Click for next page ( 61


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 60
CHAPTER 2 SOCIOECONOMIC DIFFE=NTI=S IN FERTILITY TIae evidence presented in Chapter 1 indicated that fer- tility had already declined prior to 1970 in more developed regions such as the Southeast, particularly among higher-income groups, but not Hong lower-income groups and regions. It also suggested that the overall accelerated decline after 1970 probably resulted from the spread of lower fertility to those latter groups. The objective of the present chapter is to identify these groups more precisely. This should make it possible to focus an explanation of the post-1970 accelerated decline more sharply on particular groups, and on specific socio- economic changes that may have affected their reproductive behavior c Evidence presented in this chapter is based on data from the public use sample of the 1970 census and the 1976 PNAD national sample survey, both of which include questions on average parity and on births in the year prior to the interviews Responses were tabulated by household income, education of women, rural-urban resi- dence, and region. Indirect estimating techniques were used to derive total fertility rates for women in differ- ent education and income categories. Considerable caution is required in interpreting the results since most of the assumptions on which the techniques are based are violated in such an exercise. This problem is complicated by the fact that the severity of these violations can vary between categories of income and education into which the population has been grouped. For example, the assumption of constant fertility would be violated to a greater extent among higher income and education groups if they had been experiencing more rapid fertility decline than lower income and education groups--the situation in Brazil in 1970. Moreover, once the population has been 60

OCR for page 60
~1 divided into education and income classes, these cannot be cons idered ~closed. populations, another requirement for valid application of the techniques. Sampling error is a further problem when such divisions are made, par- ticularly for repor ted bir ths in the year pr for to the interview. These biases can be reduced but not eliminated by us ing fewer categor ies of each vat table to increase settle size. In the study of fertility differences by income category cited in Chapter 1, Carvalho and Paiva ( 1976) reported that such a procedure reduced the impact of interclass mobility on their estimates. This problem may be less ser ious for breakdowns of the population by education than by income since most women, except the small proportion with university education, would have completed the it education by the time they reached thei r late teens. E OUCATION AND FERTILl rY DECLINE To examine the relation between Per tility and education, women were divided into three broad education categories, with education defined according to years of schooling completed: women with no schooling, those with 1-4 years of schooling, and those with ~ or more years. This break- down sect if ices some specif icity among higher educational groups for a reduction in sampling error and in the mobil- ~ty bias mentioned above. In preliminary tabulations, the effect of education on fertility varied by ruralo urban residence, suggesting that rural and urban women should be separated in the discussion of educational difo f erences. To reduce the sampling error that resulted from having so few rural women with more than 4 years of schooling, only two rural education classes were created: ~none. and many education.. Computations of total fertility rates for women in different education groups are based on the adapted Brass methodology described in Indirect Techniques for Demo graphic Estimation tUnited Nations, 1983); in this method, r eference per Sod error in the reporting of bit ths during the year pr for to the census or survey is corrected using a f actor der iced f tom compar isons between repot ted par ity at different ages and the parity that would accrue if current fertility were cumulated (P/F ratios). Although reference per iod error would be expected in the 1970 data, which are based on a question about births In the last year, that error should have been minimal in the

OCR for page 60
62 1976 survey, which recorded the date of the lash birth. Estimates prepared for the Panel on Brazil indicated an average P/F of 1.32 for Brazil in 1970 and 1.22 in 1976; this falls to 1.07 in estimates of total fertility based on advanced tabulations of the 1980 census. The 1976 P/F ratios suggest that reference period error was still present; one reason for this is that the survey was con- ducted over several weeks, and the year interval identi- f fed in Me tabulations may have excluded recent births e The Panel on. Brazil elected to employ the P/F ratio ad justment in 1976, as discussed further in its report. Them problems, as well as the others mentioned above (interclass mobility, interclase differentials in recent fertility decline, and sampling error), have undoubtedly affected the results reported in Table 16, which presents entitles of total fertility for women grouped according to educational attainment and rural-urban residence. The results are arranged in separate panels for 1970 and 19760 The first row in each panel shows unadjusted rates based on reported births in the precarious year; the second row gives the average P/F ratio f or women aged 20-24 and 25-29. The unadjusted data suggest a strong negative correlation between years of schooling and total fertil- ity. The question arises of whether reference period error was higher among less-educated women. In L970, the Pi/? ratio was 1.37 for urban women with no education and about .10 lower for urban women with some education. It is doubtful that enough women in their twenties shifted from the ~none. class to the 1-4 group for interclass shifts to have accounted for this. On the other hand, it is possible that the P/F ratio for the 5+ group may be exaggerated since these women had been experiencing more rapid fertility decline prior to 1910. Although the 1916 results suggest that fertility decline has indeed spread to lower education groups, problems arising from P/F ratios make it very difficult to determine how much. Interclass shifting of women may have had a greater effect since P/F ratios dropped from 1.21 in the ~none. group to 1.07 in the 5+ group at the Bum. time that the percent of women in the ~none. group declined from 13.6 in 1970 to 9.5 in 1976; the 5+ cate- gory increased from 220L to 30.7 percent. The 1976 results could also reflect higher reference period error among less-educated women. That survey's enumerators were better trained and supervised than those of the census, a point which suggests that reference period error, if present in 1976, could be related to the

OCR for page 60
~3 TABS 16 Total Fertility Rates by Years of Schooling, 1970-76: Brazil Years of Schooling Urban Rurs1 Year and Measure Total cone 1-4 5+ None Sow 1970 1976 Unadjusted TFa 4.37 5~02 3et7 2~28 6031 5~27 P/F Ratio. 1033 1~37 1~26 1027 1~32 1~32 Adjusted TPR 5081 6090 4.74 2091 8031 6094 Percent Distribution 100.0 13~6 27~6 22~1 20~8 lSo9 Unadjusted T~ 3.64 4~51 3~26 2~22 5099 lo63 P/F Ration 1~22 1~27 1024 1007 1031 1.12 Adjusted TFR 4~42 5070 d.06 2037 7084 5018 Percent Distr ibution 100. 0 9.5 28 0 2 30.7 12.9 18 0 7 Percent Decrease Unadl~u~t~ 16~7 l0~2 13~5 2~6 501 12~1 AdjUSt" TO 2309 17~3 14~5 18~6 5~7 25~4 Mean web at Flrst Birth 1970 1976 23028 21~86 22~7Ei 2SoO. 2ct.95 23~48 23 0 84 2lo 91 22.30 26.08 22.08 23 ~ 70 aAdjus~nts b"ed on mirage of P/F ratios for - _n aged 20-24 and 2S-29. bBased on reported percent of coven with zero par ity, af ~ r al Badry correction of nonreporting woven (~e United cations, 1983). Sources s Be rived fray 3~970 census arid 1976 P - D s~1e files. ability to recall the date of the last bir=. If so, education, rather than the quality of interviewing, would account for differentials in reference period error. However, if fertility actually did decline more rapidly between 1970 and 1976 among less~educated women, this, too, could have inflated their P/E ratio. Educational differentials in fertility with and without the P/F adjustment can be humanized according to differences between rates for women reporting a given level of education and women with no education. In 1970, unadjusted total fertility for urban women with 1-4 years of school was 1.25 children lower than for women with no schooling, and 2.74 lower for women with 5 or more years of schooling. These differentials increased to 2.15 and

OCR for page 60
64 3.99 children, respectively, when rates were ad justed using observed P/F ratios. The dif ferential between rural women with no education and some education was one child when unadjusted data were used, and 1.37 children with the ad justment; though rural P/F ratios are equal, the adj ustment process increases the dif ferential between the two groups because of the larger base rate for women with no education. In 1976, the differential between unadjusted fertility rates for urban women with no educe tion and those with 1-4 years of schooling was again 1. 25 children, but decreased to 2.29 children for the 5+ group. With the adjustment, the differentials were 1.64 children and 3. 33 children, respectively. Either way, educational differentials In fertility appear to narrow among urban women (when these differentials are expressed in numbers of children). For rural women, the opposite is true, since the 1976 differential was 1.36 with unadjusted data and 2. 66 af ter ache ad j ustment ~ see Figure 7 ) . The pattern of differentials in fertility decline between 1970 and 1976 is highly sensitive to P/F adjust- ments. For urban women, the category that appears least affected is the 1-4 group, whose decline was about 14 percent; however, its P/F ratios could have been biased upward both by fertility decline and by popula~cion shifts. For women with no education, the decline increases from 10 percent in the unadjusted rates to 17 percent after adjustment. For women with 5+ years of schooling, the decline increases from 3 percent to nearly 19 percent; the P/F ratio drops from 1.27 in 1970 to 1.07 in 1976 for that group. Although the result for rural women with no education are not affected by the adjustment, it causes the decline for rural women with come education to double. It is difficult to draw firm conclusions about educa- tional differentials in fertility decline from these results. For urban women, unadjusted data suggest that declines were greatest for women with 1-4 years of school. Adjusted results suggest that declines were greater among women with 5 or more years of schooling. since there is reason to suspect that the 1970 P/F ratio for women in the 5+ group was biased upward by declining fertility, the 1970-76 decrease indicated by the adjusted data is probably exaggerated. A conclusion, tentative at best, is that urban fertility decline was probably more rapid among women with less education, leading to a narrowing of educational differentials among urban women; for rural women, those with no education experienced the least decline, leading to a widening in these differentials.

OCR for page 60
61 ~ 4 o 10 9 8 F UR BAN None (17) - - '- 5 . G I _ ul tto 4 Y - n _ (151 5+ Years o 1970 65 1976 1 970 YEAR RURAL _ \ Some (253\ 1976 FIGURE t Total Fertility Rate by Years of Schooling, 1970 and 1916: Brazz1 Note: Percent decreases shown in parentheses.

OCR for page 60
66 I t is also important to observe that the total per- centage fertility decline between 1970 and 1976 exceeded the decline in all but one education/residence category ( the ad justed rates for rural women with some education) O This is because the percentage distr ibution of women among education/residence categories changed between 1970 and 1976. The percentage of women in the urban ~none. class declined from 1306 percent to 9.5 percent, while the rural ~none. dropped from 20.8 percent to 12.9 percept e The shares of the urban 5+ class increased from 2201 percent to 3007 percent, while the rural ~some. group rose from 15.9 to 1807 percent. The urban 1-4 group was more stable in percentage terms though it is important to recognize that this stability masks cons siderable shifting into and out of the group as a consequence of changes in the shares of adjacent groups. Because of these changes in composition, the average decline for all classes combined exceeds percentage declines within classes. Insights into the relationship between education and fertility that can be extracted from tabulations of questions on children ever born and children born in the last year are not limited to computation of total fer- tility ratese Tabulations of f irst bir~che from these data mate it possible to measure educational differences in the singulate mean age at first birth using the tech. nique described earlier. These averages are shown in the last panel of Table 160 In 1970, there is a difference of less than one year between urban women in the tenoned category and those with 1-4 years of schooling. A much larger difference, 2. 3 years, separates the 1-4 and 5+ groups. There is a differential of about 1.5 years between rural women with no schooling and those with some schoolinge The main change in 1976 is that the average age at first birth for urban women in the 5+ group increases to 26.1 years, while the average for women in the 1-4 group drops slightly, increasing the difference between these groups to nearly 4 years. Since the reliability of these measurements could have been affected by the shifting of women from one education group to the next, by declining fertility, and by semolina error. caution is required in interpreting them. . Ilowever, it is probably safe to say that these difference" in age at first birth are one of the main features of educational differentials in Brazil- ian fertility. This could be the result of later mar- riage, labor force participation, and other aspects of

OCR for page 60
67 the changing roles associated with increased education. Educational differences in the singulate mean age at marriage measure were not computed because of previously mentioned doubts about the reliability of the reporting of marital status. FAMILY INCOME Published results of the 1976 PNAD survey included tabu- lations of fertility questions according to household income categories (in multiples of the monthly salary at the time of the survey). Berquo (1980) has co ~ area estimates of total fertility based on these tabulations to estimates of fertility by minimum salary groups in 1970 census data, with results as shown in Table 17. These estimates suggest that the greatest decline in total fertility between 1970 and 1976 occurred among the lowest-income groups. This suggests important changes in the pattern of ~ncome-related fertility differentials in Brazil because declines prior to 1970 clearly had been concentrated in h~gher-income groups. These changes have stirred considerable interest in the question of why rapid fertility decline spread to low~income women. Before this question is explored in detail in subsequent chapters, the remainder of the present chapter describes more precisely TABLE 17 Total Fertility Rates by Family Income Level (multiples of monthly minimum salary), 1970 and 1976: Brazil Monthly Income: Multiples of the Minimum Salary Total Fertility Rate Percent 1970 1976 Decline <1 1.66 6.11 20.2 - <1 to <2 6.20 5.94 4.2 <2 to <5 4.35 4.07 6.4 - >5 2.60- 2~54 2.3 Source: Berquo (1980)' using 1970 census and 1976 PNAD survey data.

OCR for page 60
68 changes in the relationship between income and fertility in Brazil. There are several ways in which the rates reported in Table 17 are ambiguous or might have been distorted. One relates to the effect of changes in the composition of women by income class. Again, in no group, including the lowest-income, does the decline exceed the 24 percent average for all groups combined, suggesting that changing composition has been at work. The effects of changing composition by income class are more complicated than the changes in education described above. There is an added problem of definition: the meaning of minimum salary categories as indices of poverty or wealth changed over the period from 1970 to 1976 because of deterioration in the purchasing power of the minimum salary; thus fer- tility changes observed for a particular minimum salary class could reflect the movement of women into or out of the class, or changes in the way that the class reflects income distribution. In 1970, 39 percent of families reported income levels of one minimum salary or less, and 21 percent had two or more. By 1976, the share of families with less than one minimum salary had fallen to 21 percent, while those with two or more had increased to 54 percente The extent to which these shifts represent interclass mobility rather than changes in the meaning of minimum salary classes is ambiguous. Either could explain why the largest fertility declines seem limited to the lowest minim salary group. Nearly half of the worn in the one-two class in 1976 belonged to the less than one class in 1970, which means Mat they could well have experienced a decline from 7066 to Se94 (22 percent), a figure that is closer to the national average. Another ambiguity relates to the extent to which these changes in composition, as well as interclass differen- tials in prior fertility decline and sailing error, may have distorted P/F ratios used to adjust total fertility rates reported in Table 17. If the tabulations by educa- tional level are a valid indication, there could be major problems. A third ambiguity, also suggested by the education results, arises from the possible marking of quite dif- ferent rural and urban patterns in income group averages that combine rural and urban women. Access to the raw data files for both the 1970 census sample and the 1976 PNAD survey make it possible to experiment with alternative tabulations by income class aimed at reducing, or at least clarifying, these distor-

OCR for page 60
69 tions. To avoid the def initional problem arising from categorizing income groups according to minimum salary, families were regrouped into family income deciles (with f amilies in multifamily households considered as separate units). In doing this, a choice had to be made between total family income and family income per capita. Neither measure was entirely satisfactory: for a given level of income, grouping by total income understated the relative prosperity of smaller households, whereas grouping by income per capita led to a clustering of higher-fertility women in the lower-income category. When total fertility rates for women categorized as low-income by both definio tions were compared to results for women with no educa- tion, the rate for the low per capita category was higher, enough so that the grouping by total family income was selected. In tabulating questions on fertility for different family income defiles, decile categories were grouped to reduce sampling error and the impact of interclass mobility. The following groups were adopted: in urban areas, deciles 1-3 were labeled ~low,. deciles 4-6 ~middle,. and defiles 7-10 ~high.; in rural areas, the top two groups were combined because of sampling error arising from the limited n ~ er of cases in the 7-10 category. Interclase mobility is reduced but not eliminated by this grouping since The defiles refer to the distribution of all families, and the composition of groups could change as a result of changes in the distribution of women by place of residence or income. Total fertility rates calculated from responses to fertility questions tabulated for groups of family income deciles are presented in Table 18. The format of the table is similar to that of Table 16, which described fertility differences by educational level: unadjusted rates in the first row, followed by observed P/F ratios, adjusted rates, and the percentage distribution of women in 1970 and 1976. The table also shows percentage decreases in rates from 1970 to 1976 and singulate mean ages at first birth for both dates. In the unadjusted rates for 1970, total fertility for the urban low group was actually .4 children less than for the middle group. The reason Mat this did not show up in Table 16 is Mat in 1970, the majority of low-incoI'ae women resided in rural areas, which weighs heavily in the overall low-income average. Unadjusted total fertility for urban women in the high-income class was over 2 chil- dren lower than for those in the middle class, and in

OCR for page 60
70 TABLE 18 Total Fertility Rates by Family Income Dec iles, 1970-76: Brazil F~ily Inca" Decile Urban Rure1 Year and Measure To"1 ~ Middle Eligh ~ Eligh . . ... . _ . _ . 1970 1 O7~ Unad] usted T~ ~ 0 3t ~ 0 36 ~ 0 75 2.69 6 71 ~ 0 99 P/P Batioa 1033 1038 1022 loU 1019 1053 AdJusted TF~ 5081 5.99 5.82 3088 8.00 7.66 Percent Distr ibution 100.0 10. 8 16.5 35 .8 17. 8 19 .1 Adjusted TFR 3064 3.98 3.9S 2.08 6.50 ~oll P/l' Ratio. 1022 1.10 1014 1.45 1.03 1045 Adjusted SFR dod2 do3~7 4~52 3~02 6070 5~86 Percent Dlatribution lOOoO 12~2 18~6 37~7 13~4 ,8~1 Percent Decrease UnadJusted TFR 16.1 8.7 16.8 22.7 3.1 17.6 Adiusted SPR 23.9 27.0 22.3 22.2 16.3 22.2 Mean Aoeb at First Birth 1970 23 o28 22.03 21e 46 25 0 16 20 ~ 51 24 ~ 28 1976 23.84 21. 32 21. S2 26 ~ 30 20.48 24 0 70 aAdjus~nts b~d on average of P/F ratioa for - _n agQd 20-~. - ~l 25-29. bBased on reported perc~t of ~_n with zero p~ty, af~r E1 R~ry correction of nonreporting wc_n (~ United Nations, 1983). Sources' Derived fr~ 1970 ce~u~ and 1976 PRaD ~p1e files. rural areas about 1.7 children lower for middle and high deciles combined. Unad3us ted total fertility declined by about 17 percent overall from 1970 to 1976. Rates for the urban low and middle groups were about the same, and the pattern of differences ~mong other groups was similar to that of 1970. The rural low group declined feast g however, the weight of this group decreased, while that of low urban women increased. The unadjusted rates suggest that fertility decline was greater am~ng the middle- and highoincome groupa. The picture changes considerably when rates are adjusted using the observed P/F ratios: incame differen- tials narrow for both urban and rural women because of the high P/F ratios of high-income women. This is surely a distortion that reflects the declining fertility of

OCR for page 60
71 women in this group. Because 1976 P/F ratios were lower for all women except those in the urban high-income group, the adjusted rates suggest more rapid declines than do the unadjusted rates. The pattern of fertility decline by income class also changes, with the adjusted rates indicating that decline to have been greatest among low- income urban women and least among low-income rural women. Though the P/F ratio of high-income women is probably distorted, there is little change in it from 1970 to 1976; thus the percentage decline for the group is unaffected. The insights provided by these results about income class differentials in the level and percentage decline of fertility between 1970 and 1976 are thus clouded by distortions in the P/F ratios. However, they do suggest a need to modify the conclusion reported earlier that fertility decline was concentrated in the lowest-income group and that little or no decline occurred at higher levels. Moreover, the results indicate that if fertility decline was greater among low-income women, it was among low-income urban women; in fact, they suggest that the rate of decline was lowest among low-income rural women. Otherwise, the evidence reported here indicates that fertility decline was more evenly spread across income classes. If this is so, education may have played a more important role than income In differentials in the rate of decline between 1970 and 1976. There may also be an interaction between education and income; that is, fer- tility change may be related to a woman's level of educa- tion, but the nature of this relation may vary by income class. The last bit of information about income class differs entials in fertility relates to the measure of mean age at first birth. The patterns here are similar to those observed in the educational breakdowns, with a differ- ential of about 3 years separating high-income women from other groups in 1970 and an increase in this differential to about 4 years for urban women in 1976. This again raises the question of what socioeconomic forces led to increases in age at first birth for these women and not for women in lower income and education groups; it also raises the question of how differences by income and education relate to each other. A partial answer to the last question is provided by an examination of joint percentage distributions of women by educational attainment and family income level, as shown in Table 19. The base for the percentages is the total number of women aged 15-49; thus each cell in the

OCR for page 60
72 TABLE 19 Percent Distribution of All Women Aged 15-49 by Income Deciles, Years in School, and Rural-Urban Residence, 1970 and 1976: Brazil Yearn of Schooling Urban Rural Year and Income Decile alone 1-4 5+ None Some 1970 _, Urban I.ow 4.78 4.46 1.52 Urban Middle 4.93 8.27 3.26 -- Urban High 3.83 14.83 17.29 ~ Rural Low ~ -- 12.20 5. 54 Rural Bigh ~ 8.73 10. 36 1976 Urban' Low 3.74 5.79 2.62 -- Urban Middle 3.46 9034 5.79 - Urban High :!o32 130113 22.27 ~ Rural Low ~ -a 7.21 6020 Rural Bigh - 5.69 12. 44 Sources: Tabulations of 1970 census and 1976 survey data files. table shows the percent of women in a particular income/ education group, with the sum of all cells rather than either rows or column" adding to 100 percent. The dis- tributions show that there is a loose correspondence in the data, but hardly an exact fit, between income level and educational attainment. This correspondence ~ mea- sured by comparing percentages in each cell, is closer when one examines the distributions of educational attainment within income groups (reading across rows); the picture is less clear in the distribution of women by income level within education categor ies ( reading down COlUmnS)e There is a closer correspondence in rural areas and at higher levels of income and education in the urban population: for example, the majority of women with higher educational attainment are found in higher- income defiles. This is not true of urban women with

OCR for page 60
73 lower educational attainment, who appear to have a better chance of attaining the middle- or upper-income decides. This indicates a need to take account of the role of education and other features of the urban environment (particularly labor force participation) in examining differentials in fertility by income class, and vice versa. TEE REGIONAL DIMENSION OF INCOME DIFFERENCES The regional dimension of decliner in total fertility by income level is examined in Table 20.1 Rates were cal- culated for three groups of PNAD regions, which were combined to preserve an adequate sample size in the tabulation by income defiles. Regions 1 and 2 (Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo), which represent the highest levels of income and socioeconomic development in Brazil, were combined and are labeled as ~RJ-SP.. A second combination consists of PNAD regions 3 and 4 (Parana/ Santa Catarina/Rio Grande do Sul and Minas Gerais/Espirito Santo), which represent intermediate levels of income and other development indicators and are labeled as ~Other.. Region 5 consists of Brazil poorest region, the North- eastern states, so labeled. PNAD regions 6 and 7 are not shown because only their urban population was available in the 1976 sample. Family income groups were also con- ~olidated to reduce sampling error: in urban areas, the lowest six and highest four deciles were combined, and all rural women were combined. The discussion is limited to unadjusted total fertility rates. In 1970' previously observed (Chapter 1) patterns of interregional differentials in fertility were maintained within each broad category of family income. Fertility was lowest in the high-income region and highest in the low-income region. Interregional differentials were greatest among low-income urban women. Within regions, the differential between low- and high-income urban women was greatest in the Northeast and least in Rio and Sao Paulo. However, the differential between low-income urban women and rural women generally {most of whom are lower-income) is greatest in the middle group. In 1976, the pattern charged e Most Importantly, rates for women in middle-income regions moved closer to those for women in Rio and Sao Paulo. In fact, the rates for urban low-income women were lower in the "other. region, so that the within-region differential for urban women

OCR for page 60
74 TABLE 20 Unadjusted Total Fertility Rate by PNAD Region and Income Decile, 1970 and 1976: Brazil PNAD Reg ion Year and RJ-SP Other Northeast Decile (1-2) (3-4) (S) 1_ I_ Urban/Low-Middle 3 . 85 4 0 27 SO 41 Urban/Middle 20 47 2. 67 30 37 Rural/All 4.82 5. 62 6.39 Urban/Low-Middle 3 . S1 3. 32 4. 8S Urban/lligh 2.01 2.04 4.43 Rural/All 4.42 4.43 6.06 Percent Decrease . ~ Urban/Liow-Middle 8 e 8 22e 2 It) o 4 Urban/Bigh 18.6 23 0 6 2901 Rural/All 8 ~ 3 21e 2 5 o 2 Source: Unadjusted total fertility rates derived from special tabulations of census and survey files. was less for this region than for R;r-sp. The reason for this is that fertility rates for all classes of women declined more rapidly in the former. Declines were least rapid in Rio and Sao Paula since their rates were lower to begin with in 1970. The greatest percentage decline occurred awns high-income urban women in the Nor~cheast, while the lowest percentage decline was mung rural women in that region. In assessing these patterns, it is also important to take account of the relative size of each region's income classes, since both the percentage decline and weight of each group in the total namer of women account for their contributions to the overall fertility decline. Table 21

OCR for page 60
f 5 TABLE 21 Percent Distr ibution of Women Aged 15-49 by PNAD Region and Income Deciles, 1970 and 1976: Brazil PNAD Reg ion Other Northeast Year and R3-SP Decile (1-2) (3-4) {5) (6-7) Total ~ . , . 1970 1976 Urban/Low-Middle 708 7.8 9.2 2.5 27.3 Urban/High 19.9 9.0 4.7 202 35.8 Rural/~11 4. 6 150 5 160 8 a 36.9 Total 32.3 32.3 30~7 4.7 100.0 Urban/Low-Middle 9.7 8.1 9.7 3.1 31.2 Urban/High 19.1 10.7 4.7 2.3 37.4 Rural/All 3~7 13.2 14.5 a 31.4 Total 33.1 32.6 28.9 5.4 100.0 .. aRegions 6-7 included for comparison, but rural population of these regions not included in total. Source: Special tabulations of census and survey data files. shows the percentage distributions of women aged 15-49 by region and income class for 1970 and 1976. The total number of women at each date is the base of the percant- ages. The group with the largest share {nearly 20 per- cent) of women--the higher-income deciles in Rio and Sao Parlor had an 1B.6 percent fertility decline. Although this was below the national average since this group already had comparatively low fertility in 1970, it was important because of the weight of this group in the total. The group with the greatest percentage decline in fertility--the higher-income women in the Northeast-- accounted for a relatively small share (less than 5 percent) of women (see Figure 8~. The important groups in terms of larger weight in the total and higher percentage declines were women in the middle-income ~other. region. They accounted for a little less than one-third of all women, and experienced

OCR for page 60
76 40 30 20 10 o Rural/MI Income Groups UrbanlHigh Income UrbanlLow-Middle Income 1 ~ 100 ~ _ .~.......... ................ ................ :-:-:-:-:-:~:-:-:-:- ...~.~........... ..~...~......... ....~............ :::::::::: . ~ ::::::::.: .............. .. .................. ...22".22.2. _ .-.:.: :-:-: _ -~ CL l_ 20 TOTAL RIO DE JANEIRO OTHER NORTH- SAO PAU LO EAST 80 60 40 o FIGURE 8 Distribution of Women Aged lS-49, by Region and Income Group, 1976: Brazil fertility declines of 21-24 percent. Rural fertility decline in this region was about 22 percent, and these rural women accounted for about 14 percent of the total. This contrasts with rural women in the Northeast, whose decline was only 5 percent, and who accounted for a roughly similar percentage share of all women. These comparisons add further weight to the conclusion stated earlier: that the spread of fertility decline to new regions and income groups, combined with its continua- tion among women experiencing pre-1970 declines, accounted for the accelerated fertility declines of the 1970~.

OCR for page 60
77 These comparisons also suggest that in the future, fertil- ity decline at the national level will depend to an even greater extent on declines among low-income groups in both urban and rural areas. Fertility decline among urban middle- and upper-middle defiles, which contributed substantially to the declines of the 1970s, will be more limited since the fertility of these groups has reached comparatively low levels. CONCLUSIONS The objective of this chapter was to identify differences in fertility among Brazilian women according to levels of educational attainment and family income in 1970 and 1976, as well as differential rates of fertility decline between these two sets of data by education and income. A further objective was to determine the possible effects of changes in the distribution of women by education and income on the overall rate of decline and to pinpoint which groups contributed most to the decline because they had greater percentage decline-, greater weight in the total number of women aged 15-19, or both. The main finding of the chapter is a confirmation of the hypothesis stated in Chapter 1 about ache reason for Brazil8s accelerated fertility decline in the 1970~: during the 197Os, there was continued, though slowing, fertility decline mung middies and upper-income women in Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paula {women who had experienced declines prior to 1970), combined with the spread of fertility decline to women in lower- and middle-income regions that had experienced only limited decline before 1970. The chapter also suggests a number of lines of analysis that might indicate why the 1970" brought the particular combination of fertility declines that it did. These data, while basically descriptive, suggest that interactions between income level, educational attainment, age, and other aspects of the socioeconomic environment should be studied In greater detail. An examination of links between female labor force partici- pation, migration, and household conduction patterns is warranted, with account taken of regional and rural-urban dimensions of these changes. These factors will be in- cluded in the analyses presented in the next two chapters. The present chapter has also raised a namer of method- ological questions, particularly about the reliability of data on births in the year prior to the interview as

OCR for page 60
78 tabulated for subpopulations like the income and education groups identif I'd here. The distortions in P/F ratios associated with the shifting of women between groups, dif- ferential fertility between groups, and sampling error are so severe that adj ustments based on these ratios are questionable if not misleading. Though it would be desirable to use data on current rather than cumulative fertility in analyzing recent changes, the questionable reliability of current fertility measures as applied to subpopulations suggests that data on parity by age and other characteristics are more likely to yield unbiased results O Imaginative use of these data ~ such as a focus on childIessne"s and on cohort changes ([OK example, the difference between the average parity of women in a par- ticular education/income class who were 20024 in 1970 and the parity of the same group at age 26~30 in 1976) may be a way to compensate for some of the information on recent fertility that is lost by not using the data on births in the last year.