The total fertility rate of the world has dropped from around 5 children per woman in 1950, to 2.2 children per woman in 2025, which means that women today are having fewer than half the number of children that women did 75 years ago. Replacement level fertility This change has come as a result of the global demographic transition, and is influenced by factors such as the significant reduction in infant and child mortality, reduced number of child marriages, increased educational and vocational opportunities for women, and the increased efficacy and availability of contraception. While this change has become synonymous with societal progress, it does have wide-reaching demographic impact - if the global average falls below replacement level (roughly 2.1 children per woman), as is expected to happen in the 2050s, then this will lead to long-term population decline on a global scale. Regional variations When broken down by continent, Africa is the only region with a fertility rate above the global average, and, alongside Oceania, it is the only region with a fertility rate above replacement level. Until the 1980s, the average woman in Africa could expect to have 6-7 children over the course of their lifetime, and there are still several countries in Africa where women can still expect to have 5 or more children in 2025. Historically, Europe has had the lowest fertility rates in the world over the past century, falling below replacement level in 1975. Europe's population has grown through a combination of migration and increasing life expectancy, however even high immigration rates could not prevent its population from going into decline in 2021.

A volatile regulatory environment at the state and federal levels has altered the makeup and concentration of some of the many family planning services clinics offer. In addition, declining patient volume because of telehealth expansion and an uncertain future regarding government funding has led to some clinics closing and to the concentration of services in some locations or drought in others. In particular, pregnancy termination services remain concentrated in independent clinics, and with medication abortion restrictions, these independent clinics will face an increase in demand. As medication abortions represent 63.0% of U.S. cases, telehealth restrictions in 28 states (Guttmacher 2025) still restrict access to medication abortion. Despite the significant shifts in pregnancy termination services, Medicaid is available for other planning services (in-person and telemedicine) and industry revenue is expected to climb at a CAGR of 3.5% by 2025 and reach $4.7 billion, when revenue will climb by 3.2% in 2025 alone. Technology continues to impact the clinic. Virtual-only clinics are increasingly providing telehealth services. Mobile abortion clinics aim to reduce travel for women in states with legal but distant abortion access and to bring family planning to others where there is a lack of maternal healthcare. Positioned near state borders where abortion is banned, they minimize driving time. Planned Parenthood, one of the largest providers of family planning services, operates mobile clinics, bringing services to states with service restrictions and to markets with shortages or undersupply of services. State actions may continue to counter federal bans that restrict services and shift in entry. For example, the Arizona Abortion Access Act may alter a clinic's decision to open a facility in the state. However, in April 2025, the federal government withheld Title X funding from 16 organizations, impacting clinics' budgets and services, including organizations like Planned Parenthood. Continued legal actions, state funding and advocacy efforts will continue to address and reverse these freezes. Looking forward, per capita disposable income will support donations and philanthropy. Assuming compensatory services are provided in other locations to offset state regulatory actions and with moderate growth in Medicaid funding, industry revenue will climb at an annual rate of 2.8% through 2030, reaching $5.4 billion, while profit remains stable.

National surveys reveal notable individual differences in U.S. citizens’ attitudes toward freedom of expression, including freedom of the press and speech. Recent theoretical developments and empirical findings suggest that ecological factors impact censorship attitudes in addition to individual difference variables (e.g., education, conservatism), but no research has compared the explanatory power of prominent ecological theories. This study tested climato-economic, parasite stress, and life history theories using four measures of attitudes toward censoring the press and offensive speech obtained from two national surveys in the U.S.A. Neither climate demands nor its interaction with state wealth—two key variables for climato-economic theory—predicted any of the four outcome measures. Interstate parasite stress significantly predicted two, with a marginally significant effect on the third, but the effects became non-significant when the analyses were stratified for race (as a control for extrinsic risks). Teenage birth rates (a proxy of human life history) significantly predicted attitudes toward press freedom during wartime, but the effect was the opposite of what life history theory predicted. While none of the three theories provided a fully successful explanation of individual differences in attitudes toward freedom of expression, parasite stress and life history theories do show potentials. Future research should continue examining the impact of these ecological factors on human psychology by further specifying the mechanisms and developing better measures for those theories.

Brazil and the United States are the two most populous countries in the Americas today. In 1500, the year that Pedro Álvares Cabral made landfall in present-day Brazil and claimed it for the Portuguese crown, it is estimated that there were roughly one million people living in the region. Some estimates for the present-day United States give a population of two million in the year 1500, although estimates vary greatly. By 1820, the population of the U.S. was still roughly double that of Brazil, but rapid growth in the 19th century would see it grow 4.5 times larger by 1890, before the difference shrunk during the 20th century. In 2024, the U.S. has a population over 340 million people, making it the third most populous country in the world, while Brazil has a population of almost 218 million and is the sixth most populous. Looking to the future, population growth is expected to be lower in Brazil than in the U.S. in the coming decades, as Brazil's fertility rates are already lower, and migration rates into the United States will be much higher. Historical development The indigenous peoples of present-day Brazil and the U.S. were highly susceptible to diseases brought from the Old World; combined with mass displacement and violence, their population growth rates were generally low, therefore migration from Europe and the import of enslaved Africans drove population growth in both regions. In absolute numbers, more Europeans migrated to North America than Brazil, whereas more slaves were transported to Brazil than the U.S., but European migration to Brazil increased significantly in the early 1900s. The U.S. also underwent its demographic transition much earlier than in Brazil, therefore its peak period of population growth was almost a century earlier than Brazil. Impact of ethnicity The demographics of these countries are often compared, not only because of their size, location, and historical development, but also due to the role played by ethnicity. In the mid-1800s, these countries had the largest slave societies in the world, but a major difference between the two was the attitude towards interracial procreation. In Brazil, relationships between people of different ethnic groups were more common and less stigmatized than in the U.S., where anti-miscegenation laws prohibited interracial relationships in many states until the 1960s. Racial classification was also more rigid in the U.S., and those of mixed ethnicity were usually classified by their non-white background. In contrast, as Brazil has a higher degree of mixing between those of ethnic African, American, and European heritage, classification is less obvious, and factors such as physical appearance or societal background were often used to determine racial standing. For most of the 20th century, Brazil's government promoted the idea that race was a non-issue and that Brazil was racially harmonious, but most now acknowledge that this actually ignored inequality and hindered progress. Racial inequality has been a prevalent problem in both countries since their founding, and today, whites generally fare better in terms of education, income, political representation, and even life expectancy. Despite this adversity, significant progress has been made in recent decades, as public awareness of inequality has increased, and authorities in both countries have made steps to tackle disparities in areas such as education, housing, and employment.

The COVID-19 pandemic increased the global death rate, reaching *** in 2021, but had little to no significant impact on birth rates, causing population growth to dip slightly. On a global level, population growth is determined by the difference between the birth and death rates, known as the rate of natural change. On a national or regional level, migration also affects population change. Ongoing trends Since the middle of the 20th century, the global birth rate has been well above the global death rate; however, the gap between these figures has grown closer in recent years. The death rate is projected to overtake the birth rate in the 2080s, which means that the world's population will then go into decline. In the future, death rates will increase due to ageing populations across the world and a plateau in life expectancy. Why does this change? There are many reasons for the decline in death and birth rates in recent decades. Falling death rates have been driven by a reduction in infant and child mortality, as well as increased life expectancy. Falling birth rates were also driven by the reduction in child mortality, whereby mothers would have fewer children as survival rates rose - other factors include the drop in child marriage, improved contraception access and efficacy, and women choosing to have children later in life.

Snapshot img

Fertility Services Market Size 2025-2029

The fertility services market size is forecast to increase by USD 9.53 billion, at a CAGR of 7.8% between 2024 and 2029.

The market is a continually evolving landscape, driven by various factors that shape its dynamics. One significant trend is the increasing demand for fertility treatments due to the rising prevalence of late parenthood. According to recent studies, the number of women giving birth over the age of 35 has increased by 23.3% in the last decade. This demographic shift has led to a surge in demand for assisted reproductive technologies, including in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Moreover, the market is also influenced by the growing incidence of prostate cancer, which can impact male fertility. According to the American Cancer Society, there will be approximately 193,000 new cases of prostate cancer diagnosed in the US in 2022.
This statistic underscores the importance of fertility services in addressing the reproductive health needs of cancer survivors. Despite these growth opportunities, the market faces challenges, including high complication rates associated with fertility treatments. For instance, the risk of multiple pregnancies and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) are significant concerns. These complications can lead to increased healthcare costs and potential long-term health risks for patients. The market is a complex and dynamic industry, shaped by demographic trends, health concerns, and technological advancements. As the demand for fertility treatments continues to rise, stakeholders must navigate the challenges and opportunities that come with this evolving landscape.

Major Market Trends & Insights

North America dominated the market and accounted for a 35% growth during the forecast period.
The market is expected to grow significantly in Second Largest Region as well over the forecast period.
By the Service, the Treatment services sub-segment was valued at USD 6.65 billion in 2023
By the End-user, the Fertility clinics sub-segment accounted for the largest market revenue share in 2023

Market Size & Forecast

Market Opportunities: USD 89.23 billion
Future Opportunities: USD USD 9.53 billion 
CAGR : 7.8%
North America: Largest market in 2023

What will be the Size of the Fertility Services Market during the forecast period?

Get Key Insights on Market Forecast (PDF) Request Free Sample

Fertility services encompass a range of medical interventions and technologies designed to help individuals and couples achieve pregnancy. One significant area within this market is the use of fertility medications, which play a crucial role in assisted reproductive technology (ART). According to recent reports, approximately 12% of women in the United States have used some form of fertility medication. ART involves various techniques, including artificial insemination, ovulation predictor kits, and ovarian stimulation protocols, among others. Cervical mucus plays a vital role in the natural process of conception, but ART may bypass this step through the use of intrauterine insemination (IUI) or in vitro fertilization (IVF).
In IUI, semen cryopreservation is essential for the success of the procedure. Ovarian stimulation protocols, such as ovulation induction, are commonly used in ART to increase the number of mature follicles and improve the chances of successful pregnancy. Ovulation predictor kits help individuals monitor their menstrual cycle and identify the most fertile days for conception. Despite the advancements in fertility services, challenges persist. Miscarriage rates remain a concern, with approximately 10-20% of known pregnancies ending in miscarriage. Blastocyst development is a critical factor in the success of ART, with implantation rate and pregnancy rate being essential indicators of treatment efficacy.
Reproductive endocrinology, a subspecialty of obstetrics and gynecology, focuses on the diagnosis and treatment of infertility. Donor insemination and ectopic pregnancy are other areas of fertility services that have gained increasing attention. Embryo culture media and ultrasound imaging are essential tools used in the field to monitor the development of embryos and assess the progress of pregnancies. Looking ahead, the market is expected to grow substantially. According to market reports, the global ART market is projected to expand at a significant rate, with an increase of around 15% in the number of ART cycles performed annually.
This growth is driven by factors such as rising infertility rates, increasing awareness, and advancements in technology. Comparing the growth rates of different regions, Asia Pacific is expected to witness the fastest growth in the ART market due to factors such as increasing disposable income, changing social norms, and government initiatives to promote fertility treatments

Future county population was based on projections for 2100 from the Spatially Explicit Regional Growth Model (SERGoM; Theobald 2005). SERGoM simulates population based on existing patterns of growth by census block, groundwater well and road density, and transportation distance to urban areas, while constraining the pattern of development to areas outside of protected areas and urban areas (Theobald 2005). The dataset here is a projection for a “baseline” growth scenario that assumes a similar trajectory to that of current urban growth (Bierwagen et al. 2010). SERGoM accuracy is estimated as 79–99% when compared to 1990 and 2000 census data, with the accuracy varying by urban/exurban/rural categories and increasing slightly with coarser resolution (Theobald 2005). The accuracy of future model predictions with different economic scenarios is most sensitive to fertility rates, which are subject to cultural change, economic recessions, and the current pattern of lands protected from development (Bierwagen et al. 2010). Bierwagen, B. G., D. M. Theobald, C. R. Pyke, A. Choate, P. Groth, J. V. Thomas, and P. Morefield. 2010. National housing and impervious surface scenarios for integrated climate impact assessments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107:20887-20892. Theobald, D. M. 2005. Landscape patterns of exurban growth in the USA from 1980 to 2020. Ecology and Society 10: article 32.

This map layer shows the prevalent generations that make up the population of the United States using multiple scales. As of 2018, the most predominant generations in the U.S. are Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964), Millennials (born 1981-1998), and Generation Z (born 1999-2016). Currently, Millennials are the most predominant population in the U.S.A generation represents a group of people who are born around the same time and experience world events and trends during the same stage of life through similar mediums (for example, online, television, print, or radio). Because of this, people born in the same generation are expected to have been exposed to similar values and developmental experiences, which may cause them to exhibit similar traits or behaviors over their lifetimes. Generations provide scientists and government officials the opportunity to measure public attitudes on important issues by people’s current position in life and document those differences across demographic groups and geographic regions. Generational cohorts also give researchers the ability to understand how different developmental experiences, such as technological, political, economic, and social changes, influence people’s opinions and personalities. Studying people in generational groups is significant because an individual’s age is a conventional predictor for understanding cultural and political gaps within the U.S. population.Though there is no exact equation to determine generational cutoff points, it is understood that we designate generational spans based on a 15- to 20-year gap. The only generational period officially designated by the U.S. Census Bureau is based on the surge of births after World War II in 1946 and a significant decline in birth rates after 1964 (Baby Boomers). From that point, generational gaps have been determined by significant political, economic, and social changes that define one’s formative years (for example, Generation Z is considered to be marked by children who were directly affected by the al Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001).In this map layer, we visualize six active generations in the U.S., each marked by significant changes in American history:The Greatest Generation (born 1901-1924): Tom Brokaw’s 1998 book, The Greatest Generation, coined the term ‘the Greatest Generation” to describe Americans who lived through the Great Depression and later fought in WWII. This generation had significant job and education opportunities as the war ended and the postwar economic booms impacted America.The Silent Generation (born 1925-1945): The title “Silent Generation” originated from a 1951 essay published in Time magazine that proposed the idea that people born during this period were more cautious than their parents. Conflict from the Cold War and the potential for nuclear war led to widespread levels of discomfort and uncertainty throughout the generation.Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964): Baby Boomers were named after a significant increase in births after World War II. During this 20-year span, life was dramatically different for those born at the beginning of the generation than those born at the tail end of the generation. The first 10 years of Baby Boomers (Baby Boomers I) grew up in an era defined by the civil rights movement and the Vietnam War, in which a lot of this generation either fought in or protested against the war. Baby Boomers I tended to have great economic opportunities and were optimistic about the future of America. In contrast, the last 10 years of Baby Boomers (Baby Boomers II) had fewer job opportunities and available housing than their Boomer I counterparts. The effects of the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal led a lot of second-wave boomers to lose trust in the American government. Generation X (born 1965-1980): The label “Generation X” comes from Douglas Coupland’s 1991 book, Generation X: Tales for An Accelerated Culture. This generation was notoriously exposed to more hands-off parenting, out-of-home childcare, and higher rates of divorce than other generations. As a result, many Gen X parents today are concerned about avoiding broken homes with their own kids.Millennials (born 1981-1998): During the adolescence of Millennials, America underwent a technological revolution with the emergence of the internet. Because of this, Millennials are generally characterized by older generations to be technologically savvy.Generation Z (born 1999-2016): Generation Z or “Zoomers” represent a generation raised on the internet and social media. Gen Z makes up the most ethnically diverse and largest generation in American history. Like Millennials, Gen Z is recognized by older generations to be very familiar with and/or addicted to technology.Questions to ask when you look at this mapDo you notice any trends with the predominant generations located in big cities? Suburbs? Rural areas?Where do you see big clusters of the same generation living in the same area?Which areas do you see the most diversity in generations?Look on the map for where you, your parents, aunts, uncles, and grandparents live. Do they live in areas where their generation is the most predominant?

The world's population first reached one billion people in 1805, and reached eight billion in 2022, and will peak at almost 10.2 billion by the end of the century. Although it took thousands of years to reach one billion people, it did so at the beginning of a phenomenon known as the demographic transition; from this point onwards, population growth has skyrocketed, and since the 1960s the population has increased by one billion people every 12 to 15 years. The demographic transition sees a sharp drop in mortality due to factors such as vaccination, sanitation, and improved food supply; the population boom that follows is due to increased survival rates among children and higher life expectancy among the general population; and fertility then drops in response to this population growth. Regional differences The demographic transition is a global phenomenon, but it has taken place at different times across the world. The industrialized countries of Europe and North America were the first to go through this process, followed by some states in the Western Pacific. Latin America's population then began growing at the turn of the 20th century, but the most significant period of global population growth occurred as Asia progressed in the late-1900s. As of the early 21st century, almost two-thirds of the world's population lives in Asia, although this is set to change significantly in the coming decades. Future growth The growth of Africa's population, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, will have the largest impact on global demographics in this century. From 2000 to 2100, it is expected that Africa's population will have increased by a factor of almost five. It overtook Europe in size in the late 1990s, and overtook the Americas a few years later. In contrast to Africa, Europe's population is now in decline, as birth rates are consistently below death rates in many countries, especially in the south and east, resulting in natural population decline. Similarly, the population of the Americas and Asia are expected to go into decline in the second half of this century, and only Oceania's population will still be growing alongside Africa. By 2100, the world's population will have over three billion more than today, with the vast majority of this concentrated in Africa. Demographers predict that climate change is exacerbating many of the challenges that currently hinder progress in Africa, such as political and food instability; if Africa's transition is prolonged, then it may result in further population growth that would place a strain on the region's resources, however, curbing this growth earlier would alleviate some of the pressure created by climate change.

In 2023, about 17.7 percent of the American population was 65 years old or over; an increase from the last few years and a figure which is expected to reach 22.8 percent by 2050. This is a significant increase from 1950, when only eight percent of the population was 65 or over. A rapidly aging population In recent years, the aging population of the United States has come into focus as a cause for concern, as the nature of work and retirement is expected to change to keep up. If a population is expected to live longer than the generations before, the economy will have to change as well to fulfill the needs of the citizens. In addition, the birth rate in the U.S. has been falling over the last 20 years, meaning that there are not as many young people to replace the individuals leaving the workforce. The future population It’s not only the American population that is aging -- the global population is, too. By 2025, the median age of the global workforce is expected to be 39.6 years, up from 33.8 years in 1990. Additionally, it is projected that there will be over three million people worldwide aged 100 years and over by 2050.

The statistic shows the total population of India from 2019 to 2029. In 2023, the estimated total population in India amounted to approximately 1.43 billion people.

Total population in India

India currently has the second-largest population in the world and is projected to overtake top-ranking China within forty years. Its residents comprise more than one-seventh of the entire world’s population, and despite a slowly decreasing fertility rate (which still exceeds the replacement rate and keeps the median age of the population relatively low), an increasing life expectancy adds to an expanding population. In comparison with other countries whose populations are decreasing, such as Japan, India has a relatively small share of aged population, which indicates the probability of lower death rates and higher retention of the existing population.

With a land mass of less than half that of the United States and a population almost four times greater, India has recognized potential problems of its growing population. Government attempts to implement family planning programs have achieved varying degrees of success. Initiatives such as sterilization programs in the 1970s have been blamed for creating general antipathy to family planning, but the combined efforts of various family planning and contraception programs have helped halve fertility rates since the 1960s. The population growth rate has correspondingly shrunk as well, but has not yet reached less than one percent growth per year.

As home to thousands of ethnic groups, hundreds of languages, and numerous religions, a cohesive and broadly-supported effort to reduce population growth is difficult to create. Despite that, India is one country to watch in coming years. It is also a growing economic power; among other measures, its GDP per capita was expected to triple between 2003 and 2013 and was listed as the third-ranked country for its share of the global gross domestic product.

In 2024, the average life expectancy in the world was 71 years for men and 76 years for women. The lowest life expectancies were found in Africa, while Oceania and Europe had the highest. What is life expectancy?Life expectancy is defined as a statistical measure of how long a person may live, based on demographic factors such as gender, current age, and most importantly the year of their birth. The most commonly used measure of life expectancy is life expectancy at birth or at age zero. The calculation is based on the assumption that mortality rates at each age were to remain constant in the future. Life expectancy has changed drastically over time, especially during the past 200 years. In the early 20th century, the average life expectancy at birth in the developed world stood at 31 years. It has grown to an average of 70 and 75 years for males and females respectively, and is expected to keep on growing with advances in medical treatment and living standards continuing. Highest and lowest life expectancy worldwide Life expectancy still varies greatly between different regions and countries of the world. The biggest impact on life expectancy is the quality of public health, medical care, and diet. As of 2022, the countries with the highest life expectancy were Japan, Liechtenstein, Switzerland, and Australia, all at 84–83 years. Most of the countries with the lowest life expectancy are mostly African countries. The ranking was led by the Chad, Nigeria, and Lesotho with 53–54 years.