A Framework for Analyzing the Proximate Determinants of Fertility

Bongaarts, John

doi:10.2307/1972149

Cited by 1,002 publications

(700 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

630

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They track the evolution of the population of England from 1541 to 1870 and were reconstructed by the Cambridge Group for Population and Social Structure (Wrigley andScho…eld 1981, Wrigley et al 1997). Although the methodology and some of the interpretations of the Cambridge Group have motivated some debate, 5 their results are generally regarded as 4 The lag is usually longer than a year if pregnancy delay is taken into consideration. 5 See for instance Lee (1985aLee ( , 1993 Goldstone (1986), and Lindert (1983).…”

Section: The Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Was Malthus right? A VAR analysis of economic and demographic interactions in pre-industrial England

Nicolini

2007

European Review of Economic History

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper shows that the interaction between economic and demographic variables in England before the onset of modern economic growth did not fit some crucial assumptions of the Malthusian model. I estimated a vector autoregression for data on fertility, nuptiality, mortality and real wages over the period 1541-1840 applying a well-known identification strategy broadly used in macroeconomics. The results show that endogenous adjustment of population to real wages functioned as Malthus assumed only until the 17th century: positive checks disappeared during the 17th century and preventive checks disappeared before 1740. This implies that the endogenous adjustment of population levels to changes in real wages -one of the cornerstones of the Malthusian model-did not work during an important part of the period usually considered within the "Malthusian regime".

show abstract

Section: The Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Was Malthus right? A VAR analysis of economic and demographic interactions in pre-industrial England

Nicolini

2007

European Review of Economic History

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since Bongaarts (1978) identified variations in abortion as one of the primary reasons for fertility differences among populations, this study investigated the extent to which socioeconomic factors determine induced abortion in a society in socioeconomic transition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socioeconomic Variations in Induced Abortion in Turkey

Ankara

2016

J. Biosoc. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary. This study aimed to identify the levels of, and socioeconomic variations in, income-related inequality in induced abortion among Turkish women. The study included 15,480 ever-married women of reproductive age Higher socioeconomic characteristics (such as higher levels of wealth and education and better neighbourhood) were found to be associated with higher rates of abortion. Inequality analyses indicated that although deprived women become more familiar with abortion over time, abortion was still more concentrated among affluent women in the 2008 survey. The decomposition analyses suggested that wealth, age, education and level of regional development were the most important contributors to income-related inequality in abortion. Therefore policies that (i) increase the level of wealth and education of deprived women, (ii) develop deprived regions of Turkey, (iii) improve knowledge about family planning and, especially (iv) enhance the accessibility of family planning services for deprived and/or rural women, may be beneficial for reducing socioeconomic variations in abortion in the country.

show abstract

“…Los estudiosos de la fecundidad se han pronunciado ante el significado de sus componentes: para Preston 26 , estudioso de la relación mortalidad-fecundidad, es esencial considerar los determinantes próximos, es decir, los niveles, diferenciales y determinantes que inciden la fecundidad, y que actúan entre los factores macroeconómicos y la fecundidad 27 . Bongaarts 28 identificó cuatro determinantes próximos, a saber: (1) la proporción de mujeres casadas, (2) el uso de anticonceptivos, (3) el aborto inducido y (4) la lactancia materna, que con el tiempo de posparto, constituye un período de infecundabilidad.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Determinantes próximos de la fecundidad: comportamiento reproductivo de las indígenas Chamibida de Antioquia, Colombia

Arias-Valencia

2005

Cad. Saúde Pública

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

El objetivo de este artículo es caracterizar el calendario reproductivo en las Chamibida en el Departamento de Antioquia, Colombia. Este es un estudio sociodemográfico realizado en el año 2000 con la técnica de historia reproductiva. Se visitaron todas las 234 viviendas de la Reserva Indígena de Cristianía para obtener 253 historias reproductivas correspondientes a 83,1% de las mujeres de 15 a 49 años. El comportamiento reproductivo se caracteriza por una entrada a la unión a los 17,8 años en promedio; intervalos intergenésicos cortos en 69,0%, con una tasa de fecundidad ajustada de 5,12 hijos. Este patrón reproductivo es diferente frente a las demás etnias y subgrupos de Antioquia. Como explicación se destaca que de las mujeres chamibida conocen y aceptan la planificación familiar occidental y, tienen mayor acceso a la escolaridad formal. Las políticas actuales están lejos de ser apropiadas, en tanto pasan por alto la especificidad de estos grupos étnicos.

show abstract

A Framework for Analyzing the Proximate Determinants of Fertility

Cited by 1,002 publications

References 0 publications

Was Malthus right? A VAR analysis of economic and demographic interactions in pre-industrial England

Was Malthus right? A VAR analysis of economic and demographic interactions in pre-industrial England

Socioeconomic Variations in Induced Abortion in Turkey

Determinantes próximos de la fecundidad: comportamiento reproductivo de las indígenas Chamibida de Antioquia, Colombia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About