Factors Contributing to Unfulfilment of and Changes in Fertility Intentions in Czechia
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6012505 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Hana Hašková (0000-0002-3708-5816, Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Sociology), Kristýna Pospíšilová (0000-0001-6788-5980, Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Sociology) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 9 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 15-34 |
| Publication date | 2019-09-02 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Anthropological Researches and Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2360-3445 • E-ISSN: 2360-3445 |
| Publisher | Anthropological Researches and Studies (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.26758/9.1.2 |
| OpenAlex | W2972148930 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 12 |
Objectives. Achieved fertility is lower than intended fertility in Europe. The factors contributing to this mismatch are thus an important research topic. The objective of this study is to identify the factors that contribute to the unfulfilment of short-term fertility intentions and to changes in the intended number of children to improve our understanding of the mismatch between achieved and intended fertility in Czechia. Material and methods. Binary logistic regression is applied to data on people aged 18-45 from two waves of the Generations and Gender Survey from 2005 and 2008 to explore what factors contribute to the unfulfilment of short-term fertility intentions, and to the Life Course 2010 data on people aged 25-60 from 2010 to identify what factors contribute to changes in the intended number of children. Descriptive statistics show the most cited reasons for the downward or upward changes in fertility intentions. Results. The results show the importance of gender, partner, age, cohort, and the two-child norm for the chance that short-term fertility intentions will be left unfulfilled and the chance that people will change the number of children they plan to have. The results confirm that short-term fertility intentions are predictors of fertility behaviour, and labour market instability and siblings are factors that influence the number of children a person intends to have. Economic conditions, health, and the absence of a partner are the main reasons given to explain downward changes in the number of children people plan to have, while a change of values / new experiences and the influence of one‘s partner explain upward changes. Conclusions. This study contributes to existing knowledge by testing factors associated with both, the fulfilment of short-term fertility intentions and changes in lifetime fertility intentions. They are rarely analysed together, although they both contribute to the postponement of childbearing and the mismatch between intended and achieved fertility
Cohort · Descriptive statistics · Fertility · Logistic regression · Norm (philosophy · Political science · Population · Sociology · Statistics · Term (time · Demographic Trends and Gender Preferences · Demography · Family Dynamics and Relationships · Intergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving · Mathematics · Medicine · Psychology · Social Psychology
Parenting intentions and desires among childless lesbian, gay, and heterosexual individuals.
Bringing norms back in
How are Time-Dependent Childbearing Intentions Realized? Realization, Postponement, Abandonment, Bringing Forward
Racing Against the Biological Clock? Childbearing and Sterility Among Men and Women in Second Unions in France
Channels of Social Influence on Reproduction
Couple childbearing desires, intentions, and births
The evolution of fertility expectations over the life course
Who Remains Childless? Unrealized Fertility Plans in Hungary
The Correspondence Between Fertility Intentions and Behavior in the United States
Two Is Best? The Persistence of a Two‐Child Family Ideal in Europe
Economic Recession and Fertility in the Developed World
Institutions and Discourses on Childcare for Children Under the Age of Three in a Comparative French-Czech Perspective
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,17 |
| Citation span | 2020 - 2020 (1) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |