IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberhi/0085.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Use of the Census to Estimate Childhood Mortality: Comparisons fromthe 1900 and 1910 United States Census Public Use Samples

Author

Listed:
  • Michael R. Haines
  • Samuel H. Preston

Abstract

This paper estimates child mortality by race and nativity for the U.S. as a whole and the Death Registration Area based on the public use micro- samples of the 1900 and 1910 censuses. We compare indirect estimates to mortality rates and parameters based on published census and vital statistics data. The censuses of 1900 and 1910 both asked adult women about children ever born and children surviving which, when tabulated by age or marriage duration can be used to estimate probabilities of their children dying at various ages up to 25. Data on children ever born for 1910 were partially tabulated and published in conjunction with the 1940 federal census but the information on children surviving was never tabulated and published; nor was information from 1900. The public use micro samples of the 1900 census permit the application of these well-established indirect methods. This paper applies the basic indirect age and marriage duration methods, and a method using the backward projection of age distribution of surviving own-children of younger adult women. The results match well to life tables calculated from aggregaed census and vital statistics for the total white, native white and foreign-born white populations. The results are less definite for African-Americans but it seems that mortality was substantialy better than indicated by the widely cited Glover life tables for 1900/02, 1901/10, and 1909/11 for the original the original Death Registration Area of 1900. Overall, however, it appears that calculated life tables from published vital statistics and census popula- tions for the Death Registration Areas of 1900 and 1910 describe the remainder of the population relatively well.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael R. Haines & Samuel H. Preston, 1996. "The Use of the Census to Estimate Childhood Mortality: Comparisons fromthe 1900 and 1910 United States Census Public Use Samples," NBER Historical Working Papers 0085, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberhi:0085
    Note: DAE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/h0085.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert W. Fogel, 1986. "Nutrition and the Decline in Mortality since 1700: Some Preliminary Findings," NBER Chapters, in: Long-Term Factors in American Economic Growth, pages 439-556, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Michael Haines, 1979. "The use of model life tables to estimate mortality for the United States in the late nineteenth century," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 16(2), pages 289-312, May.
    3. Gretchen Condran, 1984. "Evaluation of estimates of underenumeration in the census and the age pattern of mortality, philadelphia, 1880," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 21(1), pages 53-69, February.
    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. Haines, Michael R., 2011. "Inequality and infant and childhood mortality in the United States in the twentieth century," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 418-428, July.

    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. Michael R. Haines, 1994. "Estimated Life Tables for the United States, 1850-1900," NBER Historical Working Papers 0059, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Michael R. Haines & Lee A. Craig & Thomas Weiss, 2000. "Development, Health, Nutrition, and Mortality: The Case of the 'Antebellum Puzzle' in the United States," NBER Historical Working Papers 0130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Michael Haines, 1989. "American fertility in transition: New estimates of birth rates in the United States, 1900–1910," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 26(1), pages 137-148, February.
    4. Michael R. Haines, 2001. "The Urban Mortality Transition in the United States, 1800-1940," NBER Historical Working Papers 0134, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Michael R. Haines, 1998. "Health, Height, Nutrition, and Mortality: Evidence on the "Antebellum Puzzle" from Union Army Recruits in the Middle of the Nineteenth Century," NBER Historical Working Papers 0107, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Komlos, John, 2012. "A Three-Decade “Kuhnian” History of the Antebellum Puzzle: Explaining the shrinking of the US population at the onset of modern economic growth," Discussion Papers in Economics 12758, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    7. Robert W. Fogel, 1986. "Nutrition and the Decline in Mortality since 1700: Some Preliminary Findings," NBER Chapters, in: Long-Term Factors in American Economic Growth, pages 439-556, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Chulhee Lee, 2003. "Prior Exposure to Disease and Later Health and Mortality. Evidence from Civil War Medical Records," NBER Chapters, in: Health and Labor Force Participation over the Life Cycle: Evidence from the Past, pages 51-88, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Sunder, Marco, 2013. "The height gap in 19th-century America: Net-nutritional advantage of the elite increased at the onset of modern economic growth," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 245-258.
    10. Lionel Kesztenbaum & Jean-Laurent Rosenthal, 2014. "Income versus Sanitation; Mortality Decline in Paris, 1880-1914," PSE Working Papers halshs-01018594, HAL.
    11. Godoy, Ricardo A. & Goodman, Elizabeth & Levins, Richard & Caram, Mariana & Seyfried, Craig, 2007. "Adult male height in an American colony: Puerto Rico and the USA mainland compared, 1886-1955," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 82-99, March.
    12. Scott Alan Carson, 2010. "The Effect Of Development Of Geography, Vitamin D, Wealth, And Agricultural Productivity On Tuberculosis Mortality: The Case Of The 19th Century Us," Journal of Economic Development, Chung-Ang Unviersity, Department of Economics, vol. 35(2), pages 57-74, June.
    13. Mario Sanchez, 2003. "Internal Migration, Return Migration, and Mortality. Evidence from Panel Data on Union Army Veterans," NBER Chapters, in: Health and Labor Force Participation over the Life Cycle: Evidence from the Past, pages 203-230, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Scott A. Carson, 2008. "Geography and Insolation in 19th Century US African-American and White Statures," CESifo Working Paper Series 2229, CESifo.
    15. Adolfo Meisel-Roca & Juliana Jaramillo-Echeverri & María Teresa Ramírez-Giraldo, 2018. "Más de cien años de avances en el nivel de vida: El caso de Colombia," Cuadernos de Historia Económica 46, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
    16. Marco-Gracia, Francisco J. & Puche, Javier, 2021. "The association between male height and lifespan in rural Spain, birth cohorts 1835-1939," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    17. Frank D. Lewis, 2001. "Farm settlement with imperfect capital markets: a life-cycle application to Upper Canada, 1826-1851," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 34(1), pages 174-195, February.
    18. Steckel, Richard H., 2014. "In memory of Robert William Fogel," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 1-3.
    19. Scott A. Carson, 2006. "African-American and White Living Standards in the 19th Century American South: A Biological Comparison," CESifo Working Paper Series 1696, CESifo.
    20. Donn L Feir & Rob Gillezeau & Maggie E C Jones, 2024. "The Slaughter of the Bison and Reversal of Fortunes on the Great Plains," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(3), pages 1634-1670.

    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:nbr:nberhi:0085. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.