Demography and social economy, 2019, 1(35):11-25
doi: https://doi.org/10.15407/dse2019.01.011
UDC 314.12(477)
JEL CLASSIFICATION: J13

I.O. Kurylo
Dr. Sc. (Economics), Prof.
Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
01032, Ukraine, Kyiv, Taras Shevchenko blvd, 60
E-mail: iryna.kurilo2017@gmail.com

STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF FERTILITY, THEIR CONNECTION AND DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS OF DYNAMICS
Section: DEMOGRAPHIC PROCESSES
Language: Ukrainian
Abstract: The paper is aimed at studying fertility structure indicators and links between them as well as defining the impactof demographic factors on the fertility structure in Ukraine and other European countries. The key trends in the recent changes of fertility structure are described. It is established that the most serious impact on the dynamics of number of births in Ukraine in the current century were due to: births to mothers aged 25 to 35; second and third births; births in marriage. A decrease of the level of right-side skewness is identified, and it is established that the distribution of the age function of birth rates has become less concentrated in Ukraine, which is typical for “motherhood ageing” during the Second Demographic Transition.In the long-term retrospective, the slowdown of family formation and childbearing in Ukraine and other post-Soviet European countries developed much later than in Western European countries. The family policies and certain extraordinary events in Ukraine influenced changes in ratios between the overall fertility rate and such indicators as the mean birth order and the mean age at birth.Using various methodological approaches to the analysis of convergence/divergence for the statistical data for the period since the 2nd half of the 20th century for thirty three European countries, it is determined that the mean age at birth in the European region for this period demonstrates a tendency to converge (the average speed of convergence is 2.5 %). However, the average weighted difference in the mean age of the mother at birth in Ukraine and other studied countries still remains significant; the “motherhood ageing” in Ukraine will be progressing in the future.It is confirmed that nowadays one of the major demographic factors of “ageing motherhood” is the increase of life expectancy. Based on the information for European countries for 1960–2015 period, an attempt to estimate the relations between the life expectancy for women and the mean age at birth (with the certain time lag) is made. The analysis showed that the link is statistically significant for the period between 1997 and 2015.
Key words: fertility, fertility structure, mean birth order, mean age at birth, demographic determinants of fertility and of its structure, life expectancy, convergence and divergence of structural fertility parameters.
References:
1. Sobotka, T., Zeman, K., Leasthaeghe, R., Frejka, T., & Neels, K. (2011). Postponement and Recuperation in Cohort Fertility: Austria, Germany and Switzerland in a European Context. Comparative Population Studies, 36 (2-3), 417-452.
2. Solaz, A. (2016). Having a child later in life. The sociodemographic issues of birth postponement. Publications using HFD/HFC data (2009-2019). Population (English Edition), 71 (1),171-172. doi: 10.3917/popu.1601.0175
3. Berrington, A. (2004). Perpetual postponers? Women’s, men’s and couple’s fertility intentions and subsequent fertility behavior. Population trends, 117, 9-19.
4. Philipov, D., & Bernardi, L. (2011). Concepts and Operationalisation of Reproductive Decisions. Comparative Population Studies, 36 (2-3), 495-530. doi: 10.4232/10.CPoS2011-14en
5. Balbo, N., & Mills, M. (2011). Social capital and pressure in fertility decision-making: second and third births in France, Germany and Bulgaria. Population studies, 65 (3), 335-351. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2011.579148
6. Mills, M., Rindfuss, R.R., McDonald, P., & te Velde, E. (2011). Why do people postpone parenthood? Reasons and social policy incentives. Human reproduction update, 17 (6), 848-860. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmr026
7. Zakharov, S.V. (2018). Family Policy. Russia: Strategy, Policy and Administration. London. Palgrave Macmillan. (Ch. 28). doi: 10.1057/978-1-137-56671-3_28
8. Narodzhuvanist v Ukraini u konteksti suspilno-transformatsiinykh protsesiv [Fertility in Ukraine in the context of social transformation processes]. (2008). K : ADEF-Ukraina [in Ukrainian].
9. Aksonova, S.Iu. (2018). Serednii vik materi pry narodzhenni dytyny: chy mozhlyva reversiia? [The average age of a mother at birth is a possible reversal? Demohrafiia ta sotsialna ekonomika - Demography and social economy, № 2 (33), 53-66. doi:https://doi.org/10.15407/dse2018.02.053[in Ukrainian].
10. Aksonova, S.Iu., & Kurylo, I.O. (2018). Vidkladannia narodzhen v Ukraini kriz pryzmu realnykh pokolin zhinok [Deferment of births in Ukraine through the prism of real generations of women]. Demohrafiia ta sotsialna ekonomika - Demography and social economy, № 3 (34), 11-25. doi: doi:https://doi.org/10.15407/dse2018.03.011 [in Ukrainian].
11. Sliusar, L.I. (2018). Pozashliubna narodzhuvanist v Ukraini: suchasni osoblyvosti v konteksti yevropeiskoho demohrafichnoho rozvytku [The offspring of birth in Ukraine: modern features in the context of European demographic development]. Demohrafiia ta sotsialna ekonomika - Demography and social economy, № 3 (34), 26-38. doi:https://doi.org/10.15407/dse2018.03.026 [in Ukrainian].
12. Krimer, B.O. (2018). Transformatsiia narodzhuvanosti v Ukraini na rannikh etapakh demohrafichnoho perekhodu [Transformation of fertility in Ukraine in the early stages of demographic transition]. Demohrafiia ta sotsialna ekonomika - Demography and social economy, № 2 (33), 67-81. doi: https://doi.org/10.15407/dse2018.02.067 [in Ukrainian].
13. Palian, Z., & Halytsia, O. (2017). Rehionalni osoblyvosti narodzhuvanosti ta smertnosti v Ukraini [Regional features of fertility and mortality in Ukraine]. Proceedings from Comparative statistical studies of the development of socio-economic systems ‘17: Mizhnarodna naukovo-praktychna konferentsiya z nahody dnia pratsivnykiv statystyky – International Scientific and Practical Conference on the Occasion of the Day of Employees of Statistics. (pp. 231-235). Kyiv : Informatsiino-analitychne ahentstvo [in Ukrainian].
14. Arpino, B., Esping-Andersen, G., & Pessin, L. (2015). How Do Changes in Gender Role Attitudes Towards Female Employment Influence Fertility? A Macro-Level Analysis. European Sociological Review, 31 (3), 370-382. doi:10.1007/s12546–014–9135–3
15. Kreyenfeld, M. (2010). Uncertainties in female employment careers and the postponement of parenthood in Germany. European sociological review, 26 (3), 351-366. doi:10.4054/DemRes.2012.27.28
16. Sobotka, T., Skirbekk, V., & Philipov, D. (2011). Economic recession and fertility in the developed world. Population and development review. 2, 267-306. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2011.00411.x
17. Baizán, P., Aassve, A., &. Billari, F.C. (2004). The interrelations between cohabitation, marriage and first birth in Germany and Sweden. Population and environment, 25 (6), 531-561. doi:https://doi.org/10.1023/B:POEN.0000039064.65655.3b
18. Benoît, L., Fostik, A.L., & Sobotka, T. (2015). Two period measures for comparing the fertility of marriage and cohabitation. Demographic Research, Vol. 32, 14, 421-442. doi:https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2015.32.14
19. Piskunov, V.P. (1970). Bahatoplidni rody na Ukraini [Multifamous breeds in Ukraine]. Demohrafichni doslidzhennia - Demographic research, Vol. 1, 136-146. [in Ukrainian]
20. Statistical Yearbook of Finland (1957). Helsinki.
21. Marques, A., & Soukiazis, E. (2000). Per capita income: convergence across countries and across regions in the European Union. Some new evidence. The 2nd International meeting of European Economy. CEDIN (ISEG). Lisbon.
22. Shadyab, A.H., Gass, M.L.S., Stefanick, M.L., Waring, M.E., Macera, C.A. & Gallo, L.C. et al. (2017). Maternal Age at Childbirth and Parity as Predictors of Longevity Among Women in the United States: The Women’s Health Initiative. American Journal of Public Health, 107 (1), 113-119. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2016.303503

» pdf