Home > Costs and finances

Breastfeeding – why

22.10.2026

Table of contents

The economic benefits of breastfeeding

What are the economic advantages in terms of health, for the state as well as for families?

Breastfeeding offers many financial advantages, both for families and for the state, thanks to its positive effects on health and the reduction in costs associated with childhood and maternal illnesses. Here is an analysis of the main financial advantages:

For families

1. Reduction in food costs:

• Breastfeeding is almost free, unlike infant formula, which can represent a significant expense (between €50 and €150 per month, depending on the brand and needs).

• No need for additional equipment (bottles, bottle warmers, sterilisers, etc.), except when a breast pump is used.

2. Lower medical expenses:

• Breastfed babies generally fall ill less often, which reduces the costs of medical consultations, medicines and hospitalisations.

• For example, breastfeeding reduces the risk of gastroenteritis, ear infections, respiratory infections and allergies, which are costly to treat.

3. Reduction in parental absenteeism from work:

• Parents of breastfed babies miss fewer working days to look after sick children, which has a positive impact on family income.

For the state and the health system

1. Reduction in public health costs:

• A US study showed that increasing breastfeeding rates could save more than $13 billion every year in health expenditure. Bartick M, 2010, Bartick and Reinhold 2013, Bartick et al 2017.

2. Reduction in costs related to child health:

• Breastfed children are at lower risk of developing chronic diseases such as type 2 diabetes, obesity or asthma, which reduces long-term costs for health systems. See the Child’s health and Mother’s health pages

• In addition to suffering from more illnesses, infants fed with infant formula represent a cost
to the health system. Health insurance funds should make substantial savings, while providing
better-quality care, by supporting and encouraging exclusive breastfeeding. Ball TM, Wright AL. Health care costs of formula-feeding in the first year of life. Pediatrics. 1999 Apr;103(4 Pt 2):870-6.

3. Reduction in costs related to maternal illnesses:

• Breastfeeding reduces the risk of certain diseases in mothers, such as breast and ovarian cancer, or osteoporosis, which reduces the health expenditure needed to treat them. See the Mother’s health page

• “Measures aimed at promoting optimal breastfeeding could translate into substantial gains in public health. Breastfeeding has a greater impact on women’s health than was previously thought.” (Bartick et al. 2017)

4. Positive impact on the economy:

• A high breastfeeding rate would reduce public expenditure on the purchase of infant formula in certain social programmes.

5. Less pressure on medical infrastructure:

• With healthier children, there is less demand for medical consultations and hospitalisations, which frees up resources for other public health needs.

Studies and estimates

Studies have estimated that increasing breastfeeding rates in developed countries could save millions, or even billions, in health costs and productivity losses. For example:

• In the United States, a report published in Pediatrics estimates that if 90% of families breastfed exclusively for the first six months, the health system would save more than $13 billion every year.

• In France, according to some analyses, greater promotion of breastfeeding could significantly reduce the costs related to preventable childhood illnesses.

Conclusion

Breastfeeding is financially beneficial for families and for the state thanks to its preventive effects on health. Encouraging and supporting breastfeeding (appropriate maternity leave, support for mothers, information campaigns) is a cost-effective investment for society as a whole.

Changing perspective: the cost of not breastfeeding

The cost of not breastfeeding to a society can be considerable, owing to the consequences for public health, family finances and the economy as a whole. These costs include direct and indirect expenditure related to health, productivity and socio-economic development. Here is a detailed analysis:

1. Cost to the health system

Not breastfeeding is associated with an increased prevalence of many childhood and maternal illnesses, which adds to the burden of health expenditure. Bartick and Reinhold conclude: “If 90% of American families followed medical recommendations advocating exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months, the United States would save $13 billion per year and avoid 911 additional deaths, almost all of which would involve infants ($10.5 billion and 741 deaths with 80% adherence).” The Burden of Suboptimal Breastfeeding in the United States: A Pediatric Cost Analysis

  • Costs for children:

• Increased risk of gastroenteritis, respiratory infections, ear infections, and related hospitalisations.

• Increase in chronic diseases such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, allergies and asthma.

• Long-term impact on cognitive and developmental health (resulting in lower future productivity).

  • Costs for mothers:

• Higher risk of breast and ovarian cancer, type 2 diabetes and osteoporosis, among others. See the details here Breastfeeding and women’s health

• Increased need for medical consultations, treatment and hospitalisations.

  • Costs for society:

• In the United States, a study published in 2013 estimated that not breastfeeding cost the health system more than $13 billion per year, owing to the increase in preventable childhood and maternal illnesses. (Bartick 2010, see above)

• A study published in The Lancet in 2016 estimated that the global cost of not breastfeeding, in terms of child and maternal health, amounted to around $300 billion per year, mainly because of economic losses linked to reduced cognitive development.

2. Cost to families

• Additional food expenditure:

• Buying infant formula represents a significant expense for families (up to €1,500 per year).

• Cost associated with buying additional equipment (bottles, sterilisers, bottle warmers, etc.).

• Medical costs:

• Children who are not breastfed fall ill more often, which increases medical costs (consultations, medicines, hospitalisations).

• Increased parental absenteeism from work to look after sick children, which can affect income.

3. Cost to the economy as a whole

• Loss of productivity, absenteeism:

• Working days lost by parents because of sick or hospitalised children lead to a fall in economic productivity. “Approximately 28% of the infants in the study had no illness; of these, 86% were breastfed and 14% were fed with infant formula. When illnesses occurred, 25% of all one-day maternal absences concerned breastfed babies and 75% concerned the formula-fed group.” Cohen R, Mrtek MB, Mrtek RG. Comparison of maternal absenteeism and infant llness rates among breastfeeding and formula-feeding women in two corporations. Am J Health Promot. 1995 Nov-Dec, 10(2):148-53.

• The reduced potential for cognitive development in children who are not breastfed can have long-term economic repercussions on the future workforce.

• Impact on social inequalities: low-income families are often the hardest hit by the cost of infant formula, which worsens economic inequalities.

4. Environmental cost and societal cost

The environmental costs of not breastfeeding, although still poorly quantified, are also considerable. See our Environment and climate page

• Resource consumption:

• The production of infant formula consumes large quantities of water, energy and raw materials (cow’s milk, packaging, transport).

• The carbon footprint associated with the manufacture and transport of infant formula contributes to climate change, which has indirect costs for society (pollution, natural disasters, etc.).

• Waste and transport:

• The packaging and waste from infant products represent an additional cost for waste management systems. See our analyses of the environment, resources and climate here: Greenfeeding.

Price of a litre of breast milk

  • €80 per litre for fresh or frozen breast milk, 
  • €1,330 per litre for freeze-dried breast milk. 

Quantifying the value of breast milk at country level

Money is the language of policy-makers. Breastfeeding and breast milk are not currently taken into account in food systems or in the economy, but they should be. Including breastmilk production in food and economic statistics will improve policy-making and investment in women’s unpaid work.

The Mother’s Milk Tool enables the productivity of women to be valued and the volume of breast milk – and thus the economic value of breastfeeding – to be quantified at national and global levels. The tool also quantifies what is lost when national environments, policies, healthcare, the workplace and the community fail to enable women and children to exercise their right to breastfeed. See the presentation from the launch of this tool on 5 May 2022 https://nceph.anu.edu.au/news-events/events/measuring-and-valuing-womens-productivity-mothers-milk-tool

Estimates for Switzerland

The 2014 SWIFS is based on 2013 figures. The following extrapolations are based on the 2013 figures. In 2013, Switzerland had 82,731 live births. According to SWIFS, 95% of mothers breastfed at birth. Since SWIFS is based on samples rather than on comprehensive figures, the picture is reductive. This way of measuring breastfeeding rates is so approximate that WHO does not accept the Swiss figures in its global statistics. WBTi Switzerland has also highlighted this point as a regrettable lack of figures for breastfeeding monitoring.

The 2024 SWIFS finds, based on limited figures: “The study shows that breastfeeding practices and the introduction of complementary foods have improved significantly.” https://www.gifa.org/en/publications/swiss-infant-feeding-study-2024/

Approximate calculation of the volume of breast milk produced in Switzerland

1st month

Calculation based on SWIFS 2014, i.e. 82,731 live births in 2013, 95% of these babies being breastfed at birth, i.e. 78,594 babies. As the exact duration is unknown, let us assume 1 month (a very optimistic assumption): 78,594 babies receive about 0.5 L of breast milk / day = 39,297 L of breast milk produced in a single day. Over 30 days, this comes to 1,178,910 L of breast milk, i.e. more than one million litres for the first month of exclusive breastfeeding.

Between 1 month and 3 months

As the exclusive breastfeeding rate falls after one month, production decreases. According to SWIFS, at 12 weeks (3 months), only 50% of children are still breastfed. There is therefore a drop from 95% to 50% between week 4 and week 12. On the other hand, for the calculation, the quantity of milk increases to 0.8 L/day/child. Our calculation: an average of 72.5% of babies (56,980) are therefore breastfed for a further 2 months, which gives 56,980 x 0.8 L (= 45,584 L) x 60 days = 2,735,040 L of breast milk

Between 3 and 6 months

The exclusive breastfeeding rate falls further, to less than 25% exclusive breastfeeding at 6 months. The calculation would be that an average of 40% of babies (31,437 babies) still receive 0.8 L of breast milk per day for 3 months (90 days). Our calculation: 31,437 x 0.8 L (25,149 L) x 90 = 2,263,464 L of breast milk.

Switzerland would therefore have produced about 1,178,910 L + 2,735,040 L + 2,263,464 L = 6,177,414 L of breast milk, taking into account exclusive breastfeeding only, without including estimates for mixed feeding or for continued breastfeeding after 6 months.

Approximate calculation of the annual value of breast milk produced in Switzerland

If we wanted to “monetise” this quantity of breast milk, by applying the price per litre of breast milk supplied by a human milk bank, at a rate of 75 CHF/L, the estimated value for the year 2013 alone would be 463,306,050 CHF, i.e. a “wealth” of more than 463 million Swiss francs generated by women, counting the raw material product alone.

To this must be added all the health benefits and many other indirect and externalised savings.

This wealth could be increased by 6 months of exclusive breastfeeding.

Wealth created by a breastfeeding Swiss woman

A woman who exclusively breastfeeds her baby for 6 months produces a total of about 135 L of breast milk (30 days at about 0.5 L and 150 days at about 0.8 L of breast milk = 135 L); at the “price” of 75 CHF/L, this is equivalent to 10,125 CHF.

This is the gross value of breast milk, to which must be added the value of the savings in health costs for the mother and the child, as well as the cost saved on the environmental impact of producing breast-milk substitutes – for this aspect, please see our Environment and climate page.

Breastfeeding is not “free”

Breastfeeding means an investment of time and effort for the woman. An article from the American Sociological Association (ASA) published on 27 April 2012 reveals the “hidden” costs of breastfeeding – an interesting approach which shows that the burden is often borne by the woman alone, whereas breastfeeding has benefits for the whole of society. Source: https://lesvendredisintellos.com/2012/05/05/les-couts-caches-de-lallaitement/

In the same vein, an article published in the Journal of Perinatology (2023) 43:678–682; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-023-01646-z details the costs involved in breastfeeding.

Understanding the costs associated with breastfeeding is essential in order to develop breastfeeding support policy that is as effective as possible by tackling financial barriers. Breastfeeding is not without cost; direct costs include those of equipment, altered nutritional intake and time (opportunity cost). Breastfeeding does not necessarily require more equipment than feeding with artificial milk, although the use of equipment varies according to the mother’s preferences. Meeting increased nutritional needs requires additional spending on food and possibly on dietary supplements, the marginal cost of which depends on the mother’s baseline diet.

The opportunity cost of the three to four hours a day spent breastfeeding can be prohibitive, particularly for low-income workers. These costs are relatively higher for people on low incomes, a group disproportionately made up of racial and ethnic minorities, and who have lower breastfeeding rates than their white and higher-income counterparts. Recognising and addressing these costs and their regressive nature is an essential element of effective breastfeeding policy.”

The Nature article cited above has been picked up in Switzerland. Thus, breastfeeding one’s baby would cost 9,500 francs per year. https://www.20min.ch/fr/story/maternite-allaiter-son-bebe-couterait-9500-francs-par-an-300046780161 This cost is borne by the woman / family alone, whereas the economic benefits are enjoyed by the whole of society, starting with the health insurance funds.

Conclusion

Not breastfeeding imposes a significant economic and environmental burden on society. These costs include increased health expenditure, productivity losses, worsening inequalities and environmental impacts. Investing in the promotion and support of breastfeeding (longer maternity leave, awareness-raising, assistance for mothers) is therefore not only beneficial for public health, but also economically cost-effective for individuals and for society as a whole.

No country can afford to neglect the support and protection of breastfeeding, either economically or in terms of public health. See in particular