ua ru en

№1 (39) 2020

Demography and social economy, 2020, 1(39):3-19
doi: https://doi.org/10.15407/dse2020.01.003
UDC 314.3(477)
JEL Classification: J13

P. Shevchuk,
PhD (Economics), Leading Researcher
Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies
of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
01032, Kyiv, Taras Shevchenko Blvd, 60
E-mail: pavlo-shevchuk@ukr.net
ORCID 0000-0003-1158-4438

Language: Ukrainian
Abstract: The largest cities have significant socio-economic and cultural impact that extends over the surrounding region as well as beyond. It can be expected that the model of reproductive behaviour of their inhabitants will be extended to other populations. Therefore, the research of detailed fertility rates and the study of the peculiarities of the transformation of the fertility model in such cities is relevant. In addition, there have been some changes since the previous publication on this topic that require clarification. The purpose of the article is to find out the current peculiarities of the dynamics and structural characteristics of fertility in six cities of Ukraine: Dnipro, Donetsk, Kyiv, Lviv, Odessa, Kharkiv and compare them with similar indicators of the rest of the population of the respective regions. The scientific novelty of this paper lies in the first ever comparison of the birth rates in large cities with those of the rest of the population, in particular urban of the relevant administrative units. Methods of population statistics are used, namely: calculation and analysis of demographic indicators, graphical and tabular methods. This study focuses on birth rates in Kyiv in recent years, both because of a trend different from other regions and the availability of more detailed data, including the birth order of a child. After 2014, in the largest cities of Ukraine, with the exception of Kyiv, a new decline in fertility has started. The opposite dynamics in Kyiv are caused by both a current underestimation of population size and the dissemination of childbirth registration practices in medical institutions since 2016. In both cases, this means registering births in Kyiv by women who are not registered as residents of the city. Conversely, the regions where these women came from have an overestimation of the population and, consequently, a lower birth rate than it really is. It is not possible to exclude births by women by the region of origin. Taking into account unofficial estimates of the actual population of Kyiv, the total fertility rate in 2018 should be about 1.2-1.3, and not 1.53 children per woman according to official calculation. This result approximates the corresponding indicators of other metropolitan areas of Ukraine: from 0.95 in Kharkiv to 1.24 in Odessa in 2018. In all metropolitan areas, as well as in Ukraine as a whole, there is a tendency of growth of the mean childbearing age. Accordingly, the age of mother distribution is transformed. A study of age specific birth rates has shown that the birth-rate profile in major cities of Ukraine has been repeated for about a decade and a half in other urban settlements. This confirms the hypothesis that the model of reproductive behaviour of metropolitan residents extends to the rest of the population of Ukraine. It is shown that the birth rate increase in Kyiv is due to the first births against the background of the increase of the mean age at first birth. At the same time, the share of births of children of higher parities of birth in Kyiv is not increasing. Birth rates are compared in major cities in several countries. It is shown that, given the low birth rate already achieved, its level in the biggest cities may be lower or higher than the birth rate in the region, although in most cases lower or near birth rates can be seen. Instead, in countries that still hold traditions of higher fertility, metropolitan residents tend to have a lower birth rate.
Key words: large city, urban fertility, mean age at childbearing.
1. Steshenko, V.S. (Ed.). (2001). Demographic crisis in Ukraine. Problems, research, origins, components, directions of counteraction. Institute of Economics. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
2. The population of Ukraine. Fertility in Ukraine in the context of social and transformation processes (2008). Kyiv: ADEF-Ukraine [in Ukrainian].
3. Kurilo, I.A. (Ed.). (2018). Fertility and parenthood in the socio-demographic dimension. Saarbrücken: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing [in Russian].
4. Kulu, H. (2008). Fertility and spatial mobility in the life-course: evidence from Austria. Environment and Planning, 40, 632-652. - https://doi.org/10.1068/a3914
5. Shakhotska, L.P. (2000). Demographic Development of the Republic Belarus. T. Kučera, O. Kučerová, O. Opara, E. Schaich (Eds.). New Demographic Faces of Europe. Berlin: Springer. -https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-59800-5_2
6. Henripin, J. (1972). Trends and Factors of Fertility in Canada. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.
7. Cheng, Ch., & Maxim, P. (1992). Socioecomic Determinants of China’s Urban Fertility. Population and Environment, 14(2), 133-157.
8. Kulu, H. (2011). Why Do Fertility Levels Vary between Urban and Rural Areas? Regional Studies, 47(6), 895-912. - https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2011.581276
9. Hank, K. (2001). Regional Fertility Differences in Western Germany: an Overview of the Literature and Recent Descriptive Findings. International Journal of Population Geography, 7(4), 243-257. - https://doi.org/10.1002/ijpg.228
10. Bulgaru, M., Bulgaru, O., Sobotka, T., & Zeman, K. (2000). Past and Present Population Development in the Republic of Moldova. T. Kučera, O. Kučerová, O. Opara, E. Schaich. (Eds.). New Demographic Faces of Europe. Berlin: Springer. - https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-642-59800-5_11
11. Rocznik Demograficzny 2019. (2019). Warszawa: GUS. Retrieved from https://stat.gov.pl/ obszary-tematyczne/roczniki-statystyczne/roczniki-statystyczne/rocznik-demograficzny- 2019,3,13.html.
12. Zakharov, S.V. (Ed.). (2018). The population of Russia 2016: twenty-fourth annual demographic report. Nat researched University “Higher School of Economics”. Moskow: Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics. - https://doi.org/10.17323/978-5- 7598-1772-7 [in Russian].
13. Burcin, B., & Kučera, T. (2000). Changes in Fertility and Mortality in the Czech Republic: An Attempt of Regional Demographic Analysis. T. Kučera, O. Kučerová, O. Opara, E. Schaich (Eds.). New Demographic Faces of Europe - https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-59800-5_18
14. Kulu, H., Boyle, P.J., & Andersson, G. (2009). High suburban fertility: Evidence from four Northern European countries. Demographic Research, Vol. 21(31), 915-944. - https://doi. org/10.4054/DemRes.2009.21.31
15. Nakaluzna, I.V. (2010). Fertility in the Big Cities in Ukraine in Breaking the XXI century. Demography and Social Economy, 1(13), 167-176. - https://doi.org/10.15407/dse.2010.01.167 [in Ukrainian].
16. Aksyonova, S.Yu. (2019). The relation of the mean age of women at childbearing and fertility rate. Demography and Social Economy, 2(36), 23-38. - https://doi.org/10.15407/ dse2019.02.023 [in Ukrainian].
17. Estimation of the population of Ukraine (detailing the level of regions as of December 1, 2019). (2019). Kyiv. Retrieved from http://www.ukrstat.gov.ua/Noviny/new2020/zmist/ novini/OnU_01_12_2019.pdf [in Ukrainian].
18. Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine of 02.03.2016 No. 207 “On approval of the Rules of registration of the place of residence and the Procedure of transfer by the bodies of registration of information to the Unified State Demographic Register” (2016, 02 March). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/207-2016-%D0%BF [in Ukrainian].
19. Total Fertility Rates and Age-Specific Fertility Rates for city, county, and district. (n.d.). KOSIS. Retrieved from http://kosis.kr/statHtml/statHtml.do?orgId=101&tblId=DT_1B8 1A17&vw_cd=MT_ETITLE&list_id=A21&scrId=&seqNo=&language=en&obj_var_ id=&itm_id=&conn_path=E3&path=
20. Fertility indicators (n.d.). I. Stat. Your direct access to the Italian Statistics. Retrieved from http://dati.istat.it/Index.aspx?QueryId=19029&lang=en
21. Population Statistics of Japan 2017 (n.d.). National Institute of Population and Social Security Recearch. Retrieved from http://www.ipss.go.jp/p-info/e/psj2017/PSJ2017.asp
22. Demographic Yearbook of the Republic of Belarus (2019). National Statistical Committee of the Republic of Belarus. Minsk. Retrieved from https://www.belstat.gov.by/ofitsialnayastatistika/publications/izdania/public_compilation/index_14356/ [in Russian]
23. The total fertility rate (n.d.). EMISS. State statistics. Retrieved from https://www.fedstat.ru/ indicator/31517 [in Russian]
24. General Directorate of Civil Registration and Nationality (n.d.). General Directorate of Civil Registration and Nationality (Turkey). Retrieved from https://www.nvi.gov.tr/
25. Report on Bangladesh Sample Vital Statistics 2018 (2019). Dhaka: Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. Retrieved from http://bbs.portal.gov.bd/sites/default/files/files/bbs.portal.gov. bd/page/6a40a397_6ef7_48a3_80b3_78b8d1223e3f/SVRS_Report_2018_29-05- 2019%28Final%29.pdf
26. Population and Employment (n.d.). General Statistics Office of Viet Nam. Retrieved from https://www.gso.gov.vn/Default_en.aspx?tabid=491
27. Angka Fertilitas Total menurut Provinsi 1971, 1980, 1990, 1991, 1994, 1997, 2000, 2002, 2007, 2010 dan 2012 (n.d.). Badan Pusat Statistik. Indonesia. Retrieved from https://www. bps.go.id/statictable/2009/02/20/1271/angka-fertilitas-total-menurut-provinsi-1971- 1980-1985-1990-1991-1994-1997-1998-1999-2000-2002-2007-2010-dan-2012.html
28. Demographic statistics bulletin 2017 (Nigererian). (2018). Abuja: National bureau of statistics. Retrieved from https://nigerianstat.gov.ng/elibrary

» pdf