%, 2.09% per yearLibya: 27.7%, 1.04% per yearSt. Lucia: 55.5%, 0.225% per yearSri Lanka: 64.6%, -0.733% per yearLesotho: 67.4%, 1.1% per yearMorocco: 70.8%, 0.914% per yearMoldova: 56%, -1.75% per yearMadagascar: 49.7%, 2.4% per yearMaldives: 18.8%, 0.355% per yearMexico: 71.8%, 0.826% per yearNorth Macedonia: 59.9%, -0.189% per yearMali: 17.2%, 2.9% per yearMyanmar: 52.2%, 0.641% per yearMontenegro: 20.7%, -0.0635% per yearMongolia: 48.1%, 1.25% per yearMozambique: 26.4%, 2.85% per yearMauritania: 14.3%, 2.78% per yearMauritius: 63.8%, -0.164% per yearMalawi: 65.6%, 2.56% per yearMalaysia: 42.8%, 1.17% per yearNamibia: 56.1%, 2.05% per yearNiger: 15.3%, 3.22% per yearNigeria: 21.6%, 2.06% per yearNicaragua: 80.4%, 1.31% per yearNetherlands: 73%, 0.522% per yearNepal: 57.2%, -0.111% per yearOman: 29.7%, 3.96% per yearPakistan: 34%, 1.56% per yearPanama: 50.8%, 1.22% per yearPeru: 77.3%, 1.04% per yearPhilippines: 58.3%, 0.811% per yearPapua New Guinea: 36.7%, 1.75% per yearPoland: 63.2%, -0.338% per yearPortugal: 73.9%, 1.03% per yearParaguay: 68.4%, 1.2% per yearWest Bank and Gaza: 57.3%, 2.33% per yearQatar: 37.5%, 3.92% per yearRussian Federation: 68%, -0.109% per yearRwanda: 64.1%, 2.17% per yearSaudi Arabia: 40%, 4.63% per yearSudan: 12.8%, 2.38% per yearSenegal: 26.5%, 2.3% per yearSolomon Islands: 29.3%, 2.35% per yearSierra Leone: 21.2%, 2.04% per yearEl Salvador: 53.6%, 0.43% per yearSomalia, Fed. Rep.: 6.9%, 3.34% per yearSerbia: 62.3%, -0.568% per yearSao Tome and Principe: 49.7%, 1.98% per yearSuriname: 39.1%, 0.851% per yearEswatini: 57.7%, 1.07% per yearTurks and Caicos Islands: 34.4%, 0.685% per yearChad: 8.1%, 3.41% per yearTogo: 23.8%, 2.18% per yearThailand: 72.8%, -0.0672% per yearTajikistan: 29.3%, 1.83% per yearTurkmenistan: 49.7%, 1.65% per yearTimor-Leste: 26%, 1.27% per yearTonga: 29.3%, -0.417% per yearTrinidad and Tobago: 36.5%, -0.0416% per yearTunisia: 54%, 0.58% per yearTurkiye: 69.8%, 0.42% per yearTuvalu: 23.7%, -1.61% per yearTanzania: 37.6%, 2.86% per yearUganda: 43%, 2.7% per yearUkraine: 65.5%, 2.92% per yearUnited States: 73.9%, 0.522% per yearUzbekistan: 58.8%, 1.88% per yearViet Nam: 72.8%, 0.603% per yearVanuatu: 49%, 2.23% per yearSamoa: 16.6%, 0.589% per yearKosovo: 66.7%, -1.1% per yearSouth Africa: 54.6%, 1.15% per yearZambia: 49.6%, 2.77% per yearZimbabwe: 66.8%, 1.88% per yearCHNKORMDAMNEMWINERSAUSOMTCDTONTUVUKR

best-fit line line after adjusting

Four ways to measure the link

MethodrpCountries
Standard (Pearson), not adjusted-0.5084.4e-11148
By rank (Spearman), not adjusted-0.5248.5e-12148
Standard (Pearson), adjusted for national income-0.3070.000148
By rank (Spearman), adjusted for national income-0.2820.001148

The rank version uses only each country’s place in line, from lowest to highest, so a few extreme countries count for less. The adjusted and unadjusted versions use the same 148 countries: those that report both measures and GDP per person. So the gap between them comes from the adjustment, not from a change in which countries are counted. Drop in the size of r after adjusting: +0.201 (a minus sign means it grew).

How solid is it?

Leaving out one country at a time, r ranges from -0.344 (without TUV) to -0.269 (without QAT). The bar above shows that range on a scale from −1 to +1, with the solid line at the full result. The single country that moves r most: QAT (+0.038).

Fragile: this link may not hold up.
  • direction is not consistent across regions

Within each region

Countries are not separate, unrelated cases, and neighbors share a lot. A link that holds inside each region is far more believable than one that shows up only when comparing regions.

nr
East Asia & Pacific23+0.16
Europe & Central Asia33-0.06
Latin America & Caribbean25+0.09
Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan & Pakistan15-0.53
Sub-Saharan Africa45-0.54

By income third

If the link shows up only in the richest third of countries, it is a feature of rich countries, not a general pattern.

nr
Poorest third50-0.21
Middle third49-0.26
Richest third49-0.43

By largest religious group

Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.

nr
Christians86-0.15
Muslims44-0.49

By last european coloniser

Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.

nr
France23-0.64
Never a European colony21-0.80
Spain18-0.63
United Kingdom46-0.10

Without outliers (countries far outside the middle half of countries on either measure, by more than one and a half times the width of that middle half): r = -0.307 after dropping 0 countries.

Two series, one country

Both measures over the years for one country you pick. The two charts are stacked so they share only the years along the bottom.

Loading…

Over time, within countries

Everything above compares countries with each other at one moment. This section compares each country only with itself over 35years. So a link here can’t come from anything about a country that stays the same, such as its history, geography, institutions or culture.

Within countries over time, there is no link that is clearly more than chance (r = -0.146, comparing each country only with itself over the years, and each year only with the same year elsewhere). Whatever the cross-country picture shows, countries whose contraceptive use (any method) moved did not tend to see their population growth move with it.

Across countries (adjusted)-0.307for comparison
Within countries-0.266each country vs itself
…and vs the same year elsewhere-0.146q = 0.114 · 96 countries
Year-on-year changes—q = —

784 country-years (one country in one year), 96 countries, 1990–2024, about 8 years each on average. Share of the variation that happens within countries over time: 24% for Contraceptive use (any method), 11% for Population growth. The margins of error allow for each country appearing many times, and for each year’s value being close to the year before.

Year-to-year changes are a cautious test, not a final answer. Looking only at changes from one year to the next removes each country’s own trends. But it also makes measurement mistakes louder, which pulls the results toward zero. A near-zero result here is weak evidence of no link, not proof.

With one measure years behind the other

0.20−0.2-100+10years Population growth trails Contraceptive use (any method) →lag -10: r = 0.042 (n = 465)lag -9: r = -0.074 (n = 515)lag -8: r = -0.106 (n = 543)lag -7: r = -0.099 (n = 577)lag -6: r = 0.075 (n = 616)lag -5: r = 0.042 (n = 671)lag -4: r = -0.143 (n = 689)lag -3: r = -0.129 (n = 725)lag -2: r = -0.101 (n = 749)lag -1: r = -0.062 (n = 770)lag +0: r = -0.146 (n = 784)lag +1: r = -0.116 (n = 784)lag +2: r = -0.037 (n = 783)lag +3: r = -0.025 (n = 774)lag +4: r = -0.021 (n = 739)lag +5: r = -0.032 (n = 723)lag +6: r = -0.063 (n = 706)lag +7: r = 0.034 (n = 660)lag +8: r = -0.060 (n = 614)lag +9: r = -0.081 (n = 578)lag +10: r = 0.102 (n = 541)

Same year (lag 0): -0.146. A peak away from zero does not show which comes first. These series change slowly — this year’s value is close to last year’s. That makes the curve smooth and nearly symmetric, whatever produced the data. Even a sharp peak at one lag (a gap of some years) would not prove that one measure changes the other.

The data


%
% per year		Years
Finland FIN85.5%0.471%2015, 2025
China CHN84.5%-0.17%2017, 2025
Korea, Rep. KOR84.2%-0.129%2021, 2025
Colombia COL81%1.01%2015, 2025
Nicaragua NIC80.4%1.31%2012, 2025
Germany DEU80.3%-0.0304%2011, 2025
Brazil BRA80.2%0.383%2013, 2025
France FRA78.4%0.246%2010, 2025
Ecuador ECU77.9%0.848%2018, 2025
Iran, Islamic Rep. IRN77.4%0.924%2010, 2025
Peru PER77.3%1.04%2023, 2025
Chile CHL76.3%0.48%2016, 2025
United Kingdom GBR76.1%0.297%2012, 2025
Estonia EST75.1%-0.428%2014, 2025
United States USA73.9%0.522%2019, 2025

World Bank, World Development Indicators
World Bank, World Development Indicators

Sources

Contraceptive use (any method)

Contraceptive prevalence, any method (% of married women ages 15-49)

World Bank · CC BY 4.0 · updated quarterly

The share of married women aged 15 to 49 who use any form of birth control, including traditional ones such as withdrawal, from national surveys. Only married women (and women living with a partner) are counted. Most countries have a survey only every few years.

Population growth

Population growth (annual %)

World Bank · CC BY 4.0 · updated quarterly

How this was computed

Data used: most recent value in 2010-2025; values come from 2010–2025. To adjust for income, each measure is first predicted from GDP per person (in percentage terms, on a log scale) with a straight-line fit. Only what is left over is then compared. This is called a partial correlation. The line is drawn the standard way (ordinary least squares), which picks the line that comes closest to all the countries at once. The error margins allow for countries in the same region resembling each other, using 7 World Bank regions. The q-value corrects for testing all 14,952 pairs at once, using the Benjamini–Hochberg method. Underlying data last updated DYB 2024. How the country data works · explore Contraceptive use (any method) and Population growth

This page shows that two measures go together. It does not show that Contraceptive use (any method) changes Population growth, or the reverse. These figures also describe countries, not individual people. See the ecological fallacy.

More links with Contraceptive use (any method) or Population growth