Fertility Rates Around the World: A Cluster Analysis of Time Series Data from 1960 to 2013

Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)

Abstract

The entry of women into the labor market with an active and permanent presence is, today, a subject of a heated debate among scholars and policy makers that sees, on the one hand, diversity in gender relations and women’s employment and on the other hand the economic importance of women and increasing economic efficiency. At international level, greater economic and political role of women is recognized as a sign of economic vitality of the country. The increase in female education rates, the economic and cultural globalization, public policies favorable to families, and recent legislative impositions have enlivened this debate highlighting two crucial aspects: a greater integration of women meeting the equitable principles of equal opportunities and a greater integration of women responding to greater efficiency and economic growth. The main limitations and difficulties in the participation of women in the labor market are numerous and complex and often interconnected: direct discrimination, occupational segregation, stereotypes, conciliation of life and work, the service coverage rates, etc.

In this paper we use World Bank data on fertility rates around the world from 1960 to 2013, and we analyze the different time series related to fertility rates of different countries in order to detect different clusters. The classification of different countries considered in different clusters is performed by considering an appropriate clustering methodology and the dynamic time warping distance. At this point we interpret the different clusters in order to considering also the different labor markets and policies as a relevant determinant of the dynamic of the fertility rate over time and a relevant statistical reason of the formation of the cluster. The aim of this paper is to provide how and if greater attention to women considerations could lead to a greater understanding of the obstacles that prevent the full participation of women in the economy and in particular in the labor market. This recognition allows the creation of more targeted assistance programs to address these obstacles thus creating an environment for even better response from policy makers. This paper is organized as follows. In the first section, we present a recent review of the main literature on women in the labor market. The second section presents data. The third section presents the methodology used and the fourth all different statistical results. In the fifth section, we discuss all results obtained. Finally, we conclude.

Keywords

Economics of gender Econometrics Labor market Public policy Welfare economics 

References

  1. Ahn, N., & Mira, P. (2001). Job bust baby bust? Evidence from Spain. Journal of Population Economics, 14(3), 505–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker, G., & Lewis, H. G. (1973a). Interaction between quantity and quality of children. InEconomics of the family: Marriage, children, and human capital. Chicago, IL: Univeristy of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Becker, G., & Lewis, H. G. (1973b). On the interaction between the quantity and quality of children. Journal of Political Economy, 82, S279–S288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Becker, G. S. (1960). An economic analysis of fertility. InDemographic and economic change in developed countries. New York City, NY: Columbia University Press. isbn: 0-87014-302-6.Google Scholar
  5. Butz, W. P., & Ward, M. P. (1979a). The emergence of countercyclical U.S. fertility. The American Economic Review, 69(3), 318–328.Google Scholar
  6. Butz, W. P., & Ward, M. P. (1979b). The emergence of countercyclical US fertility American Economic Review, 69(3), 318–328.Google Scholar
  7. Coleman D. (2006). Immigration and Ethnic Change in Low-Fertility Countries: A Third Demographic Transition. Population and Development Review. Vol. 32, No. 3 (Sep., 2006), pp. 401–446.Google Scholar
  8. Del Boca, D. (2002). The effect of child care and part time opportunities on participation and fertility decision in Italy. Journal of Population Economics, 15, 549–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Devaney (1983B). An analysis of variation in U.S. fertility and female labor force participation trends. Demography, 20, 147–161.Google Scholar
  10. Dunn, J. (1974). Well separated clusters and optimal fuzzy partitions. Journal of Cybernetics, 4, 95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Engelhardt, H., Kogel, T., & Prskawetz A. (2001a). Fertility and Female Employment reconsidered. MPIDR Working Paper WP 2001-021 Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research.Google Scholar
  12. Engelhardt, H., Kogel, T., & Prskawetz, A. (2001b). Fertility and female employment reconsidered: A macro-level time series analysis. MPIDR Working Paper WP 2001-021, Rostock: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research. Devaney, 1983; Heckman and Walker, 1990.Google Scholar
  13. EU Report. (2012). The impact of economic crisis on the situation of women and men and on gender equality policies. InSynthesis report. isbn: 978-92-79-28680-3. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  14. Eurostat (2013). Fertility statistics in relation to economy, parity, education and migration”. ISSN:2314-9647Google Scholar
  15. Ferrera, M. (2008). Dal welfare state al welfare regions: la riconfigurazione spaziale della protezione sociale in Europa. In Rivista delle politiche sociali. Google Scholar
  16. Ghererghi, M., & Andlauro, C. (2004). Appunti di analisi dei dati multidimensionali: Metodologia ed esempi. RCE edizioni.Google Scholar
  17. Guinnane T. W. (2011). The Historical Fertility Transition: A Guide for Economists. Journal of Economic Literature. Vol. 49, No. 3, September 2011. (pp. 589–614).Google Scholar
  18. Heckman J., Walker J. (1990). The relationship between wages and income and timing and spacing of births: evidence from Swedish longitudinal data. Econometrics, 58, 1411–1441.Google Scholar
  19. ILO. (2014). The motherhood pay gap: A review of the issues, theory and international evidence. InConditions of work and employment series no. 57. Geneva: ILO.Google Scholar
  20. Klasen, S. (1999). Does gender inequality reduce growth and development? Evidence from cross-country regressions. Policy research report on gender and development working paper series, No. 7.Google Scholar
  21. Leibenstein, H. (1957). Economic Backwardness and Economic Growth, New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  22. Liao, T. W. (2005). Clustering of time series data—A survey. Pattern Recognition, 38(11), 1857–1874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Livi, B. M. (2017). Dobbiamo anticipare l’età dell’autonomia per i nostri giovani. In Corriere della Sera.Google Scholar
  24. Lutz, W., Skirbkk, V., & Testa, M. (2005). The Low Fertility trap hypothesis: Forces that may lead to further postponement and fewer births in Europe. In European Demographic Research Papers. Google Scholar
  25. Matsui, K. (2005). Womenonomics: Japan’ s hidden asset. In Goldms Sachs Japanese Portfolio Strategies. Google Scholar
  26. McKinsey Report (2015). The outlook for global growth in 2015.Google Scholar
  27. Morgan, S. P., & Taylor, M. G. (2006). Low fertility at the turn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Sociology, 32, 375–399. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.31.041304.122220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. OECD (2005). Women and Men in OECD countries.Google Scholar
  29. The Economist. (2006). A guide to womeconomics. The future of the world economy lies increasingly in female hands. Google Scholar
  30. UNAIDS. (2012). Impact of the global economic crisis on women, girls and gender equality. isbn: 978-92-9173-989-9.Google Scholar
  31. United Nations (2010). Human Development Report 2010 20th Anniversary Edition. The Real Wealth of Nations: Pathways to Human Development.Google Scholar
  32. Willis, R. (1973a). A new approach to the economic theory of fertility behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 81(2), S14–S64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Willis, R. J. (1973b). A new approach to the economic theory of fertility behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 81(2), 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wittemberg-Cox, C. A., & Maitlan, A. (2009). Rivoluzione Womenomics. Perchè le donne sono il motore dell’economia, Gruppo 24ore.Google Scholar
  35. World Bank (2015). World Development Report: Mind, Society, and behaviorGoogle Scholar
  36. World Bank (2016) World Development Indicators. http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-developmentindicators
  37. World Economic Forum (2015). The Global Gender Gap ReportGoogle Scholar
  38. Zhao, Y., & Cen, Y. (Eds.). (2013). Data mining applications with R. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press, Elsevier. isbn: 978-0-12-411511-8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Rome “Niccolò’ Cusano”RomeItaly
  2. 2.Faculty of Business and LawKore University of EnnaEnnaItaly

Personalised recommendations