 |
 |
Vienna Institute of Demography (Ed.)
Vienna Yearbook of Population Research 2011
Nicoletta Balbo,
Melinda Mills
S. 179 - 206 doi: 10.1553/populationyearbook2011s179
Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
Abstract:
The gap between fertility intentions and behaviour remains a contentious area of theoretical, methodological and policy debate. Previous fertility studies have focused on individual and institutional characteristics, at the expense of the recognition of meso-level family social capital and networks. This study examines the realisation of time-dependent fertility intentions for the transition to first and higher-order births. Building upon and extending the previous literature we explore two competing theoretical mechanisms of how high levels of family social capital operate to either enable or inhibit the realisation of intentions and the impact of cross-sibling effects. Using two waves of the Netherlands Kinship Panel Survey (NKPS), we also introduce a methodological extension by examining whether the inclusion of only those with positive fertility intentions in previous research has resulted in selection bias. By adopting a probit model with sample selection, we both avoid this selection problem and empirically test whether there is a bias. Results show that there are some, albeit negligible, unobserved characteristics affecting both an individual’s fertility intentions and the realisation of these intentions. High levels of family social capital operate to deter from having a child, particularly when individuals already have at least one child, suggesting that individuals adopt a ‘satisficing’ strategy. Our findings also suggest that children may operate as a means to generate family social capital. Having a sibling with a young child is associated with a higher probability to realise one’s own intention to have a first child.
2012/02/02 15:27:30 Object Identifier:
0xc1aa5576 0x002a70fb
Rights:All rights reserved.For questions regarding copyright and copies please contact us by email.
Introduction
Maria Rita Testa, Tomás Sobotka and Philip S. Morgan: Reproductive decision-making: towards improved theoretical,
methodological and empirical approaches.
Demographic Debate
S. Philip Morgan and Christine A. Bachrach: Is the Theory of Planned Behaviour an appropriate model for human
fertility?
Warren B. Miller: Comparing the TPB and the T-D-I-B framework
Jennifer Barber: The Theory of Planned Behaviour: considering drives, proximity and
dynamics
Dimiter Philipov: Theories on fertility intentions: a demographer's perspective
Jane Klobas: The Theory of Planned Behaviour as a model of reasoning about fertility
decisions
Aart C. Liefbroer: On the usefulness of the Theory of Planned Behaviour for fertility
research
Icek Ajzen: Reflections on Morgan and Bachrach's critique
Christine A. Bachrach and S. Philip Morgan: Further reflections on the Theory of Planned Behaviour and fertility
research
Refereed Articles
Warren B. Miller: Differences between fertility desires and intentions: implications for theory,
research and policy
Máire Ní Bhrolcháin and Éva Beaujouan: Uncertainty in fertility intentions in Britain, 1979–2007
Saskia Hin, Anne Gauthier, Joshua Goldstein and Christoph Bühler: Fertility preferences: what measuring second choices teaches us
Maria Rita Testa, Laura Cavalli and Alessandro Rosina: Couple´s childbearing behaviour in Italy: which of the partners is leading
it?
Nicoletta Balbo and Melinda Mills: The influence of the family network on the realisation of fertility
intentions
Markus Kotte and Volker Ludwig: Intergenerational transmission of fertility intentions and behaviour in Germany: the role of contagion
David De Wachter and Karel Neels: Educational differentials in fertility intentions and outcomes: family
formation in Flanders in the early 1990s
Clémentine Rossier, Sara Brachet and Anne Salles: Family policies, norms about gender roles and fertility decisions in France
and Germany
Anna Rotkirch, Stuart Basten, Heini Väisänen and Markus Jokela: Baby longing and men's reproductive motivation
Anna Baranowska and Anna Matysiak: Does parenthood increase happiness? Evidence for Poland
Data and Trends (non-refereed contributions)
Jennifer S. Barber, Yasamin Kusunoki and Heather Gatny : Design and implementation of an online weekly survey to study unintended
pregnancies
Beatrice Chromková Manea and Petr Fucík: Couples disagreement about fertility preferences and family-friendly policy
measures in the Czech Republic
|
|
|
REFERENCES |
|
|
Adsera, A. 2005. Where are the babies? Labor market conditions and fertility in Europe. IZA discussion papers 1585.
|
|
|
Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50: 179-211.
|
|
|
Astone, N.M., C.A. Nathanson, R. Schoen and Y.J. Kim 1999. Family demography, social theory, and investment in social capital. Population and Development Review 25(1): 1-31.
|
|
|
Axinn, W.G., M.E. Clarkberg and A. Thornton 1994. Family influences on family size preferences. Demography 31(19): 65-79.
|
|
|
Balbo, N. and M. Mills 2011. Social capital and pressure in fertility decision-making: second and third births in France, Germany and Bulgaria. Population Studies 65(3): 335-351.
|
|
|
Bernardi, L. 2003. Channels of social influences on reproduction. Population Research and Policy Review 22: 527-555.
|
|
|
Bernardi, L., S. Keim, S. and H.von der Lippe 2007. Social influence on fertility: a comparative mixed methods study in Eastern and Western Germany. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1(1): 23-47.
|
|
|
Berrington, A. 2004. Perpetual postponers? Women's, mens and couples fertility intentions and subsequent fertility behaviour. Population Trends 117:9-19.
|
|
|
Billari, F.C. and R. Borgoni 2005. Assessing the use of sample selection models in the estimation of fertility postponement effects. Statistical Methods and Applications 14(3): 389-402.
|
|
|
Billari, F.C. and V. Galasso 2008. What explains fertility? Evidence from Italian pension reforms. Working Papers 343. IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
|
|
|
Billari, F.C., D. Philipov and M.R. Testa 2009. Attitudes, norms and perceived behavioural control: explaining fertility intentions in Bulgaria. European Journal of Population.
|
|
|
Bongaarts, J. and S. Watkins 1996. Social interactions and contemporary fertility transitions. Population and Development Review 22(4):639-682.
|
|
|
Bühler, C. 2008. On the structural value of children and its implication on intended fertility in Bulgaria. Demographic Research 18: 69-610.
|
|
|
Bühler, C. and D. Philipov 2005. Social capital related to fertility: theoretical foundations and empirical evidence from Bulgaria. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research Vol.3: 53-81.
|
|
|
Bühler, C. and E. Fratczak 2007. Learning from others and receiving support: the impact of personal networks on fertility intentions in Poland. European Societies 9(3): 359-382.
|
|
|
Coleman, J.S. 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology 94(supp.): S95-S120.
|
|
|
De Leeuw, E.D. and W. De Heer 2001. Trends in household survey nonresponse: a longitudinal, international comparison. In Survey nonresponse, ed. R.M. Groves, D.A.
|
|
|
Dillman, J.L. Eltinge and R.J.A. Little, 41-54. New York: Wiley.
|
|
|
Dommermuth L., J.E. Klobas and T. Lappegård 2009. Now or later? The theory of planned behaviour and fertility intentions. Working Papers 020. "Carlo F. Dondena" Centre for Research on Social Dynamics (DONDENA), Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi.
|
|
|
Dykstra, P.A., M. Kalmijn, T.C.M. Knijn, A.E. Komter, A.C. Liefbroer and C.H. Mulder 2005. Codebook of the Netherlands Kinship Panel Study, a multi-actor, multi-method panel study on solidarity in family relationships. Wave 1. NKPS Working Paper 4. The Hague, The Netherlands: Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute.
|
|
|
Dykstra, P.A., M. Kalmijn, T.C.M. Knijn, A.E. Komter, A.C. Liefbroer and C.H. Mulder 2007. Codebook of the Netherlands Kinship Panel Study: A multi-actor, multimethod panel study on solidarity in family relationships, Wave 2. NKPS Working Paper 6. The Hague, the Netherlands: Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute.
|
|
|
European Commission 2006. Childbearing preferences and family issues in Europe. Special Eurobarometer.
|
|
|
Greenhalgh, S. (ed.) 1995. Situating fertility: anthropology and demographic inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
|
|
|
Hagewen K.J. and S.P. Morgan 2005. Intended and ideal family size in the United States, 1970-2002. Population and Development Review 31(3): 507-527.
|
|
|
Haurin, R.J. and F.L. Mott 1990. Adolescent sexual activity in the family context: the impact of older siblings. Demography 27(4): 537-557.
|
|
|
Hoffman, L.W. and J.D. Manis 1979. The value of children in the United States: a new approach to the study of fertility. Journal of Marriage and the Family 41: 583-596.
|
|
|
Hoffman, L.W. and M.L. Hoffman 1973. The value of children to parents. In Psychological Perspectives on Population, ed. J.T. Fawcett, 19-76. New York: Basic Books.
|
|
|
Hogan, D. and E. Kitagawa 1985. The impact of social status, family structure, and neighborhood on the fertility of black adolescents. American Journal of Sociology 90: 825-55.
|
|
|
Knijn, T.C.M. and A.C. Liefbroer 2006. More kin than kind: instrumental support in families. In Family solidarity in the Netherlands, ed. P.A. Dykstra, M. Kalmijn, T.C.M. Knijn, A.E. Komter, A.C. Liefbroer and C.H. Mulder, 89-105. Amsterdam: Dutch University Press.
|
|
|
Kohler, H.-P. 2001. Fertility and social interaction: an economic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
|
Kravdal, Ø. 2003. The problematic estimation of imitation effects in multilevel models. Demographic Research 9: 26-40.
|
|
|
Kreyenfeld, M. 2001. Employment and fertility-East Germany in the 1990s. PhD Dissertation, MPDIR: Rostock.
|
|
|
Lyngstad, T.H. 2008. Possible mechanisms behind cross-sibling effects on fertility rates, and some Concerns about their Proper Estimation. In Complexity, ed. Willy Østreng. Oslo: Centre for Advanced Study.
|
|
|
Lyngstad, T.H. and A. Prskawetz 2010. Do siblings' fertility decisions influence each other?, Demography 47(4): 923-934.
|
|
|
Manski, C.F. 1995. Identification problems in social sciences. Harvard University Press.
|
|
|
Mills, M. and K. Begall 2010. Preferences for the sex-composition of children in Europe: a multilevel examination of its effect on progression to a third child. Population Studies 64(1): 77-95.
|
|
|
Montgomery, M.R. and J.B. Casterline 1996. Social learning, social influence and new models of fertility. In: Population and Development Review, Supplement 22, Fertility in the United States: new patterns, new theories, ed. J.B. Casterline, R.D. Lee and K.A. Foote, 151-175.
|
|
|
Morgan, S.P. and M.G. Taylor 2006. Low fertility at the turn of the Twenty-First Century. Annual Review of Sociology 32: 375-99.
|
|
|
Murphy, M. and D. Wang 2001. Family-level continuities in childbearing in low-fertility societies. European Journal of Population 17:75-96.
|
|
|
Noack, T. and L. Østby 2001. Free to choose but unable to stick with it? In Fertility and partnership in Europe: Findings and lessons from comparative research, volume II, ed. E. Klijzing and M. Corijn. Geneva/New York: United Nations.
|
|
|
Philipov, D. 2009. Fertility intentions and outcomes: the role of policies to close the gap. European Journal of Population 25: 355-361.
|
|
|
Philipov, D., Z. Speder and F.C. Billari 2006. Soon, later, or ever? The impact of anomie and social capital on fertility intentions in Bulgaria (2002) and Hungary (2001). Population Studies 60(3): 289-308.
|
|
|
Powers, D.A. 2001. Unobserved family effects on the risk of a first premarital birth. Social Science Research 30: 1-24.
|
|
|
Quesnel-Vallée, A. and S.P. Morgan 2003. Missing the target? Correspondence of fertility intentions and behavior in the U.S.. Population Research and Policy Review 22(5/6): 497-525.
|
|
|
Rijken, A.J. and E. Thomson 2011. Partners' relationship quality and childbearing. Social Science Research 40(2): 485-497.
|
|
|
Rijken, A.J., and A.C. Liefbroer 2009. Influences of the family of origin on the timing and quantum of fertility in the Netherlands. Population Studies 63: 71-85.
|
|
|
Rossier, C. and L. Bernardi 2009. Social interaction effects on fertility: intentions and behaviours. European Journal of Population 25: 467-485.
|
|
|
Sartori A.E. 2003. An estimator for some binary-outcome selection models without exclusion restrictions. Political Analysis 11(2): 111-138.
|
|
|
Schoen, R., N.M. Astone, Y.J. Kim and C.A. Nathanson 1999. Do fertility intentions affect fertility behavior? Journal of Marriage and the Family 61: 790-799.
|
|
|
Schoen, R., Y.J Kim, C.A Nathanson, J. Fields and N.M Astone 1997. Why do Americans want children? Population and Development Review 23(2): 333-358.
|
|
|
Simon, H. A. 1956. Rational choice and the structure of the environment Psychological Review 63:129-138.
|
|
|
Simon, H. A. 1957. Models of man, social and rational: Mathematical essays on rational human behavior. New York: Wiley.
|
|
|
South, S.J. 1991. Sociodemographic differentials in mate selection preferences. Journal of Marriage and the Family 53: 928-940.
|
|
|
Spéder, Z and B. Kapitány 2010. A summary of all findings in Work package 4. REPRO project.
|
|
|
Spéder, Z. and B. Kapitány 2009. How are time-dependent childbearing intentions realized? Realization, postponement, abandonment, bringing forward. European Journal of Population 25: 503-523.
|
|
|
Testa, M.R. 2006. Childbearing preferences and family issues in Europe. Special Eurobarometer 253/Wave 65.1 TNS Opinion & Social.
|
|
|
Testa, M.R. and L. Toulemon 2006. Family formation in France: individual preferences and subsequent outcomes. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research Vol. 4: 41-75.
|
|
|
Toulemon, L. and M.R. Testa 2005. Fertility intentions and actual fertility: a complex relationship. Population & Societies 415(4).
|
|
|
Van de Ven, W. and B. Van Praag. 1981. The Demand for Deductibles in Private Health Insurance: A Probit Model with Sample Selection. Journal of Econometrics 17(2): 229-252.
|
|
|
Vella, F. 1998. Estimating models with sample selection bias: a survey. Journal of Human Resources 33:127-169.
|
|
|
Zelizer, V.A. 1994. Pricing the priceless child: the changing social value of children. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
|
Inhaltsverzeichnisse und Leseproben sind frei zugänglich. Tables of Contents and Reading examples are freely accessible.
Home
Order
Print
References
Share
