international conference

International conference Соціально-демографічні зрушення: чинники та перспективи,

17-18 грудня 2013 року, Київ, Україна

Sociodemographic differences of fertility intentions in Lithuania in the context of low fertility and

economic instability

Vlada StankūnienėDemographic Research Centre,Vytautas Magnus University, Kaunas, Lithuania andLithuanian Social Research Centre

STATISTICAL DATA: Lithunian statistics Human fertility data base EUROSTAT

SURVEYS: Main (international): Generations and Gender Survey, 1st wave (GGS1), Lithuania, 2006

Generations and Gender Survey, 2nd wave (GGS2), Lithuania 2009

Additional/ comparative: International: Fertility and Family Survey (FFS), Lithuania, 1994/95

Population Policy Acceptance Study (PPA), in Lithuania 2001

National: Needs of Family Policy (FP), 2010

DATA, SOURCES

SURVEYS:

18-49 Total

FP, 2010 1000 1000

GGS2, Lithuania 2009 5000 8000

GGS1, Lithuania, 2006 6300 10000

PPA, in Lithuania 2001 900 1500

FFS, Lithuania, 1994/95 5000 5000

DATA, SOURCES, No

1

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2

2,2

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Source: Lithuanian statistics

TOTAL FERTILITY RATE, Lithuania, 1990-2012

1

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2

2,2

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2,1

1,5

1,3



TOTAL FERTILITY RATE: Eastern and Central European countries

Sources: Eurostat 2010; Federal 2010; Naselenie 1988; Otchiot 2009; Recent 2004; State 2010; Demografijos, 2013

PTFR

1,00

1,20

1,40

1,60

1,80

2,00

2,20

2,40

2,60

19

85

19

86

19

87

19

88

19

89

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

Czech R.

Estonia

Hungary

Latvia

Lithuania

Romania

Poland

Slovak R.

Slovenia

Belorussia

Russia

Ukraine

Bulgaria

RF

LF

LLF

Sources: Eurostat 2010; Federal 2010; Naselenie 1988; Otchiot 2009; Recent 2004; State 2010; Statistikos 2011

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

19

60

19

62

19

64

19

66

19

68

19

70

19

72

19

74

19

76

19

78

19

80

19

82

19

84

19

86

19

88

19

90

19

92

19

94

19

96

19

98

20

00

20

02

20

04

20

06

20

08

Austrija

Danija

Prancūzija

V.Vokietija

Nyderlandai

Švedija

D.Britanija

Graikija

Italija

Portugalija

Ispanija

Suomija

Belgija

LiuksemburgasLietuva

RG

ŽG

ŽŽG

PSGR TOTAL FERTILITY RATE: Western European countriesPTFR

X

1

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2

2,2

2,4

2,6

2,8

1960

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

Source: Lithuanian statistics; Human fertility data base


FDT, end

SDT, beginning

2-2,2

X

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

1960 1975 1990

A


Age-specific fertility rates, Lithuania

X

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

1990 2005

B



0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

1990 2005 2012

B



1990

1995

2005

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

2005

2012

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49


Age-specific fertility rates, Lithuania, 1990-2012

22

23

24

25

26

27

1,0

1,1

1,2

1,3

1,4

1,5

1,6

1,7

1,8

1,9

2,0

2,1

199

01

99

11

99

21

99

31

99

41

99

51

99

61

99

71

99

81

99

92

00

02

00

12

00

22

00

32

00

42

00

52

00

62

00

72

00

82

00

92

01

02

01

12

01

2

Me

an a

ge

at firs

t b

irth

Toa

tal

fert

ility

ra

te

TFR MAB1


Total fertility rate and mean age at first birth

1

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2

2,2

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

TFR adjTFR

Source: Human fertility data base; Bongaarts,Feeney, 2010, 1998

Total fertility rate and adjusted total fertility rate

X

1,7

1,75

1,8

1,85

1,9

1,95

2

2,05

2,1

2,15

19

95

20

01

20

06

20

09

20

10

Have children Total

Desired

Sources: FFS, GGS_2006, GGS_2009, PPA_2001; FP_2010

Desired number of children

18-49

1,7

1,75

1,8

1,85

1,9

1,95

2

2,05

2,1

2,15

2001

2006

2009

2010

Have children All respondents

Intended to have

Sources: GGS_2006, GGS_2009, PPA_2001; FP_2010

Fertility intentions

18-49

1,7

1,75

1,8

1,85

1,9

1,95

2

2,05

2,1

2,15

19

95

20

01

20

06

20

09

20

10

Have children Total

Desired

1,7

1,75

1,8

1,85

1,9

1,95

2

2,05

2,1

2,15

20

01

20

06

20

09

20

10

Have children All respondents

Intended to have

Sources: FFS, GGS_2006, GGS_2009, PPA_2001; FP_2010

Number of children: desired and intended to have

18-49 X

Sociodemographic differences of fertility intentions (1)

I. Sociodemographic differences of fertility intentions by gender:

Differences between fertility intentions of men and women are considerable different

Changes of fertility intentions trajectory in economic fluctuation are different

II. Sociodemographic differences of fertility intentions by age:

Decline in fertility intention among youngest is more evident (men and women).

During economic decline reaction of youngest (men/women) is most expressed

III. Sociodemographic differences of fertility intentions by education:

Highest fertility intentions among the men with university education.

Fertility intentions of men with higher education are not affected even by economic fluctuations

Among women, differences of fertility intentions by education is not very expressed even in economic downturn

Sociodemographic differences of fertility intentions (2)

IV. Sociodemographic differences of fertility intentions by employment:

Fertility intentions of employed men are highest irrespective of the economic situation

Among women, differences of fertility intentions by employment status is not very expressed even during economic fluctiuations

V. Sociodemographic differences of fertility intentions by residence:

The highest differences (men/ women, especially men) are by residence

Vilnius, capital of Lithuania stands out, conspicuously, by the highest fertility intention indicators (men/ women).

Sub-populations of small and middle towns are most affected by unfavourable conditions especially in economic instability

1,73

1,91,84

1

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2

2,2

2006 2009 2010

20-29 30-3940-49 Total

Males

1,831,87

1,91

1

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2

2,2

2006 2009 2010

20-29 30-3940-49 Total

Females

Sources: GGS_2006, GGS_2009, FP_2010

Fertility intentions: number of children by age of respondent

20-49

1,96

1,83

1,58

1,83

1,58

2,00

1,95

1,88

1,61

1,0

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2,0

2,2

2006 2009 2010

Higher SeconduryLower sec.

Males

1,74

1,80

2,02

1,85

1,87

1,93

1,92

1,0

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2,0

2,2

2006 2009 2010Higher Secondury

Lower sec.

Females


Fertility intentions: number of children by education of respondent

20-49

Fertility intentions: number of children by employment of respondent

20-49

1.75

1.57

1.45

1.911.93

1.65

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

2.2

2006 2009 2010

Employed Unemployed

Males

1.72

1.75 1.7

1.82 1.9

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

2.2

2006 2009 2010

Employed Unemployed

Females

2,12

1,75

1,62

1,44

1,93

1,85

1,77

2,02

2,19

1,78

1,74

1,8

1

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2

2,2

2006 2009 2010

Vilnius >100 tūkst.

10-100 tūkst. <10 tūkst.

Males

2,02

1,75 1,73

1,81

1,74

1,53

1,9

2,05

2,16

1,66

2,05

2,07

1

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2

2,2

2006 2009 2010

Vilnius >100 tūkst.

10-100 tūkst. <10 tūkst.

FemalesVilnius


Fertility intentions: number of children by residence of respondent

20-49

2,01

1,91

1,77

2,10 2,06

1,84

1,0

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2,0

2,2

2006 2009 2010

Married In cohabit.

Men

1,991,97

1,85

2,082,03

1,95

1,0

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2,0

2,2

2006 2009 2010

Married In cohabit.

Women

Fertility intentions: number of children by marital status of respondent

20-49 X

Factors

Odds ratio Exp(B)

2006 2009

Men Women Men Women

Age

20-24 1 1 1 1

25-29 0,536** 0,761 0,572* 0,428**

30-34 0,205*** 0,202*** 0,267*** 0,133***

35–39 0,070*** 0,045*** 0,063*** 0,042***

Education

Higher 1 1 1 1

Secondary 1,036 0,819 1,314 0,537**

Lower than secondary 0,676 1,208 0,415** 0,369

Residence

>10 000 1 1 1 1

10 001–100 000 1,032 0,603 0,775 0,892

100 001–500 000 1,182 0,958 0,616* 0,792

Vilnius 3,733*** 5,356*** 1,892* 2,278*

Estimations of household’s total monthly income: is household able to make ends meet

Very easily + easily 0,879 0,836 1,892 1,503

Fairly easily 1,327 0,604 2,541*** 1,133

With some difficulty1,164 0,476

*1,529 1,292

With great difficulty + with difficulty 1 1 1 1

Significance level: * 5 (per 100), ** 1 (per 100) ir *** 1 (per 1000).

Factors of intentions to have two children. 20-39 years old childless respondents

Highest differences:

By residence – men/women

By education – men

Wellbeing of household -men

-24

-19

-14

-9

-4

1

6

11

16

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

GD

P (

%)

1,00

1,20

1,40

1,60

1,80

2,00

2,20

To

tal f

ert

ility

ra

te

GDP (%) PTFR


Dynamic of total fertility rate and change of gross domestic product

THANK YOU FOR ATTENTION

international conference

Documents