The relative importance of family planning and development for fertility reduction: critique of research and development of theory.

Abstract

3 recent studies about the relative effects of family planning and development are reviewed in an effort to point out their limitations and to augment them. A tentative theoretical framework is presented from which the problem of fertility reduction may be viewed. Also presented is an analysis of the "outliers" in 1 of the 3 studies. This analysis involves consideration of macrosocial and contextual aspects of different nations as a supplement to other analyses. Mauldin and Berelson (1978) and Tsui and Bogue (1978) used indicators of social setting and family planning effort to explain declines in respectively crude birthrate between 1965 and 1975 and total fertility rates between 1968 and 1975. The 2 studies used nearly identical sets of explanatory variables. With both studies using the same indicators except for "labor force" it is not surprising that the results were the same. The results were previously obtained by Freedman and Berelson (1976) who also used the Lapham Mauldin index of planning effort along with similar indicators of social setting. Freedman and Berelson found that birthrate declines could be explained better by program effort (which independently explained 17% of the variance in crude birthrate (CBR) declines) than by social setting (which independently accounted for 7% of that variance) and that the 1972 birthrate itself was similarly explained (15% of the variance attributed to program effort alone 5% to social setting alone). Mauldin and Berelson obtained nearly identical results. In the Tsui and Bogue study the contribution of the 1968 level of fertility was the dominant influence on the 1975 total fertility rate. The standardized regression coefficient indicated that previous fertility explained 50-60% of subsequent fertility by direct relationship a figure comparable to the social setting family planning interaction effects (44-58%) in the 2 other studies. Much of this discussion is devoted to an analysis of the "outliers" in the exploratory data analysis done by Sykes for Mauldin and Berelson (1978). The outliers in Sykes exploratory data analysis were divided along 2 dimensions. The first involves the relationship between predicted and actual reductions in fertility. The 2nd dimension refers to the independent variables used to predict the fertility declines. This analysis involves analysis of contextual variables and an analysis of distributional variables. It is limited by missing data but the analysis of Freedman and Berelson (1976) Mauldin and Berelson (1978) and Tsui and Bogue (1978) is plagued by missing variables: contextual variables; distributional variables; and unique national regional or local circumstances. These can only be adequately revealed by case studies and may be important influences on fertility behavior. Effects of family planning and social setting may be conditioned by contextual variables (e.g. island status as in Taiwan) or unique circumstances (e.g. coercion as in India) and distribution appears to have an effect of its own.