Population Research and Policy Review

, Volume 31, Issue 3, pp 387–415 | Cite as

Cohort Effects or Period Effects? Fertility Decline in South Korea in the Twentieth Century

Article

Abstract

This study examines if the Korean fertility decline is driven by long-term cohort changes or by fluctuating period changes. By using a classic age–period–cohort model, a moment decomposition method, and a new summary fertility measure—‘cross-sectional average fertility’—I show that the Korean fertility decline is primarily driven by period changes and that delayed childbearing has important consequences for the onset of fertility decline. These findings are in line with the existing literature in fertility changes such as theories of fertility transitions and sociological accounts of fertility changes in Western countries in the twentieth century. The policy implications of these findings are also discussed.

Keywords

Fertility decline in South Korea Cross-sectional average fertility (CAF) APC analysis Moment decomposition 

References

  1. Becker, G. S. (1974). A theory of marriage. In T. W. Schultz (Ed.), Economics of the family: Marriage, children, and human capital (pp. 299–344). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bongaarts, J., & Feeney, G. (1998). On the quantum and tempo of fertility. Population and Development Review, 24(2), 271–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Calot, G. (1993). Relationships between cohort and period demographic indicators: translation revisited. Population (English edition), 5, 183–222.Google Scholar
  4. Choe, K. M., & Park, K. A. (2006). Fertility decline in South Korea: Forty years of policy-behavior dialogue. The Journal of Population Association of Korea, 29(2), 1–26.Google Scholar
  5. Choi, K. (2004). Causes of the recent fertility drop in Korea. The Journal of Population Association of Korea, 27(2), 35–39. (in Korean).Google Scholar
  6. Coale, A. J., & Trussell, T. J. (1974). Model fertility schedules: Variations in the age structure of childbearing in human populations. Population Index, 40(2), 185–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen, B., & Montgomery, M. R. (1998). Introduction. In M. R. Montgomery & B. Cohen (Eds.), From deaths to birth: Mortality decline and reproductive change (pp. 1–38). Washington: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  8. Davis, K. (1963). The theory of change and response in modern demographic history. Population Index, 29(4), 345–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fienberg, S., & Mason, W. M. (1979). Identification and estimation of age–period–cohort models in the analysis of discrete archival data. Sociological Methodology, 10, 1–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fienberg, S., & Mason, W. M. (1985). Specification and implementation of age, period and cohort models. In W. M. Mason & S. E. Fienberg (Eds.), Cohort analysis in social research (pp. 25–88). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Foster, A. (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(2), 287–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gauthier, A. H. (2007). The impact of family policies on fertility in industrialized countries: A review of the literature. Population Research and Policy Review, 26, 323–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Glenn, N. D. (2005). Cohort analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication.Google Scholar
  14. Goldstein, J. R., & Wachter, K. W. (2006). Relationships between period and cohort life expectancy: Gaps and lags. Population Studies, 60(3), 257–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Guillot, M. (2003). The cross-sectional average length of life (cal): A cross-sectional mortality measure that reflects the experience of cohorts. Population Studies, 57(1), 41–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Han, S. H., & Feeney, G. (1993). The emergence of a new pattern of childbearing: fertility in Korea during the 1980s. The Journal of the Population Association of Korea, 16(1), 59–68.Google Scholar
  17. Johnson, R. A. (1985). Analysis of age, period, and cohort effects in marital fertility. In W. M. Mason & S. E. Fienberg (Eds.), Cohort analysis in social research (pp. 229–257). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jun, K. (2004). Fertility. In D. Kim & C. Kim (Eds.), Population of Korea (pp. 65–89). Seoul: Korea National Statistical Office.Google Scholar
  19. Kohler, H., Billari, F. C., & Ortega, J. A. (2002). The emergence of lowest-low fertility in Europe during the 1990s. Population and Development Review, 28(4), 641–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kohler, H., & Ortega, J. A. (2002). Tempo-adjusted period parity progression measures, fertility postponement and completed cohort fertility. Demographic Research, 6, 91–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kwon, T. H. (1977). Demography in Korea. Seoul: Seoul National University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Kwon, T. H. (1993). Exploring socio-cultural explanations of fertility transition in South Korea. In R. Leete & I. Alam (Eds.), The revolution in Asian fertility (pp. 41–53). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lam, D., & Marteleto, L. (2008). Stages of the demographic transition from a child’s perspective: Family size, cohort size, and children’s resources. Population Development Review, 34(2), 225–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee, S. Y. (2003). The relationship between son preference and fertility. The Journal of Population Association of Korea, 26(1), 31–57. (in Korean).Google Scholar
  25. Lee, S. Y. (2006). Economic crisis and the lowest-low fertility. The Journal of Population Association of Korea, 29(3), 111–137. (in Korean).Google Scholar
  26. Li, N., & Wu, Z. (2003). Forecasting cohort incomplete fertility: A method and an application. Population Studies, 57(3), 303–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Malthus, T. R. (1953). A summary view of the principle of population. In D. V. Glass (Ed.), Introduction to Malthus (pp. 115–181). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  28. Mason, K. O. (1997). Explaining fertility transitions. Demography, 34(4), 443–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McDonald, P. (1993). Fertility transition in Asia: The statistical evidence. In R. Teete & I. Alam (Eds.), The revolution in Asian fertility (pp. 15–37). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. McDonald, P. (2002). Sustaining fertility through public policy: the range of options. Population (English Edition), 57(3), 417–446.Google Scholar
  31. Ní Brolchaín, M. (1992). Period paramount? A critique of the cohort approach to fertility. Population and Development Review, 18(4), 599–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Notestein, F. W. (1945). Population—The long view. In T. W. Schultz (Ed.), Food for the world (pp. 36–57). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  33. O’Brien, R. M. (2000). Age period cohort characteristic models. Social Science Research, 29, 123–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. O’Brien, R. M., Hudson, K., & Stockard, J. (2008). A mixed model estimation of age, period, and cohort effects. Sociological Methods and Research, 36(3), 402–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pearl, J. (2000). Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Preston, S. H. (1978). Introduction. In S. Preston (Ed.), The effects of infant and child mortality on fertility (pp. 1–16). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  37. Pullum, T. W. (1980). Separating age, period, and cohort effects in white U.S. fertility, 1920–1970. Social Science Research, 9, 225–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rindfuss, R. R., Morgan, S. P., & Swicegood, G. (1988). First births in America: Changes in the timing of parenthood. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  39. Ryder, N. (1964). The process of demographic translation. Demography, 1(1), 74–82.Google Scholar
  40. Ryder, N. (1965). The cohort as a concept in the study of social change. American Sociological Review, 30(6), 843–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schoen, R. (2004). Timing effects and the interpretation of period fertility. Demography, 41(4), 810–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schofield, R. (1989). Family structure, demographic behavior, and economic growth. In J. Walter & R. Schofield (Eds.), Famine, disease and the social order in early modern society (pp. 279–304). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wachter, K. W. (2007). Essential demographic methods. Unpublished Manuscript.Google Scholar
  44. Winship, C., & Harding, D. (2008). A mechanism-based approach to the identification of age period cohort models. Sociological Methods and Research, 36(3), 362–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. World Health Organization. (2010). World Health Statistics 2010. Geneva: WHO Press.Google Scholar
  46. Xie, Y., & Pimentel, E. E. (1992). Age patterns of marital fertility: Revising the Coale–Trussell method. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 87, 977–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yang, Y. (2008). Trends in U.S. adult chronic disease mortality, 1960–1999: Age, period, and cohort variations. Demography, 45(2), 387–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yang, Y. (2011). Aging, cohorts, and methods. In R. H. Binstock & L. K. George (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (7th ed., pp. 17–30). London: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yang, Y., Fu, W. J., & Land, K. C. (2004). A methodological comparison of age–period–cohort models: Intrinsic estimator and conventional generalized linear models. Sociological Methodology, 34, 75–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yang, Y., & Land, K. C. (2006). A mixed models approach to the age–period–cohort analysis of repeated cross-section surveys: Trends in verbal test scores. Sociological Methodology, 36, 75–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cornell Population CenterCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations