Population Research and Policy Review

, Volume 22, Issue 5–6, pp 557–574 | Cite as

An Analysis of Fertility Differentials by Religion in Kerala State: A Test of the Interaction Hypothesis

  • Manoj Alagarajan
Article

Abstract

In a revelation of overall decline to below replacement fertility in the Kerala state of India, it was generally found that fertility among Muslims is higher and contraceptive prevalence lower than among Hindus and Christians. This paper examines the interaction between religion and other socioeconomic factors, that is, whether the effect of religion on fertility remains constant across other factors. The analysis is based on the data from the National Family Health Survey-1 in Kerala. The analysis found that large Hindu-Muslim fertility differences at a low level of education do not persist at higher levels. For contraceptive use, wider gaps are found at a middle level of education and at a medium level of standard of living than at lower and higher levels. This indicates that couples at different socioeconomic settings make different decisions in spite of belonging to the same religion. The fact that fertility of Muslims at higher levels of socioeconomic status is low, and not much different than the fertility of other religions, suggests that the observed fertility gap between Hindus/Christians and Muslims is a passing phenomenon.

Contraception Fertility Interaction Religion Socioeconomic status 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alagarajan, M. (2000). An analysis of fertility differentials by religion in Kerala state, India. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Bharathiar University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India.Google Scholar
  2. Chamie J. (1977). Religious differentials in fertility: Lebanon 1971, Population Studies 31(2): 365–382.Google Scholar
  3. Chaudhury, R.H. (1984). Hindu-Muslim differential fertility: How much religion and how much socio? Social Action 34(3): 251–273.Google Scholar
  4. Freedman, R. & Whelpton, P.K. (1961). Socio-economic factors in religious differentials in fertility, American Sociological Review 26(4): 608–614.Google Scholar
  5. Goldscheider, C. & Uhlenberg, P.R. (1969). Minority group status and fertility, The American Journal of Sociology 74(4): 361–373.Google Scholar
  6. Goldstein, S. (1973). Religious fertility differentials in Thailand, Population Studies 24(3): 325–337.Google Scholar
  7. Hobcraft, J. & Mcdonald, J. (1984). Birth Intervals. WFS, comparative studies No. 28, world fertility survey. London: WFS.Google Scholar
  8. India, Registrar General (1995). Census of India 1991: Religion, Paper 1, Series 1. India, New Delhi: Controller of Publications.Google Scholar
  9. International Institute for Population Sciences (1995). National Family Health Survey (MCH and Family Planning), xIndia 1992–93. IIPS, Mumbai: International Institute for Population Sciences.Google Scholar
  10. International Institute for Population Sciences & ORC Macro (2000). National Family Health Survey (NFHS-2), 1998–99. Mumbai: International Institute for Population Sciences.Google Scholar
  11. International Institute for Population Sciences & ORC Macro 2001. National Family Health Survey (NFHS-2), India, 1998–99: Kerala. Mumbai: International Institute for Population Sciences.Google Scholar
  12. Jones, G. & Nortman, D. (1968). Roman Catholic fertility and family planning: A comparative review of the research literature, Studies in Family Planning 34: 1–27.Google Scholar
  13. Kulkarni, P.M., Alagarajan, M. & Sivakami, M. (1998). Religious differentials in fertility in India: An assessment of the characteristics hypothesis. Discussion paper. XXIth Annual conference of the Indian Association for the Study of Population, Banaras Hindu University, Varnasi, February 9–12.Google Scholar
  14. Mosher, W.D. & Hendershot, G.E. (1984). Religion and fertility: A replication, Demography 21(2): 185–190.Google Scholar
  15. PRC Thiruvananthapuram (Population Research Centre, University Of Kerala) & International Institute for Population Sciences (1995). National Family Health Survey, Kerala, 1992–93. Bombay: International Institute for Population Sciences.Google Scholar
  16. Ramesh, B.M., Gulati, S.C. & Retherford, R.D. (1996). Contraceptive use in India, 1992– 93, National Family Health Survey Subject Reports, No. 2. Mumbai, India: International Institute for Population Sciences and Honolulu, Hawaii: East-West Centre Program on Population.Google Scholar
  17. Retherford, R.D. & Choe, M.K., eds. (1993). Statistical Models for Causal Analysis. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. Roy, T.K. & Jayachandran, V. (1996). Is living standard important for determining fertility and child-loss experience? An empirical investigation based on NFHS. Discussion paper. XIX Annual Conference of the Indian Association for the Study of Population. Baroda, India, February 26–28.Google Scholar
  19. Ryder, N.B. & Westoff, C.R. (1971). Reproduction in the United States, 1965. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Westoff, C.F., Potter, R.G. & Sagi, P.C. (1963). The Third Child, a Study in the Prediction of Fertility. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manoj Alagarajan
    • 1
  1. 1.Gujarat Institute of Development Research, Gota, Ahmedabad-GujaratIndia

Personalised recommendations