IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/popdev/v29y2003i4p627-646.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conflicting Preferences: A Reason Fertility Tends to Be Too High or Too Low

Author

Listed:
  • David Voas

Abstract

Fertility has often seemed to be too high or too low, relative not only to social and economic goals, but also to reproductive preferences. In developing countries actual fertility has often been higher than desired family size, while in developed societies fertility tends to be below replacement level even though people generally say that they want at least two children. In explanations of fertility extremes, or of the discrepancies between desired and actual fertility, the effect of partners' holding different preferences has tended to be overlooked. Individual preferences expected to lead to replacement‐level reproduction may in combination generate substantially higher or lower fertility. In explaining such outcomes, a crucial question is what happens when spousal preferences diverge. Given that personal practices or social norms may systematically favor high or low preferences in the event of disagreement, chance alone will ensure that desired and actual fertility do not coincide.

Suggested Citation

  • David Voas, 2003. "Conflicting Preferences: A Reason Fertility Tends to Be Too High or Too Low," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 29(4), pages 627-646, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:popdev:v:29:y:2003:i:4:p:627-646
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2003.00627.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2003.00627.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2003.00627.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julie DaVanzo & Christine E. Peterson & Nathan Jones, 2003. "How Well Do Desired Fertility Measures for Wives and Husbands Predict Subsequent Fertility? Evidence From Malaysia," Working Papers DRU-3013-NICHD, RAND Corporation.
    2. Julie DaVanzo & Christine E. Peterson & Nathan R. Jones, 2003. "How Well Do Desired Fertility Measures for Wives and Husbands Predict Subsequent Fertility?," Working Papers 03-16, RAND Corporation.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maria Rita Testa & Danilo Bolano, 2021. "When partners’ disagreement prevents childbearing: A couple-level analysis in Australia," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 44(33), pages 811-838.
    2. Doris Hanappi & Valérie-Anne Ryser & Laura Bernardi & Jean-Marie Le Goff, 2017. "Changes in Employment Uncertainty and the Fertility Intention–Realization Link: An Analysis Based on the Swiss Household Panel," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 33(3), pages 381-407, July.
    3. Sara Yeatman & Christie Sennott & Steven Culpepper, 2013. "Young Women’s Dynamic Family Size Preferences in the Context of Transitioning Fertility," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 50(5), pages 1715-1737, October.
    4. Mizuki Komura, 2013. "Tax reform and endogenous gender bargaining power," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 175-192, June.
    5. Maria Rita Testa & Laura Cavalli & Alessandro Rosina, 2014. "The Effect of Couple Disagreement about Child-Timing Intentions: A Parity-Specific Approach," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 40(1), pages 31-53, March.
    6. Mónica L. Caudillo & Seungwan Kim & Jaein Lee & Jingwen Liu, 2024. "Racial-Ethnic Disparities in Dyadic Pregnancy Intentions Preceding Births in the United States," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 43(2), pages 1-14, April.
    7. Kodzi, Ivy A. & Johnson, David R. & Casterline, John B., 2012. "To have or not to have another child: Life cycle, health and cost considerations of Ghanaian women," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(7), pages 966-972.
    8. Pierluigi Conzo & Giulia Fuochi & Letizia Mencarini, 2017. "Fertility and Life Satisfaction in Rural Ethiopia," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 54(4), pages 1331-1351, August.
    9. Mizuki Komura, 2013. "Fertility and endogenous gender bargaining power," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(3), pages 943-961, July.
    10. Beatrice Chromková Manuea & Petr Fučík, 2011. "Couple disagreement about fertility preferences and family-friendly policy measures in the Czech Republic," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 9(1), pages 335-344.
    11. Stulp, Gert, 2020. "Certainty of fertility preferences among Dutch women," OSF Preprints gacz5, Center for Open Science.
    12. Renata Kyzlinková & Anna Šťastná, 2018. "Fatherhood in a Changing Society: Shifts in Male Fertility Patterns," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 23(2), pages 328-353, June.
    13. Julika Hillmann & Anne-Kristin Kuhnt, 2011. "Der Kinderwunsch im Kontext von Partnerschaft und Partnerschaftsqualität: eine Analyse übereinstimmender Elternschaftsabsichten von Eltern und kinderlosen Paaren," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2011-019, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    14. Maria Rita Testa, 2012. "Couple disagreement about short-term fertility desires in Austria: Effects on intentions and contraceptive behaviour," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 26(3), pages 63-98.
    15. Komura, Mizuki & Ogawa, Hikaru, 2014. "Pension and the Family," IZA Discussion Papers 8479, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Colleen Ray & Sela Harcey & Arthur Greil & Stacy Tiemeyer & Julia McQuillan, 2018. "Stability and change in personal fertility ideals among U.S. women in heterosexual relationships," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 39(16), pages 459-486.
    17. Moore, Ann M. & Frohwirth, Lori & Miller, Elizabeth, 2010. "Male reproductive control of women who have experienced intimate partner violence in the United States," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1737-1744, June.
    18. Tomáš Sobotka, 2009. "Sub-Replacement Fertility Intentions in Austria [Intentions de fécondité inférieures au seuil de remplacement en Autriche]," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 25(4), pages 387-412, November.
    19. Frank Heiland & Alexia Prskawetz & Warren C. Sanderson, 2008. "Are Individuals’ Desired Family Sizes Stable? Evidence from West German Panel Data," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 24(2), pages 129-156, June.
    20. Alessandro Rosina & Laura Cavalli & Maria Rita Testa, 2011. "Couples’ childbearing behaviour in Italy: which of the partners is leading it?," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 9(1), pages 157-178.
    21. Alessandra Trimarchi, 2022. "Gender-Egalitarian Attitudes and Assortative Mating by Age and Education," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 38(3), pages 429-456, August.
    22. Anne Gauthier & Christoph Bühler & Joshua Goldstein & Saskia Hin, 2011. "Fertility preferences: what measuring second choices teaches us," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 9(1), pages 131-156.
    23. Giacaman, Rita & Abu-Rmeileh, Niveen ME & Mataria, Awad & Wick, Laura, 2008. "Palestinian women's pregnancy intentions: Analysis and critique of the Demographic and Health Survey 2004," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 83-93, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dana Sarnak & Stan Becker, 2022. "Accuracy of wives' proxy reports of husbands' fertility preferences in sub-Saharan Africa," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 46(17), pages 503-546.
    2. Ankita Mishra & Jaai Parasnis, 2017. "Peers and Fertility Preferences: An Empirical Investigation of the Role of Neighbours, Religion and Education," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 134(1), pages 339-357, October.
    3. John Casterline & Laila El-Zeini, 2007. "The estimation of Unwanted Fertility," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 44(4), pages 729-745, November.
    4. Ivy Kodzi & David Johnson & John Casterline, 2010. "Examining the predictive value of fertility preferences among Ghanaian women," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 22(30), pages 965-984.
    5. Sarah R. Hayford & Victor Agadjanian, 2012. "From desires to behavior," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 26(20), pages 511-542.
    6. Kerry MacQuarrie & Jeffrey Edmeades, 2015. "Whose Fertility Preferences Matter? Women, Husbands, In-laws, and Abortion in Madhya Pradesh, India," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 34(4), pages 615-639, August.
    7. Henriette Engelhardt, 2004. "Fertility Intentions and Preferences: Effects of Structural and Financial Incentives and Constraints in Austria," VID Working Papers 0402, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna.
    8. Beatrice Chromková Manuea & Petr Fučík, 2011. "Couple disagreement about fertility preferences and family-friendly policy measures in the Czech Republic," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 9(1), pages 335-344.
    9. Rasul, Imran, 2008. "Household bargaining over fertility: Theory and evidence from Malaysia," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 215-241, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:popdev:v:29:y:2003:i:4:p:627-646. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0098-7921 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.