Social class and net fertility before, during, and after the demographic transition: A micro-level analysis of Sweden 1880-1970

The historical fertility transition at the micro level

“…The elite group and middle class were the first to start to limit their fertility, followed by skilled workers and farmers, and finally unskilled workers. Overall this pattern is similar to the one found for Sweden as a whole based on census data (Dribe and Scalone, 2014), as well as for the city of Stockholm in the same period (Molitoris and Dribe, forthcoming). We now turn to the discussion of how these findings agree with the expectations we formed, based on existing theories and major empirical generalizations.…”

“…The later fertility decline among farmers, which is also evident from nation-wide data from micro-censuses (Dribe and Scalone 2014), could possibly be related to the comparatively high benefits of children working on the family farm. However, starting already in the second quarter of the nineteenth century, it became increasingly difficult for farmer children to retain their social status, as shown by increasing downward social mobility in this group (Dribe, Helgertz, and Van de Putte forthcoming;Dribe and Svensson 2008).…”

“…Even though the latter two may have started to play more of a role in the later stages of the transition, it was not until the post-transitional period that they became really important, when the educational system and married women"s labor force participation really expanded (see Dribe and Scalone, 2014). Mortality decline, on the other hand, might have been of some importance to the overall fertility decline, but cannot explain much of the SES-specific pattern.…”

Does socioeconomic status matter? The fertility transition in a northern Italian village (marriage cohorts 1900‒1940)

“…In the passage from natural to controlled fertility the demand for children is one of the crucial elements that has to be taken into account (Easterlin 1975;Becker 1981;Caldwell 1982;Easterlin and Crimmins 1985;Galloway, Hammel, and Lee 1994;Dribe 2009;Dribe and Scalone 2014). From an economic point of view, this demand is determined by the advantages or disadvantages of having another child.…”

“…Elite groups are more open culturally and more likely to adopt new emerging attitudes towards procreation, as shown by the processes of secularisation and individualisation (Goldscheider 2006;Lesthaeghe and Surkyn 1988;Norris and Inglehart 2004;Surkyn and Lesthaeghe 2004;Peri-Rotem 2016). Higher status groups represent a vanguard in changing family and fertility behaviours and act as forerunners in the fertility decline (Livi Bacci 1986;Haines 1992;Dribe and Scalone 2014;Dribe, Oris, and Pozzi 2014). 6 The motivation of forerunners in the fertility decline may be to retain acquired social status and avoid downward mobility, and, for landowners, the changed rules of land inheritance (Bengtsson and Dribe 2014).…”