Abstract
AbstractAustralia has moderately high fertility compared to many Western‐industrialized countries. The current total fertility rate is around 1.88, but fertility levels are not uniform across the country. There is a distinct geographic pattern with the total fertility rate about 0.5 higher in remote and very remote Australia (2.33) compared to major cities (1.82). In this paper, we examine 2 explanations for this pattern: the compositional hypothesis and the contextual hypothesis. Using event‐history methods with joint modelling to investigate parity progression, we find that after taking into account differences in age, country of birth, indigenous status, relationship status, education levels, and economic activity, women living in smaller towns in regional Australia are more likely to have a first, second, and third birth. Further, there is lower propensity to have a first child in inner or middle city areas that are characterized by smaller and more expensive housing than suburban or regional areas.
Highlights
Australia presents an interesting case for examining the geographic distribution of fertility
One is the compositional hypothesis that posits that people living in urban and rural areas have different socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, such as education levels or age profiles, and if these characteristics are related to fertility that could explain why fertility levels may differ across geographic areas (Fulda, 2015)
Using individual‐level survey data, we investigate to what degree differences in the characteristics of individuals explain the pattern of higher fertility in regional Australia
Summary
Australia presents an interesting case for examining the geographic distribution of fertility. It is one of the largest countries in the world and one of the most urbanized with over 75% of the population living in cities of over 100,000 residents (Department of Infrastructure and Transport, 2013). Demographic characteristics, including socioeconomic levels and ethnic background, vary widely between those living in different sized cities, as well as between city dwellers and people living in rural or remote regions of the country. The national total fertility rate (TFR) is 1.88, but in remote parts of Australia, it is 2.33, and in major cities, it is just 1.82 (ABS, 2014a).. The highly urbanized nature of the Australian population means that the national TFR is strongly affected by the fertility levels in cities where the majority of people live. We further determine whether the spatial variation in parity progression persists even after controlling for compositional factors or differences in people’s socioeconomic and demographic characteristics
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
