IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dem/demres/v47y2022i2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring US fertility using administrative data from the Census Bureau

Author

Listed:
  • Katie Genadek

    (United States Census Bureau)

  • Joshua Sanders

    (University of Colorado Boulder)

  • Amanda Stevenson

    (University of Colorado Boulder)

Abstract

Background: Longitudinal data available for studying fertility in the United States are not representative at the state level, limiting analyses of subnational variation in US fertility. The US Census Bureau makes available restricted data that may be used for measuring fertility, but the data have not previously been described for a scholarly audience or used for fertility research. Objective: This paper describes and analyzes restricted-use administrative birth data available through the Census Numident for nearly all US births for more than the last century. Within these data, most births since 1997 are linked to parents through the Census Household Composition Key (CHCK). These analyses are designed to illustrate the scope and limitations of these data for the study of US fertility. Methods: We describe the creation and content of the Census Numindent and CHCK data sets and compare the data to published US vital statistics. We also analyze the geographic coverage of both data sets and compare the demographic composition of the new data sources to national demographic composition. We further illustrate how these novel data sources may be used by comparing them to survey responses at the individual level. Contribution: This paper describes an underutilized source of national US data for studying fertility, shows the quality of these data by performing analyses, and explains how scholars can access these data for research.

Suggested Citation

  • Katie Genadek & Joshua Sanders & Amanda Stevenson, 2022. "Measuring US fertility using administrative data from the Census Bureau," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 47(2), pages 37-58.
    • Handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:47:y:2022:i:2
    DOI: 10.4054/DemRes.2022.47.2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol47/2/47-2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4054/DemRes.2022.47.2?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. Menken, J., 1974. "Biological determinants of demographic processes," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 64(7), pages 657-661.
    2. Eva Beaujouan & Caroline Berghammer, 2019. "The Gap Between Lifetime Fertility Intentions and Completed Fertility in Europe and the United States: A Cohort Approach," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 38(4), pages 507-535, August.
    3. Raj Chetty & Nathaniel Hendren & Patrick Kline & Emmanuel Saez, 2014. "Where is the land of Opportunity? The Geography of Intergenerational Mobility in the United States," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 129(4), pages 1553-1623.
    4. Deborah Wagner & Mary Lane, 2014. "The Person Identification Validation System (PVS): Applying the Center for Administrative Records Research and Applications’ (CARRA) Record Linkage Software," CARRA Working Papers 2014-01, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    5. Adela Luque & Deborah Wagner, 2015. "Assessing Coverage and Quality of the 2007 Prototype Census Kidlink Database," CARRA Working Papers 2015-07, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    6. Kryštof Zeman & Eva Beaujouan & Zuzanna Brzozowska & Tomáš Sobotka, 2018. "Cohort fertility decline in low fertility countries: Decomposition using parity progression ratios," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 38(25), pages 651-690.
    7. Caroline Sten Hartnett & Alison Gemmill, 2020. "Recent Trends in U.S. Childbearing Intentions," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(6), pages 2035-2045, December.
    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. Gloria G. Aldana, 2024. "Comparison of Child Reporting in the American Community Survey and Federal Income Tax Returns Based on California Birth Records," Working Papers 24-55, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    2. Jennifer Bernard & Kelsey Drotning & Katie R. Genadek, 2024. "Where Are Your Parents? Exploring Potential Bias in Administrative Records on Children," Working Papers 24-18, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.

    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. Zuzanna Brzozowska & Eva Beaujouan & Kryštof Zeman, 2022. "Is Two Still Best? Change in Parity-Specific Fertility Across Education in Low-Fertility Countries," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 41(5), pages 2085-2114, October.
    2. Robert Collinson & John Eric Humphries & Nicholas Mader & Davin Reed & Daniel Tannenbaum & Winnie van Dijk, 2024. "Eviction and Poverty in American Cities," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 139(1), pages 57-120.
    3. Linus Andersson, 2023. "The Role of Gender Differences in Partnering and Re-partnering for Gender Differences in Completed Fertility," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 42(2), pages 1-28, April.
    4. Colmer, Jonathan & Voorheis, John, 2020. "The grandkids aren't alright: the intergenerational effects of prenatal pollution exposure," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 108495, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Mikko Myrskylä & Julia Hellstrand & Sampo Lappo & Angelo Lorenti & Jessica Nisén & Ziwei Rao & Heikki Tikanmäki, 2024. "Declining fertility, human capital investment, and economic sustainability," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2024-002, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    6. Wendy D. Manning & Karen Benjamin Guzzo & Monica A. Longmore & Peggy C. Giordano, 2022. "Cognitive schemas and fertility motivations in the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 20(1), pages 261-284.
    7. Joshua D. Gottlieb & Maria Polyakova & Kevin Rinz & Hugh Shiplett & Victoria Udalova, 2020. "Who Values Human Capitalists' Human Capital? Healthcare Spending and Physician Earnings," Working Papers 20-23, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    8. Ariel J. Binder & Caroline Walker & Jonathan Eggleston & Marta Murray-Close, 2022. "Race and Mobility in U.S. Marriage Markets: Quantifying the Role of Segregation," Working Papers 22-59, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    9. Thomas B. Foster & Mark J. Ellis & Lee Fiorio, 2018. "Foreign-born and native-born migration in the U.S.: evidence from linked IRS administrative and census survey records," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 467-498, December.
    10. Eva Beaujouan & Kryštof Zeman & Mathías Nathan, 2023. "Delayed first births and completed fertility across the 1940–1969 birth cohorts," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 48(15), pages 387-420.
    11. Tomáš Sobotka, 2020. "Introduction: the relevance of studying fertility across time and space," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24.
    12. Jo Blanden, 2019. "Intergenerational income persistence," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 176-176, January.
    13. Maia Güell & Michele Pellizzari & Giovanni Pica & José V. Rodríguez Mora, 2018. "Correlating Social Mobility and Economic Outcomes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(612), pages 353-403, July.
    14. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Michael Storper, 2020. "Housing, urban growth and inequalities: The limits to deregulation and upzoning in reducing economic and spatial inequality," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(2), pages 223-248, February.
    15. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/6s39gt704s95upu27ma7s3p6q8 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. M. Shahe Emran & Francisco H. G. Ferreira & Yajing Jiang & Yan Sun, 2023. "Occupational dualism and intergenerational educational mobility in the rural economy: evidence from China and India," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 21(3), pages 743-773, September.
    17. John Carter Braxton & Kyle F. Herkenhoff & Jonathan Rothbaum & Lawrence Schmidt, 2021. "Changing Income Risk across the US Skill Distribution: Evidence from a Generalized Kalman Filter," Opportunity and Inclusive Growth Institute Working Papers 55, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    18. Andreas Fagereng & Luigi Guiso & Davide Malacrino & Luigi Pistaferri, 2020. "Heterogeneity and Persistence in Returns to Wealth," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 115-170, January.
    19. Adrian Adermon & Mikael Lindahl & Daniel Waldenström, 2018. "Intergenerational Wealth Mobility and the Role of Inheritance: Evidence from Multiple Generations," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(612), pages 482-513, July.
    20. Francesco Andreoli & Eugenio Peluso, 2016. "So close yet so unequal: Reconsidering spatial inequality in U.S. cities," Working Papers 21/2016, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    21. Martti Kaila & Emily Nix & Krista Riukula, 2021. "Disparate Impacts of Job Loss by Parental Income and Implications for Intergenerational Mobility," Opportunity and Inclusive Growth Institute Working Papers 53, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    fertility; census data; administrative data; United States of America;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:dem:demres:v:47:y:2022:i:2. 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: Editorial Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/ .

    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.