Advertisement

Reproductive Decision-Making: A Milestone, and the Road Ahead

  • Dimiter PhilipovEmail author
  • Jane E. Klobas
  • Aart C. Liefbroer
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter provides an overview of the main achievements of the REPRO project as reported in this volume and in other related publications by members of the REPRO team. It also considers limitations and discusses opportunities for future research that arise and are still to be addressed. Last but not least the chapter discusses the relevance of the REPRO approach for drawing policy implications.

Keywords

Behavioural Control Family Policy Fertility Intention Reproductive Decision Childbearing Intention 
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.

References

  1. Aassve, A., Arpino, B., & Billari, F. C. (2013). Age norms on leaving home: Multilevel evidence from the European Social Survey. Environment and Planning A, 45(2), 383–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ajzen, I., & Klobas, J. E. (2013). Fertility intentions: An approach based on the theory of planned behavior perspective. Demographic Research, 29(Article 8). doi: 10.4054/DemRes.2013.29.8.
  5. Bachrach, C. A., & Morgan, S. P. (2011). Further reflections on the theory of planned behaviour and fertility research. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 9, 71–74. doi: 10.2307/41342805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bachrach, C. A., & Morgan, S. P. (2013). A cognitive-social model of fertility intentions. Population and Development Review, 39(3), 459–485. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2013.00612.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barber, J. S. (2001). Ideational influences on the transition to parenthood: Attitudes toward childbearing and competing alternatives. Social Psychology Quarterly, 64(2), 101–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Billari, F. C., Philipov, D., & Testa, M. R. (2009). Attitudes, norms and perceived behavioural control: Explaining fertility intentions in Bulgaria. European Journal of Population, 25, 439–465. doi: 10.1007/s10680-009-9187-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cavalli, L. (2010). Fertility intention for a second child within the Italian couples: A bargaining process approach Why not having another child? The economics of fertility intentions for individuals and couples in Italy: A mixed-method approach. Unpublished PhD thesis, Università Cattolica della Sacra Cuore, Milan.Google Scholar
  10. Cavalli, L. (2011). A qualitative analysis of the role of paid and unpaid jobs in a lowest low fertility context: The puzzling intention for a second child. Dondena working papers, 47. www.dondena.unibocconi.it/wp47
  11. Cavalli, L., & Klobas, J. (2013). How expected life and partner satisfaction affect women’s fertility outcomes: The role of uncertainty in intentions. Population Review, 52(2), http://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth=0&type=summary&url=/journals/population_review/v052/052.052.cavalli.html
  12. Dommermuth, L., Klobas, J., & Lappegård, T. (2011). Now or later? The theory of planned behavior and timing of fertility intentions. Advances in Life Course Research, 16(1), 42–53. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2011.01.002.
  13. Dommermuth, L., Lappegård, T., & Klobas, J. (2014). Differences in childbearing patterns by time frame of fertility intention: A study using survey and register data from Norway. Discussion Paper. Statistics Norway, Oslo.Google Scholar
  14. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  15. Iacovou, M., & Tavares, L. P. (2011). Yearning, learning, and conceding: Reasons men and women change their childbearing intentions. Population and Development Review, 37(1), 89–123. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2011.00391.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Johnson-Hanks, J., Bachrach, C. A., Morgan, S. P., & Kohler, H. P. (2011). Understanding family change and variation: Toward a theory of conjunctural action. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kapitány, B., & Spéder, Z. (2012). Realization, postponement or abandonment of childbearing intentions in four European countries. Population, 67(4), 599–630. doi: 10.1353/pop.2012.0022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Klobas, J. (2010). Social psychological influences on fertility intentions: A study of eight countries in different social, economic and policy contexts. Retrieved from http://www.oeaw.ac.at/vid/repro/assets/docs/TPB-model-fertility-intentions.pdf
  19. Klobas, J. (2011). The theory of planned behaviour as a model of reasoning about fertility decisions. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 9, 47–54. doi: 10.2307/41342802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Klobas, J., Philipov, D., & Marzi, M. (2011). How attitudes, perceived norms and perceived control influence couples’ decisions to have a child. REPRO project. http://vidrepro.oeaw.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/Couples.pdf
  21. Luci-Greulich, A., & Thévenon, O. (2014). Does economic advancement ‘Cause’ a re-increase in fertility? An empirical analysis for OECD countries (1960–2007). European Journal of Population/Revue européenne de Démographie, 1–35. doi: 10.1007/s10680-013-9309-2.
  22. Merz, E.-M., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2012). The attitude toward voluntary childlessness in Europe: Cultural and institutional explanations. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74(3), 587–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Miller, W. B. (2011a). Comparing the TPB and the T-D-I-B framework. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 9, 19–29. doi: 10.2307/41342799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Miller, W. B. (2011b). Differences between fertility desires and intentions: Implications for theory, research and policy. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 9, 75–98. doi: 10.2307/41342806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Miller, W. B., & Pasta, D. J. (1995). Behavioral intentions: Which ones predict fertility behavior in married couples. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 218–250.Google Scholar
  26. Morgan, S. P. (1981). Intention and uncertainty at later stages of childbearing: The United States 1965 and 1970. Demography, 18(3), 267–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Morgan, S. P. (1982). Parity-specific fertility intentions and uncertainty: The United States, 1970 to 1976. Demography, 19(3), 315–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Morgan, S. P., & Bachrach, C. (2011). Is the theory of planned behaviour an appropriate model for human fertility? Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 10(9), 11–18. doi: 10.1553/populationyearbook2011s11.
  29. Philipov, D. (2009). The effect of competing intentions and behaviour on short-term childbearing intentions and subsequent childbearing. European Journal of Population, 25(4), 525–548. doi: 10.1007/s10680-009-9197-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Philipov, D. (2011). Theories on fertility intentions: A demographer’s perspective. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 9, 37–45. doi: 10.2307/41342801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Philipov, D., Thévenon, O., Klobas, J., Bernardi, L., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2009). Reproductive decision-making in a macro-micro perspective (REPRO). State of the art review (European demographic research papers 2009, no. 1). Vienna: Vienna Institute of Demography.Google Scholar
  32. Rosina, A., & Testa, M. R. (2009). Couples’ first child intentions and disagreement: An analysis of the Italian case. European Journal of Population, 25(4), 487–502. doi: 10.1007/s10680-009-9188-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sobotka, T. (2008). Does persistent low fertility threaten the future of European populations? In J. Surkyn, P. DeBoosere, & J. Van Bavel (Eds.), Demographic challenges for the 21st century. A state of the art in demography (pp. 27–90). Brussels: Brussels University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Sobotka, T. (2011). Reproductive Decision-Making in a macro–micro perspective (REPRO): Synthesis and policy implications. European Demographic Research Papers, 4. http://www.oeaw.ac.at/vid/download/edrp_1_11.pdf
  35. Spéder, Z., et al. (2009). Completed comparative analysis of Bulgaria and Hungary: REPRO Project.Google Scholar
  36. Spéder, Z., et al. (2010). A summary of all findings in Work Package 4. REPRO Project. Retrieved from, http://vidrepro.oeaw.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/Summary_Realization.pdf
  37. Spéder, Z., & Kapitány, B. (2014). Failure to realize fertility intentions: A key aspect of the post-communist fertility transition. Population Research and Policy Review, 1–26. doi: 10.1007/s11113-013-9313-6.
  38. Testa, M. R. (2010). Child-number and child-timing intentions in a micro-macro European framework (European demographic research papers 2010–4). Vienna: Vienna Institute of Demography.Google Scholar
  39. Thomson, E. (1997). Couple childbearing desires, intentions, and births. Demography, 34(3), 343–354. doi: 10.2307/3038288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. United Nations. (2011). World fertility policies, wall chart, United Nations. Available from: http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/worldfertilitypolicies2011/wfpolicies2011.html
  41. Vikat, A., Beets, G., Billari, F. C., Bühler, C., Corijn, M., Désesquelles, A., Fokkema, T., MacDonald, A. L., Neyer, G. R., Pailhé, A., Pinnelli, A., Solaz, A., & Spéder, Z. (2005). Wave 1 questionnaire. In Generations & gender programme: Survey instruments (pp. 35–113). New York/Geneva: United Nations.Google Scholar
  42. Vikat, A., Spéder, Z., Beets, G., Billari, F. C., Bühler, C., Corijn, M., Désesquelles, A., Fokkema, T., Hoem, J. M., MacDonald, A., Neyer, G., Pailhé, A., Pinnelli, A., & Solaz, A. (2007). Generations and gender survey: Concept and design. In Generations & gender programme: Concepts and guidelines (pp. 1–32). New York/Geneva: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dimiter Philipov
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Jane E. Klobas
    • 3
    • 4
  • Aart C. Liefbroer
    • 5
    • 6
    • 7
  1. 1.Vienna Institute of DemographyViennaAustria
  2. 2.Wittgenstein Centre for Demography and Global Human Capital (OEAW-VID, IIASA, WU)ViennaAustria
  3. 3.Dondena Centre for Research on Social Dynamics, Centre for Arts, Science and KnowledgeBocconi UniversityMilanItaly
  4. 4.Murdoch UniversityPerthAustralia
  5. 5.Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic InstituteThe HagueThe Netherlands
  6. 6.University Medical Center GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands
  7. 7.VU University AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations