Multilevel Analysis of Individual and Provincial-level Correlates of Fertility in Iran

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor of Demography, University of Tehran and NIPR.Tehran.Iran.

2 PhD Student in Demography, University of Tehran.Tehran.Iran.

Abstract

Iran has been among the countries with below replacement fertility levels since the 2000s. Fertility behaviors are determined by a broad variety of micro and macro factors. Thus, this study aims to examine the individual and provincial -level determinants of fertility in Iran using a multilevel approach. The 2016 micro-census data from Iran were analyzed for 7000 married women 15-49 years old using HLM software. Fertility behavior was measured as the number of children ever born (CEB). The results indicated that various individual-level variables, namely, education, employment, and rural-urban residence place were significantly associated with CEB. Provincial-level factors such as contraceptive use, internet coverage, and development level index were significantly correlated with fertility. The influence of individual-level factors (especially education) on fertility behavior appears stronger than that of provincial-level factors. We discuss the implications of our findings for the understanding of dynamics of fertility and new pronatalist policy in Iran.

Keywords

References

  • ×     امیرکافی، مهدی(1385). «اهمیت و منطق مدل­های چندسطحی در علوم اجتماعی»، جامعه­­شناسی ایران، ش 4.

    ×     افشاری، زهرا (1394). «عوامل اقتصادی- اجتماعی تعیین­کننده­ی باروری در ایران (با کاربرد داده­های پانل)»، پژوهش­های رشد و توسعه اقتصادی، سال 6، ش 22.

    ×     دراهکی، احمد و  نیلوفر کوشککی (1398).«تأثیر ویژگی‌های شبکه‌های اجتماعی در رفتار باروری زنان مناطق شهری استان بوشهر»، مطالعات راهبردی زنان، دوره 22، ش85.

    ×     رازقی نصرآباد، حجیه بی­بی و حسن سرایی (1393). «تحلیل کوهورتی (نسلی) نگرش زنان درباره ارزش فرزند در استان سمنان»، زن در توسعه و سیاست، دوره 12، ش 2.

    ×     عباسی­شوازی، محمد جلال و حجیه بی­بی رازقی نصرآباد ( 1389). «الگوها و عوامل مؤثر بر فاصله ازدواج تا اولین تولد در ایران»، نامه انجمن جمعیت­شناسی ایران، ش 9.

    ×     عباسی­شوازی، محمدجلال(1380). «همگرایی رفتارهای باروری در ایران: سطوح باروری استان‌ها، روندها و الگوها در ایران»،  مجله علوم اجتماعی، ش 18.

    ×     عباسی­شوازی، محمد جلال و میمنت حسینی­چاوشی(1392). «تحولات باروری در ایران در چهار دهه اخیر: کاربرد و ارزیابی روش فرزندان خود در برآورد باروری با استفاده از داده‌های سرشماری 1365، 1375، 1385 و 1390»،  پژوهشکده آمار، مرکز آمار ایران، تهران.

    ×     فراش خیالو، نورالدین، رمضی، نگار و رسول صادقی (1399).«تعیین کننده­های اجتماعی و فرهنگی نگرش دانشجویان به سقط جنین»، مطالعات راهبردی زنان، د 22، ش 87.

     

    ×     مرکز آمار ایران، (1398). شاخص­های جمعیت و سلامت ایران 1395، مرکز آمار ایران.

    ×     محمودیانی، سراج و رسول صادقی (1393). «مشخصه­های فردی و استانی مرتبط با رفتار باروری در زنان ایرانی 1390 »، ماهنامه علمی پژوهشی دانشگاه علوم پزشکی کرمانشاه، سال 18، ش 11.

    ×     محمودیانی، سراج و سهیلا شهریاری (1394). «نقش مذهب و توسعه در رفتار باروریِ زنان کُرد در ایران »،  مجله علمی دانشگاه علوم پزشکی کردستان، سال20، ش4.

    • Ø Abbasi-Shavazi, M. J, P. McDonald, & Hosseini Chavoshi, M. (2009). »Family Change  and   Continuity     in Iran: Birth Control Use before First Pregnancy« , Journal of MarriageFamily, 71(5).
    • Ø Abbasi-Shavazi, MJ & P. McDonald, (2006). »The fertility decline in the Islamic Republic of Iran, 1972-2000«, Asian Population Studies, 2 (3).
    • Ø Amara, M (2015). “Multilevel Modelling of Individual Fertility Decisions in Tunisia: Household and Regional Contextual Effects”, An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer,124(2).
    • Ø Bachrach, C. A, (2014). “Culture and Demography: From Reluctant Bedfellows to Committed Partners”, Demography, 51(1).
    • Ø Becker, G, (1981). “A Treatise on the Family, Cambridge”, Harvard University Press.
    • Ø Billari.F.C, O. Giuntella & L. Stella (2019); “Does broadband Internet affect fertility?”. Population Studies 73(3).
    • Ø Bongaarts, J, (2002). “The end of the fertility transition in the developed world”, Population andDevelopment Review, 28(3).
    • Ø Carter, A.T, (1998). »Cultural Models and Demographic Behavior, in Alaka M. Basu and Peter Aaby (eds.), The Methods and Uses of Anthropological Demography«, Oxford, Clarendon Press.
    • Ø Casterline, J. B, (2001). “Diffusion Processes and Fertility Transition: Introduction, in National Research Council, Diffusion Processes and Fertility Transition”, Selected Perspectives, Washington D.C: National Academy Press.
    • Ø Corker,J, M, Zan & C. Rossier,  (2019). “Fertility of the Elite in Sub-Saharan Africa: Is Low Fertility Among the Better-off a Phenomenon Throughout the Region?” , Population Association of American, PAA, Annual Meeting,Astuin,TX Aprial.
    • Ø Courgeau, D. & B. Baccaini, (1998). »Multilevel Analysis in the Social Sciences«, Population: An English Selection, 10(1).
    • Ø Dribe,M, S, Juárez, F. Scalone, (2015), “Is It Who You Are or Where You Live?., Community Effects on Net Fertility at the Onset of Fertility Decline: A Multilevel Analysis Using Swedish Micro-Census Data”, Published online 15 October 2015 in Wiley Online Library.
    • Ø Godferey Li J. K, (2005). “The Influence of women's status on fertility Behavior between Taiwan and China- A Multilevel Analysis, PhD Thesis in Sociology”, Texas A&M University.
    • Ø Hammel E. A, (1990). “Theory of Culture for Demography”, Population and Development Review, 16(3).
    • Ø Hirschman, C & P. Guest, (1990). “Multilevel Models of Fertility Determination in Four Southeast Asian Countries: 1970 and 1980”, Demography, (27).
    • Ø Hox, J, (2010), Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications, Routledge; 2nd edition.
    • Ø Jejeebhoy, S.J, (1995). Women’s Education, Autonomy, and Reproductive Behaviour: Experience from Developing Countries, New York: Oxford University Press.
    • Ø Kohler, H.P, F. Billari & J.A Ortega, (2002). “The emergence of lowest-low fertility in Europe during the 1990s”, Population and Development Review, 28(4).
    • Ø Luke, D. A, (2004). Multilevel Modeling, Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences , Sage Publications.
    • Ø Mason, W. M., G. W, Wong, & B. Entwistle, (1983). “Contextual analysis through the multilevel linear model”. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    • Ø Matysiak,A, D. Vignoli, (2013). “Diverse Effects of Women’s Employment on Fertility: Insights from Italy and Poland”. European Journal of Population, springer, 29(3).
    • Ø McNicoll, G (1994). “Institutional Analysis of Fertility”, Population, Economic Development and the Environment, Oxford University Press.
    • Ø McNicoll, G. (1980). “Institutional Determinants of Fertility Transition", Population and Development Review 6(3).
    • Ø Moeeni, M, A, Pourreza,  F, Torabi, H, Heydari & M Mahmoudi, (2014), »Analysis of economic determinants of fertility in Iran: a multilevel approach«International  Journal  of  Health Policy Management , 3(3).
    • Ø Osborne, J. W (2000). »Advantages of hierarchical linear modeling«. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 7 (1).
    • Ø Pinheiro JC, DM, Bates, ( 2000). Mixed-effects models in S and S-Plus, Springer Verlag, New York.
    • Ø Reed, H., R. Briere & J. Casterline, (1999). “The Role of Diffusion Processes in Fertility Change in Developing Countries”: Report of a Workshop, Washington D.C: National Academy Press.
    • Ø Silverman, E, (2018). “Methodological Investigations in Agent-Based Modelling”, Springer Cham.
    • Ø Wang, W. S. L, (1994). “The difference in fertility between urban and rural areas and its impact on the process of urbanization”. Chin J Popul Sci, 6(2).
    • Ø White, M. J. S, Muhidin, C, Andrzejewski, E, Tagoe, R Knight & E, Reed, (2008). “Urbanization and Fertility: An Event-History Analysis of Coastal Ghana”, Demography 45(4).

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics