4 ms·

Don't fertility rates _decrease_ with prosperity? Poor families have more kids because they acts as financial security in the old age. How do we reconcile these

Don't fertility rates _decrease_ with prosperity? Poor families have more kids because they acts as financial security in the old age. How do we reconcile these two theories?

toomuchtodo 12y ago
Fertility rates decline most strikingly due to the education of women in society: http://www.earth-policy.org/data_highlights/2011/highlights13 http://www.earth-policy.org/data_highlights/2011/highlights1... "Female education is especially important. Research consistently shows that women who are empowered through education tend to have fewer children and have them later. If and when they do become mothers, they tend to be healthier and raise healthier children, who then also stay in school longer. They earn more money with which to support their families, and contribute more to their communities’ economic growth. Indeed, educating girls can transform whole communities." A bit older study: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/97facts/edu2birt.htm http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/97facts/edu2birt.htm "A women's educational level is the best predictor of how many children she will have, according to a new study from the National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The study, based on an analysis of 1994 birth certificates, found a direct relationship between years of education and birth rates, with the highest birth rates among women with the lowest educational attainment. Birth rate patterns also vary greatly by mothers age. Among women in their twenties - the peak childbearing ages - and women in their forties, birth rates are highest for women with the least education. For women with college degrees, rates are highest for those in their early thirties, perhaps signaling the preferred time for childbearing by this group. First birth rates for women in their thirties with a college degree were two to five times the first birth rates for women with less education."
hkmurakami 12y ago
Because japan is a highly competitive society where the kids who had the fortune of having financial resources poured into their education "win" and the rest lose. The would be parents of the struggling middle class (quickly being eroded, just like everywhere else) feel that bringing in a child to this society without the financial backing ms chance of success would be cruel to the child.
drawkbox 12y ago
At least in the US, fertility rates are affected by recessions. http://www.prb.org/publications/datasheets/2012/world-population-data-sheet/fact-sheet-us-population.aspx http://www.prb.org/publications/datasheets/2012/world-popula... While prosperous women may have less, overall if the economy is good, more kids are born.
wodenokoto 12y ago
I'm not saying the following is 100% water tight, but hopefully it can show how such seemingly different theories can reconcile: A society where child labour is almost as valuable as adult labour and you can have your 10 year olds help around the shop/farm/whatever as cheap labour. This is a poor society. Then you have a different type of society where educated people go to offices or handle expensive machinery at factories, and children can't help around supporting the household. The jobs they can perform add too little value to bother, and their time is better invested in education. This is a rich society. I think it is fair to say that fertility as a reaction to immediate changes in the economy of those two societies are different.

Don't fertility rates _decrease_ with prosperity? Poor families have more kids because they acts as financial security in the old age. How do we reconcile these two theories?

toomuchtodo 12y ago

Fertility rates decline most strikingly due to the education of women in society: http://www.earth-policy.org/data_highlights/2011/highlights13 http://www.earth-policy.org/data_highlights/2011/highlights1... "Female education is especially important. Research consistently shows that women who are empowered through education tend to have fewer children and have them later. If and when they do become mothers, they tend to be healthier and raise healthier children, who then also stay in school longer. They earn more money with which to support their families, and contribute more to their communities’ economic growth. Indeed, educating girls can transform whole communities." A bit older study: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/97facts/edu2birt.htm http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/97facts/edu2birt.htm "A women's educational level is the best predictor of how many children she will have, according to a new study from the National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The study, based on an analysis of 1994 birth certificates, found a direct relationship between years of education and birth rates, with the highest birth rates among women with the lowest educational attainment. Birth rate patterns also vary greatly by mothers age. Among women in their twenties - the peak childbearing ages - and women in their forties, birth rates are highest for women with the least education. For women with college degrees, rates are highest for those in their early thirties, perhaps signaling the preferred time for childbearing by this group. First birth rates for women in their thirties with a college degree were two to five times the first birth rates for women with less education."

hkmurakami 12y ago

Because japan is a highly competitive society where the kids who had the fortune of having financial resources poured into their education "win" and the rest lose. The would be parents of the struggling middle class (quickly being eroded, just like everywhere else) feel that bringing in a child to this society without the financial backing ms chance of success would be cruel to the child.

drawkbox 12y ago

At least in the US, fertility rates are affected by recessions. http://www.prb.org/publications/datasheets/2012/world-population-data-sheet/fact-sheet-us-population.aspx http://www.prb.org/publications/datasheets/2012/world-popula... While prosperous women may have less, overall if the economy is good, more kids are born.

wodenokoto 12y ago

I'm not saying the following is 100% water tight, but hopefully it can show how such seemingly different theories can reconcile: A society where child labour is almost as valuable as adult labour and you can have your 10 year olds help around the shop/farm/whatever as cheap labour. This is a poor society. Then you have a different type of society where educated people go to offices or handle expensive machinery at factories, and children can't help around supporting the household. The jobs they can perform add too little value to bother, and their time is better invested in education. This is a rich society. I think it is fair to say that fertility as a reaction to immediate changes in the economy of those two societies are different.