Advertisement

Population and Environment

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 281–293 | Cite as

Household type and the demographic transition

  • Brian J. L. Berry
Article

Abstract

Demographic transition theorists postulate a post-transition steady state predicated on the nuclear family. This study reveals that other family types—community and anomic/polygynous—will, if they persist, produce different steady states at higher levels of infant mortality and fertility. Only if family type changes as countries modernize will the transition theorists' post-transition steady state be achieved.

Keywords

Ordinary Little Square Infant Mortality Nuclear Family Demographic Transition Family Type 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Becker, Gary S. (1988). Family Economics and Macro Behavior.American Economic Review, 78, 1–13.Google Scholar
  2. Bongaarts, John (1998). Demographic Consequences of Declining Fertility.Science, 282, 419–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Caldwell, John C. (1976). Fertility and the Household Economy in Nigeria.Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 7, 193–253.Google Scholar
  4. Caldwell, John C. (1977). The Economic Rationality of High Fertility: An Investigation Illustrated with Nigerian Survey Data.Population Studies, 31, 5–27.Google Scholar
  5. Chesnais, Jean-Claudel (1992).The Demographic Transition. States, Patterns, and Economic Implications. A Longitudinal Study of Sixty–Seven Countries Covering the Period 1720–1984. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  6. Coleman, J. and T.J. Fararo, eds. (1992).Rational Choice Theory. Advocacy and Critique. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  7. Davis, Kingsley (1945). The World Demographic Transition.The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 237, 1–11.Google Scholar
  8. Gibbons, Ann (1993). The Risks of Inbreeding.Science, 259, 1252.Google Scholar
  9. Lee, R. (1987). Population Dynamics in Humans and Other Animals.Demography, 24, 443–465.Google Scholar
  10. Notestein, Frank W. (1945). Population—The Long View, in T.W. Schultz (ed.),Food for the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Thompson, Warren (1929). Population.American Journal of Sociology, 34, 959–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Todd, Emmanuel (1985).The End of Ideology. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  13. Wrigley, E.A. and R.S. Schofield (1981).The Population History of England. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian J. L. Berry
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Social SciencesUniversity of Texas at DallsRichardson

Personalised recommendations