Period Parity Progression Measures of Fertility in China

Unpacking the Differential Impact of Family Planning Policies in China: Analysis of Parity Progression Ratios From Retrospective Birth History Data, 1971–2005

“…The findings confirm the overall patterns of fertility change in China, and are broadly consistent with those reported elsewhere (for example, Feeney & Yu, 1987;Luther et al, 1990;Feeney & Wang, 1993;Freedman & Wang, 1993;Feeney & Yuan, 1994;Zeng, 1996;Retherford et al, 2005). The paper adds new evidence on PPRs among subpopulations differentially exposed to FPP and how these contributed to policy impact on TFR ppr across time and place.…”

“…Although Age-Specific Fertility Rates (ASFRs) are widely used, period parity progression based measures of fertility are better suited for examining the policy influence on fertility behaviour. This is because family planning policies in China have always had a clear focus on parity and birth spacing (Feeney & Yu, 1987). For each survey, the Parity Progression Ratio (PPR) was estimated as the proportion of women who had had an additional birth within 10 years.…”

“…A systematic assessment of the data indicated generally good quality and consistent records of marriage and birth history information (Coale, 1984;Qin, 2016). Further information about the surveys and data quality has been reported in several academic studies (Coale & Chen, 1987;Feeney & Yu, 1987;Feeney & Wang, 1993;Feeney & Yuan, 1994;Zhang & Zhao, 2006;Morgan et al, 2009), although the present study is the first to use data from all six.…”

“…From 1970 onwards, fertility declined rapidly to an average of about 2.7 children per woman in 1980 and it fell further below replacement level in 1990 with 2.0 children per woman (Peng & Guo, 2000). There is a general consensus from the literature that although rapid socioeconomic development across different regions contributed to boosting fertility transition in China, this was largely due to the Later, Longer, Fewer policy and the subsequent more strict FPP implemented by the Chinese government (Tien, 1984;Bongaarts & Greenhalgh, 1985;Wolf, 1986;Feeney & Yu, 1987;Poston & Gu, 1987;Yang & Chen, 2004;Retherford et al, 2005;Chen et al, 2009). There is also, however, evidence to suggest that the onset of fertility transition and the recent trend towards very low fertility in China have both been driven by socioeconomic development.…”

Tempo and the TFR

“…The solution here is not adjustment, which is designed to remove genuine timing effects, but to use indices either specific for parity and age, or for parity and duration for orders two and higher, or standardized for these factors. Such indicators, and measures summarizing them-period parity progression ratios, the period parity progression based TFR, and regressionstandardized parity-specific rates (Feeney and Yu 1987;Hoem 1993;Ní Bhrolcháin 1987;Rallu and Toulemon 1994)-are free of confounding bias. But, occurrenceexposure rates of this type, and measures derived from them, are influenced by genuine tempo change and thus might be thought of as definitionally distorted (bias B1).…”