Fertility decline in the United States, 1850-1930: New evidence from complete-count datasets

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Between 1835 and 1935, total fertility in the United States fell from 7.0 to 2.1. new IPUMS complete-count microdata databases of the 1850, 1880, 1910, and 1930 US censuses allow us to study the fertility decline in more detail than previously possible. We construct comprehensive models of couples' fertility incorporating a wide variety of economic, social, cultural and familial factors, including measures of parental religiosity and kin availability outside of the household. The results indicate that while shifts in the occupational structure and increasing urbanisation of the population provide the most consistent and substantive contribution to fertility decline over the period, cultural and religious attitudes - as proxied by parents' nativities and child naming practices - played a major role in couples' childbearing decisions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)143-177
Number of pages35
JournalAnnales de Demographie Historique
Volume138
Issue number2
StatePublished - Apr 10 2020

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This paper was supported in part by funding from the Minnesota Population Center (P2C Hd04 1023) and through a grant from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver national Institute for Child Health and Human development (R01-Hd082120-01). We would like to thank the editors and anonymous referees for suggestions.

Funding Information:
This paper was supportedin part by funding from the MinnesotaPopulation Center (P2C Hd04 1023) and through agrant from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver national Institute for ChildHealth andHuman development (R01-Hd082120-01). We wouldlike to thank the editors andanonymous referees for suggestions.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Editions Belin et Herscher. All rights reserved.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Fertility decline in the United States, 1850-1930: New evidence from complete-count datasets'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this