Jitka Dvorakova (CZC.cz): Od trgovine do e-trgovine in nazaj
TRENDS IN FAMILY BEHAVIOUR: FERTILITY PATTERNS LEAVE POLICIES & RESEARCH, Praha 10. - 11. 2009 Jitka...
-
Upload
jasper-davis -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
0
Transcript of TRENDS IN FAMILY BEHAVIOUR: FERTILITY PATTERNS LEAVE POLICIES & RESEARCH, Praha 10. - 11. 2009 Jitka...
TRENDS IN FAMILY BEHAVIOUR: FERTILITY PATTERNS
LEAVE POLICIES & RESEARCH, Praha 10. - 11. 2009
Jitka RychtaříkováDepartment of Demography and
Geodemography Faculty of Science, Charles University in
Prague Albertov 6, 128 43 Praha, Czech Republic
[email protected] +420 221951420
Outline
Cohort and cross-sectional perspective
Age profiles Birth order Marital status Education Contraception Day care Attitudes towards having another
child
Decrease in fertility also confirmed from a cohort perspective
1,0
1,2
1,4
1,6
1,8
2,0
2,2
2,4
2,6
2,8
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
completed fertility rate
total fertility rate
bir
th c
oh
ort
193
0
bir
th c
oh
ort
194
0
bir
th c
oh
ort
19
50
bir
th c
oh
ort
19
60
bir
th c
oh
ort
197
0
bir
t co
ho
rt 1
981
Pro-family measures implemented
Promised pro-familymeasures never implemented
Fertility decrease and a rise in the age of mothers at childbirth
Sum of age-specific fertility rates: cross-sectional and cohort view
2008
The lowest total fertility rate in the Czech Republic (1,13) was recorded
in 1999. For the first time in the history of fertility in the Czech Republic
(the Czech Lands) there were fewer than 1,5 live births per woman for an extended period of time (between 1995 and 2005 the figure was even lower - below 1,3); at present, 1,5 is the average total fertility of the European Union.
The long-term trends of both basic general indicators of women’s fertility, i.e. total fertility rate (the average number of live-born children per woman of reproductive age within a calendar year) and completed fertility rate (the average number of live-born children per woman of reproductive age within a given generation of women) indicate that the recent changes signify a clear turning point in reproductive patterns and they also lessen the likelihood that there will be a return to the pattern of simple reproduction, i.e. to the average of two children per woman of reproductive age
After a short and moderate baby-boom, oscillations in TFR have been related to actual population
climate
LOCALMinima Maxima
Year TFR Number of live births Year TFR Number of live births1960 2,11 128 879 1964 2,36 154 4201968 1,83 137 437 1974 2,43 194 2151999 1,13 89 471
Minima Maxima CFR (completed fertility rate)
Birth cohort Birth cohort1943 2,02 1950 2,101981 1,52 1951 2,10
CURRENT FIGURESYear TFR Number of live births Mean age at first childbirth2008 1,50 119 570 27,33
AGE
The birth cohort 1950 was the “luckiest“and documented the success of family policy measures of
the 1970’s
Low percentage of childless
women 6,5%
Only one child
women 14 %
Two child women 54
%
Three child women 21
%
0
50
100
150
200
250
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
Age-specific fertility rate p. 1000 women
Birth cohorts
age
CFR=2,10
Recent changes in age intensity profile and fertility timing
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
1,0
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Age-specific fertility rates
Mean age at first childbirth
20-24
25-29
-19
35-39
40+
30-34
Year
Mean age at first childbirth
The only ‘visible’ gain was recorded in the category of women aged 30-34
However, this positive trend does not offset the decrease in fertility intensity recorded among young women aged 24 and under.
The same trend can be observed from cohort perspective.
Rapid shift by 9 years within 20 year period
Modal age
1988: 21
1998: 24
2008: 30
0,00
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,10
0,12
0,14
0,16
0,18
0,20
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
1988
1998
2008
Age-specific fertility rates
Years
The most numerous 1974 birth cohort has been affected the most by the transformation of the
1990’s
In the year 1993 women were 19 and in 2008 at age of 34.
It combines low fertility before the
age of 26-27 and slight
compensation afterwards. 0
50
100
150
200
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
Age-specific fertility rate p. 1000 women
Birth cohorts
age
BIRTH ORDER
Changes in cross-sectional childlessness:1988: 8,8 % 1998: 47,3 %
2008: 26,5 %(percentage of childless women)
Decrease in the first and second birth order fertility contributes the most to the current drop
Click icon to add picture
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
1 2 3 4+
Year
Total fertility rate by birth order
Birth order
Unlike age, birth order fertility changes less over time and says more about the final number of children.
Between 1986 and 2008, in the Czech Republic fertility rates primarily decreased in the first-order and second-order.
Like with total fertility rate, the current rate of total first-order fertility is at the same level as in 1994 and the second-order fertility rate corresponds to levels in 1994-1995.
Fertility decrease affected all significant birth orders; is that the impact of postponement?
TFR 1988:
1st 0,912
2nd 0,733
3rd 0,220
TFR 2008:
1st 0,734
2nd 0,548
3rd 0,156
0,00
0,02
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,10
0,12
0,14
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
1_1988
2_1988
3_1988
1_2008
2_2008
3_2008
age
Age and birth order specific fertility rates
EXTRAMARITAL FERTILITY
Increase in extramarital fertility mostly for the 1st birth order
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Perc
enta
ge o
f liv
e ex
tra-
mar
ital
bir
ths
by b
irth
ord
er
1
2
3
4+
Total
A new and significant feature of fertility in the Czech Republic is the growing percentage of extramarital
births.
Until the start of the 1990s, extramarital births made up no more than 10% of the total.
Nevertheless, the share of extramarital births is very differentiated by birth order.
Extramarital fertility is higly prevalent among women with lower educational attainment.
Higher education more traditional behaviour
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Basic
Vocational
Secondary
University
Total
Percentage of extramarital live births by educational attainment
34,3 %
OTHER CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Factors contributing to fertility change
Contraception
Break with the past conditions for parenthood
Factual deterioration for reconciling work and family
Increased use of modern contraception has contributed to induced abortion (LIA) decline
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
hormonal
IUD
LIA
con
trac
epti
on
use
p.
1000
wo
men
ind
uce
d a
bo
rtio
ns
p.1
000
wo
men
year
Disappearence of daycare for children under the age of
three
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Creches
Kindergarten
Percentage of children in daycare
Number of Number of
Year creches places
1960 884 30711
1965 1122 44917
1970 1321 53272
1975 1504 57634
1980 1672 69828
1985 1794 72773
1990 1043 39829
1995 207 7574
2000 65 1867
2005 54 1671
2007 49 1587
Note: more than 100 % ; children younger than 3 years are enrolled
4 444 respondents: 1 685 males and 2 759 females aged 18-49
Generations and Gender Survey: second wave 2008
Click icon to add pictureParameter Odds Confidence LimitsSex of respondent estimate Pr > ChiSq Ratios
female vs male -0,2044 0,0182 0,815 0,688 0,966
Living with a partner togetheryes vs no 0,8018 <,0001 2,230 1,828 2,719
Educationbasic vs secondary -0,1807 0,1320 0,835 0,660 1,056
vocational versus secondary 0,0514 0,6103 1,053 0,864 1,283university vs secondary 0,4131 0,0023 1,511 1,159 1,971
Age18-29 vs 30-39 -0,1001 0,3429 0,905 0,736 1,11340-49 vs 30-39 -2,1800 <,0001 0,113 0,086 0,148
Resident biological children0 vs 2 2,4841 <,0001 11,990 8,689 16,5451 vs 2 2,0628 <,0001 7,868 5,780 10,709
3+ vs 2 -1,9338 0,0066 0,145 0,036 0,583
Religionother vs none 0,4579 0,0053 1,581 1,146 2,181
roman catholic vs none 0,2500 0,0197 1,284 1,041 1,584
Who wants
another baby now*Males
*University
educated
*Without a child or
having one
*Religious
affiliation
People’s attitudes towards parenthood slowly change
People still value children, however, increasingly among highly educated and males.
When looking at recent fertility patterns in the Czech Republic, a low-fertility trap will pose a real potential barrier to sustaining Czech population development in the future.