, Volume 37, Issue 3, pp 299–311 | Cite as

Husbands’ versus wives’ fertility goals and use of contraception: The influence of gender context in five Asian countries

  • Karen Oppenheim Mason
  • Herbert L. Smith


Using data from Pakistan, India, Malaysia, Thailand, and the Philippines, we explore how gender context influences (1) husband-wife concordance in the demand for children and (2) the impact of each spouse’s fertility preferences on contraceptive use. We also explore whether the husband’s pronatalism can explain the wife’s unmet need for contraception. The results suggest that gender context has little net effect on couples’ concordance, but influences the relative weight of husbands’ and wives’ preferences in determining contraceptive use. Analysis of women’s unmet need for contraception suggests that the husbands’ pronatalism contributes to wives’ unmet need, but only to a relatively small degree, especially in settings where unmet need is high. This is the case because the proportion of couples with differing fertility goals is small in most communities.


Family Planning Fertility Preference Additional Child Gender Stratification Family Planning Perspective 
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. Alam, I. and R. Leete. 1993. “Pauses in Fertility Trends in Sri Lanka and the Philippines?” Pp. 83–95 in The Revolution in Asian Fertility: Dimensions, Causes, and Implications, edited by R. Leete and I. Alam. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  2. Amin, R., A.U. Ahmed, J. Chowdhury, and M. Ahmed. 1994. “Poor Women’s Participation in Income-Generating Projects and Their Fertility Regulation in Rural Bangladesh: Evidence From a Recent Survey.” World Development 44:555–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balk, D. 1994. “Individual and Community Aspects of Women’s Status and Fertility in Rural Bangladesh.” Population Studies 48:21–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bankole, A. 1995. “Desired Fertility and Fertility Behaviour Among the Yoruba of Nigeria: A Study of Couple Preferences and Subsequent Fertility.” Population Studies 49:317–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bankole, A. and S. Singh. 1998. “Couples’ Fertility and Contraceptive Decision-Making in Developing Countries: Hearing the Man’s Voice.” International Family Planning Perspectives 24(1):15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Basu, A. 1992. Culture, the Status of Women and Demographic Behaviour: Illustrated With the Case of India. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  7. Beckman, L.J. 1983. “Communication, Power, and the Influence of Social Networks in Couples’ Decisions on Fertility.” Pp. 415–43 in Determinants of Fertility in Developing Countries, Vol. 2: Fertility Regulation and Institutional Influences, edited by R.A. Bulatao and R.D. Lee. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  8. Biddlecom, A.E., J.B. Casterline, and A.E. Perez. 1997. “Spouses’ Views of Contraception in the Philippines.” International Family Planning Perspectives 23(3):10–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cain, M.T. 1993. “Patriarchal Structure and Demographic Change.” Pp. 43–60 in Women’s Position and Demographic Change, edited by N. Federici, K.O. Mason, and S. Sogner. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  10. Cain, M., S.R. Khanam, and S. Nahar. 1979. “Class, Patriarchy, and Women’s Work in Bangladesh.” Population and Development Review 5:405–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Casterline, J.B., A.E. Perez, and A.E. Biddlecom. 1997. “Factors Underlying Unmet Need for Family Planning in the Philippines.” Studies in Family Planning 28:173–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chayovan, N. and V.P. Ruffolo. n.d. Field Report: Status of Women and Fertility in Thailand (SWAFT). Bangkok: Institute of Population Studies, Chulalongkorn University.Google Scholar
  13. Cohen, J. 1960. “A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales.” Educational and Psychological Measurement 20:37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dharmalingam, A. and S.P. Morgan. 1996. “Women’s Work, Autonomy, and Birth Control: Evidence From Two South Indian Villages.” Population Studies 50:187–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dyson, T. and M. Moore. 1983. “On Kinship Structure, Female Autonomy, and Demographic Behavior in India.” Population and Development Review 9:35–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ezeh, A.C. 1993. “The Influence of Spouses Over Each Other’s Contraceptive Attitudes in Ghana.” Studies in Family Planning 24:163–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goodman, L.A. and W.H. Kruskal. 1954. “Measures of Association for Cross Classification.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 49:732–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. —. 1959. “Measures of Association for Cross Classification II: Further Discussion and References.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 54:123–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hashemi, S.M., S.R. Schuler, and A.P. Riley. 1996. “Rural Credit Programs and Women’s Empowerment in Bangladesh.” World Development 24:635–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hollerbach, P.E. 1983. “Fertility Decision-Making Processes: A Critical Essay.” Pp. 340–80 in Determinants of Fertility in Developing Countries, Vol. 2: Fertility Regulation and Institutional Influences, edited by R.A. Bulatao and R.D. Lee. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hull, T.H. 1983. “Cultural Influences on Fertility Decision Styles.” Pp. 381–414 in Determinants of Fertility in Developing Countries, Vol. 2: Fertility Regulation and Institutional Influences, edited by R.A. Bulatao and R.D. Lee. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  22. Jeffery, R. and P. Jeffery. 1997. Population, Gender, and Politics: Demographic Change in Rural North India. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jejeebhoy, S.J. 1991. “Women’s Status and Fertility: Successive Cross-Sectional Evidence From Tamil Nadu, India, 1970–80.” Studies in Family Planning 22:217–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. — 1995. Women’s Education, Autonomy, and Reproductive Behaviour: Experience From Developing Countries. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  25. — 1998. “Associations Between Wife-Beating and Fetal and Infant Death: Impressions From a Survey in Rural India.” Studies in Family Planning 29:300–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jejeebhoy, S.J. n.d. Field report. Bombay.Google Scholar
  27. Kritz, M.M. and P. Makinwa-Adebusoye. 1995. “Women’s Control Over Resources and Demand for Children: The Hausa and Yoruba Case.” Pp. 73–97 in Women’s Position and Demographic Change in Sub-Saharan Africa, edited by P. Makinwa-Adebusoye and A.-M. Jensen. Liège: International Union for the Scientific Study of Population.Google Scholar
  28. Lasee, A. and S. Becker. 1997. “Husband-Wife Communication About Family Planning and Contraceptive Use in Kenya.” International Family Planning Perspectives 23(1):15–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Malhotra, A., R. Vanneman, and S. Kishor. 1995. “Fertility, Dimensions of Patriarchy, and Development in India.” Population and Development Review 21:281–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mason, K.O. 1997. “Gender and Demographic Change: What Do We Know?” Pp. 158–82 in The Continuing Demographic Transition, edited by G.W. Jones, R.M. Douglas, J.C. Caldwell, and R.M. D’Souza. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  31. — 1998. “Wives’ Economic Decision-Making Power in the Family in Five Asian Countries.” Pp. 105–33 in The Changing Family in Comparative Perspective: Asia and the United States, edited by K.O. Mason, N.O. Tsuya, and M.K. Choe. Honolulu: East-West Center and Nihon University.Google Scholar
  32. Mason, K.O. and H.L. Smith. 1999. “Female Autonomy and Fertility in Five Asian Countries.” Presented at the annual meetings of the Population Association of America, March 25–27, New York.Google Scholar
  33. Mason, K.O., H.L. Smith, and S.P. Morgan. 1998. “Muslim Women in the Non-Islamic Countries of Asia: Do They Have Less Autonomy Than Their Non-Muslim Neighbors?” Presented at the annual meetings of the American Sociological Association, August 21–25, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  34. Mason, K.O. and A.M. Taj. 1987. “Differences Between Women’s and Men’s Reproductive Goals in Developing Countries.” Population and Development Review 13:611–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McNemar, Q. 1947. “Note on the Sampling Error of the Difference Between Correlated Proportions or Percentages.” Psychometrika 12:153–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Morgan, S.P. and B.B. Niraula. 1995. “Gender Inequality and Fertility in Two Nepali Villages.” Population and Development Review 21:541–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nagaraj, S. and K.H. Lee. 1995. “The Status of Women and Fertility, Malaysia.” Report 1: “The Technical Report.” Kuala Lumpur: Faculty of Economics and Administration, University of Malaya.Google Scholar
  38. Raymundo, C.M. and L. Domingo. n.d. “Status of Women and Fertility Survey (Philippines): Field Report.” Manila: Population Institute, University of the Philippines.Google Scholar
  39. Sathar, Z.A. and S. Kazi. 1997. Women’s Autonomy, Livelihood and Fertility. Islamabad: Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.Google Scholar
  40. Schuler, S.R. and S.M. Hashemi. 1994. “Credit Programs, Women’s Empowerment, and Contraceptive Use in Rural Bangladesh.” Studies in Family Planning 25:65–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tsui, A.O. 1996. “Family Planning Programs in Asia: Approaching a Half-Century of Effort.” Asia-Pacific Population Research Report 8 (April). Honolulu: East-West Center.Google Scholar
  42. Westoff, C.F. and A. Bankole. 1995. Unmet Need: 1990–1994. Calverton, MD: Macro International Inc.Google Scholar
  43. Westoff, C.F. and A.R. Pebley. 1981. “Alternative Measures of Unmet Need for Family Planning in Developing Countries.” International Family Planning Perspectives 7(4):126–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Population Association of America 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The World BankWashington, DC
  2. 2.Population Studies CenterUniversity of PennsylvaniaUSA

Personalised recommendations