, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 457–472 | Cite as

The relationship of the crude birth rate and its components to social and economic development

  • Avery M. Guest


Using well-known techniques of regression analysis, we decompose the crude birth rate into six analytical components, indicating illegitimacy, the marriage rate, legitimate fertility, and sex and age composition. All the components except sex structure are important in determining differences in crude birth rates across countries of the world. The model is elaborated by showing how economic development affects the crude birth rate through its basic demographic components.


Agricultural Development Demographic Transition Marital Fertility Crude Birth Rate Asian Sample 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adelman, Irene. 1963. An Econometric Analysis of Population Growth. American Economic Review 53:314–339.Google Scholar
  2. Blalock, Hubert M., Jr. 1972. Social Statistics (2nd. ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  3. Bogue, Donald J., and James A. Palmore. 1964. Some Empirical and Analytic Relations among Demographic Fertility Measures, with Regression Models for Fertility Estimation. Demography 1:316–338.Google Scholar
  4. Buissink, John D. 1971. Regional Differences in Marital Fertility in the Netherlands in the Second Half of the Nineteenth Century. Population Studies 25:353–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coale, Ansley J. 1964. How a Population Ages or Grows Younger. Pp, 47–58 in Ronald Freedman (ed.), Population: The Vital Revolution. Garden City: Doubleday-Anchor.Google Scholar
  6. —. 1970. The Decline of Fertility in Europe from the French Revolution to WorId War II. Pp. 3–24 in S. J. Behrman, Leslie Corsa, Jr., and Ronald Freedman (eds.), Fertility and Family Planning: A World View. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dixon, Ruth B. 1971. Explaining Cross-Cultural Variations in Age at Marriage and Proportions Never Marrying. Population Studies 25:215–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Duncan, Otis Dudley. 1966. Path Analysis: Sociological Examples. American Journal of Sociology 72:1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ekanem, Ita I. 1972. A Further Note on the Relation between Economic Development and Fertility. Demography; 8:383–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. 1970. Production Yearbook: 1969. Rome, Italy: Food and Agricultural Organization.Google Scholar
  11. Freedman, Ronald, and Arjun L. Adlakha. 1968. Recent Fertility Declines in Hong Kong: The Role of the Changing Age Structure. Population Studies 22:181–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Friedlander, Stanley, and Morris Silver. 1967. A Quantitative Study of the Determinants of Fertility Behavior. Demography 4:30–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goode, William J. 1963. World Revolution and Family Patterns. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  14. —. 1966. Family Organization. Pp, 479–552 in Robert K. Merton and Robert A. Nisbet (eds.), Contemporary Social Problems (2nd. ed.). New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc.Google Scholar
  15. Great Britain. Scotland. Scottish Statistical Office. 1965. Digest of Scottish Statistics, No. 29; April. Edinburgh: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office.Google Scholar
  16. Heer, David. 1966. Economic Development and Fertility. Demography 3:423–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. —, and Elsa Turner. 1965. Areal Differences in Latin American Fertility. Population Studies 18:279–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. International Labour Office. 1971. Year Book of Labour Statistics: 1971. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labour Office.Google Scholar
  19. Janowitz, Barbara. 1971. An Empirical Study of the Effects of Socioeconomic Development on Fertility Rates. Demography 8: 319–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kasarda, John D. 1971. Economic Structure and Fertility: A Comparative Analysis. Demography 8:307–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kirk, Dudley:. 1971. A New Demographic Transition. Pp. 123–147 in National Academy of Sciences (ed.), Rapid Population Growth: Consequences and Policy Implications. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
  22. Land, Kenneth. 1969. Principles of Path Analysis. Pp, 3–37 in Edgar F. Borgatta and George W. Bohrnstadt (eds.), Sociological Methodology: 1969. San Francisco: JesseyBass, Inc.Google Scholar
  23. Myrdal, Gunnar. 1968. Asian Drama. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  24. Northern Ireland. Government of Northern Ireland. 1968. Digest of Statistics, No. 29; March. Belfast: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office.Google Scholar
  25. Ryder, Norman B. 1970. The Emergence of a Modern Fertility Pattern: United States, 1917–1966. Pp. 99–123 in S. J. Behrman, Leslie Corsa, Jr., and Ronald Freedman (eds.), Fertility: and Family Planning: A World View. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  26. Schoenberg, Ronald. 1972. Strategies for Meaningful Comparison. Pp. 1–32 in Herbert L. Costner (ed.), Sociological Methodology: 1972. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.Google Scholar
  27. United Nations. 1971. Demographic Yearbook: 1970. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  28. —. 1970. Demographic Yearbook: 1969. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  29. —. 1966. Demographic Yearbook: 1965. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  30. Weintraub, R. 1962. The Birth Rates and Economic Development: An Empirical Study. Econometrica 40:812–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Population Association of America 1974

Authors and Affiliations

  • Avery M. Guest
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of WashingtonSeattle

Personalised recommendations