Abstract
Bongaarts and Feeney have recently proposed an adjusted total fertility rate to disentangle tempo effects from changes in the quantum of fertility. We propose an extension to the Bongaarts and Feeney formula that includes variance effects: that is, changes in the variance of the fertility schedule over time. If these variance effects are ignored, the mean age at birth and the adjusted total fertility rate are biased. We provide approximations for these biases, and we extend the TFR adjustment to fertility schedules with changing variance. We apply our method to the Swedish baby boom and bust, and show that variance effects are important for evaluating the relative contributions of tempo and quantum effects to the fertility change from 1985 to 1995.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bongaarts, J. 1999. “Fertility Decline in the Developed World: Where Will It End?” American Economic Review 89:256–60.
Bongaarts, J. and G. Feeney. 1998. “On the Quantum and Tempo of Fertility.” Population and Development Review 24: 271–91.
— 2000. “On the Quantum and Tempo of Fertility: A Reply.” Population and Development Review 26:560–64.
Calot, G. 1992. “Relations entre indicateurs démographiques longitudinaux et transversaux.” Population 47:1189–240.
Council of Europe. 1998. Recent Demographic Developments in Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.
Eurostat. 1998. New Cronos Database: Population and Social Conditions. Brussels: Eurostat.
Foster, A.D. 1990. “Cohort Analysis and Demographic Translation: A Comparative Study of Recent Trends in Age Specific Fertility Rates From Europe and North America.” Population Studies 44:287–315.
Hoem, B. and J.M. Hoem. 1997a. “Fertility Trends in Sweden up to 1996.” Population Bulletin 40/41:318–33.
—. 1997b. “Sweden’s Family Policies and Roller-Coaster Fertility.” Journal of Population Problems 52(3–4):1–22.
Hoem, J.M. 1990. “Social Policy and Recent Fertility Change in Sweden.” Population and Development Review 16:735–48.
Keilman, N. 1994. “Translation Formulae for Non-Repeatable Events.” Population Studies 48:341–57.
Kim, Y.J. and R. Schoen. 2000. “On the Quantum and Tempo of Fertility: Limits to the Bongaarts-Feeney Adjustment.” Population and Development Review 26:554–59.
Kohler, H.-P. and J.A. Ortega. 2001. “Period Parity Progression Measures With Continued Fertility Postponement: A New Look at the Implications of Delayed Childbearing for Cohort Fertility.” Working Paper 2001-001, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany. Available at http:// www.demogr.mpg.de.
Lesthaeghe, R. and P. Willems. 1999. “Is Low Fertility a Temporary Phenomenon in the European Union?” Population and Development Review 25:211–29.
Ní Bhrolcháin, M. 1992. “Period Paramount? A Critique of the Cohort Approach to Fertility.” Population and Development Review 18:599–629.
OECD. 1998. Labor Market Database. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.
Philipov, D. and H.-P. Kohler. Forthcoming. “Tempo Effects in the Fertility Decline in Eastern Europe: Evidence From Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Russia.” European Journal of Population.
Pullum, T.W. 1980. “Separating Age, Period and Cohort Effects in White U.S. Fertility, 1920–70.” Social Science Research 9:225–44.
Ryder, N.B. 1956. “Problems of Trend Determination During a Transition in Fertility.” Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly 34:5–21.
— 1983. “Cohort and Period Measures of Changing Fertility.” Pp. 737–56 in Determinants of Fertility in Developing Countries, Vol. 2, edited by R. Bulatao and R.D. Lee. New York: Academic Press.
van Imhoff, E. and N. Keilman. 2000. “On the Quantum and Tempo of Fertility: Comment.” Population and Development Review 26:549–53.
Zeng Yi and K. Land. 1999. “Ryder’s Basic Translation Equation Revisited and an Adjustment for Bias in Observed Changes in Period Tempo of Demographic Events.” Center for Demographic Studies, Duke University, Durham, NC. Unpublished manuscript.
—. 2001. “A Sensitivity Analysis of the Bongaarts-Feeney Method for Adjusting Bias in Observed Period Total Fertility Rates.” Demography 38:17–28.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
We are greatly indebted to Kenneth Wachter for many helpful comments and suggestions. We also gratefully acknowledge the suggestions we have received from Philip Morgan, two anonymous referees, John Bongaarts, Griffith Feeney, Alexia Fürnkranz-Prskawetz, Johannes Huinink, Iliana Kohler, Steve Smallwood, Jim Vaupel, and Zeng Yi.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kohler, HP., Philipov, D. Variance effects in the bongaarts-feeney formula. Demography 38, 1–16 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.2001.0004
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.2001.0004