Socioeconomic development, family planning, and fertility in China

Dudley L. Poston · Baochang Gu

133 citations0/0 files storedDemography

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Demographic Trends and Gender Preferences Family Dynamics and Relationships Reproductive Health and Contraception

Abstract

The relationships between socioeconomic development family planning and fertility among the 28 subregions of China circa 1982 were examined. The dependent variable was the total fertility rate in 1981. The 17 development variables include many of the social economic and demographic factors shown in earlier studies to be influential in accounting for fertility among the Chinese subregions. Table 1 presents means and standard deviations for the total fertility rate (TFR) the 17 development variables and the 11 family planning variables. The total fertility rate in 1981 had an average value among the 28 areas of 2.69 varying from lows of 1.32 in Shanghai 1.59 in Beijing and 1.65 in Tianjin to highs of 4.36 in Guizhou 4.12 in Ningxia and 4.10 in Guangxi. The relative effects of the varibles on fertility varied considerably. 4 of the family planning variables had the highest correlations: the first-birth rate (-0.92) the contraceptive use rate (-0.86) the birth planning rate (-0.83) and the 1-child certificate holder rate (-0.82). 8 socioeconomic development variables had correlations with fertility of -0.60 or higher and an additional 5 had correlations between -0.50 and -0.60. 3 separate tests of the theoretical model indicated consistently strong negative direct effects of family planning behavior and weak direct effects of family planning costs. Structural development had strong negative direct effects on fertility when it was introduced in an equation with rural quality of life; it had reduced effects when used in an equation with a development index gauging female status. The direct negative effects of quality of life on fertility were about the same as those of structural development but the 2 development indexes were not used in the same equation due to high collinearity. In regard to indirect effects of development on fertility only the female status index had high negative indirect effects through family planning behavior. All 4 development indexes had trivial indirect effects via the combined path through family planning costs and family planning behavior. The findings essentially are consistent with other analyzes.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 133 citations exist upstream.

References

1966Path Analysis: Sociological Examples 1956Social Structure and Fertility: An Analytic Framework 1985Statistical yearbook of China 1982Determinants of Fertility in Developing Countries 1962Urbanization, Technology, and the Division of Labor: International Patterns 1985An Alternative to the One-Child Policy in China 1988Conditions of Fertility Decline in Developing Countries, 1965–75

Cited by

2009The contribution of population health and demographic change to economic growth in China and India 1997Defying Gender Norms in Rural Bangladesh: A Social Demographic Analysis 2016China’s family planning policies and their labor market consequences 1995Vietnam's One-or-Two-Child Policy in Action 1993Parity Progression and Birth Intervals in China: The Influence of Policy in Hastening Fertility Decline 2016Does population control lead to better child quality? Evidence from China’s one-child policy enforcement 1997

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.