Search

Low fertility is a growing concern in modern societies. While economic and structural explanations of reproductive hindrances have been informative to some extent, they do not address the fundamental motives that underlie reproductive decisions and are inadequate to explain why East Asian countries, in particular, have such low fertility rates. The current paper advances a novel account of low fertility in modern contexts by describing how modern environments produce a mismatch between our evolved mechanisms and the inputs they were designed to process, leading to preoccupations with social status that get in the way of mating and reproductive outcomes. We also utilize developed East Asian countries as a case study to further highlight how culture may interact with modern features to produce ultralow fertility, sometimes to the extent that people may give up on parenthood or even mating altogether. Through our analysis, we integrate several lines of separate research, elucidate the fundamental dynamics that drive trade-offs between social status and reproductive effort, add to the growing literature on evolutionary mismatch, and provide an improved account of low fertility in modern contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Grassroots innovation generates possibilities for the informal and collective production of the territory that the city itself denies, from bottom‐up solutions for sustainable development and consumption, which respond to the local situation, interests, and values of the communities involved. This paper aims to identify how grassroots innovation practices take place and are shaped in 'El Faro', a self‐built settlement at the urban border of the city of Medellín; and how these have allowed the social transformation of health and well‐being. This was done from a qualitative approach with an interpretative scope, under the case study methodology. 'El Faro' is a space built by its inhabitants, in a process that they have called "dignity and resistance", becoming the promoter of what we identify as four 'grassroots innovation practices' developed around three main issues: community water management, artistic training and the creation of community public spaces. This process has allowed them, from the capacity of agency, to understand their poverty situation and face it, modifying the conditions that reproduce it and responding to unsatisfied basic needs, based on innovative solutions that guarantee conditions of life with dignity and well‐being. Likewise, it generates mechanisms that reduce inequality because the community becomes the main driving agent for the construction of the city and the transformation of the health‐disease process, through its community assets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]