title: A model comparison approach shows stronger support for economic models of fertility decline.
abstract: The demographic transition is an ongoing global phenomenon in which high fertility and mortality rates are replaced by low fertility and mortality. Despite intense interest in the causes of the transition, especially with respect to decreasing fertility rates, the underlying mechanisms motivating it are still subject to much debate. The literature is crowded with competing theories, including causal models that emphasize (i) mortality and extrinsic risk, (ii) the economic costs and benefits of investing in self and children, and (iii) the cultural transmission of low-fertility social norms. Distinguishing between models, however, requires more comprehensive, better-controlled studies than have been published to date. We use detailed demographic data from recent fieldwork to determine which models produce the most robust explanation of the rapid, recent demographic transition in rural Bangladesh. To rigorously compare models, we use an evidence-based statistical approach using model selection techniques derived from likelihood theory. This approach allows us to quantify the relative evidence the data give to alternative models, even when model predictions are not mutually exclusive. Results indicate that fertility, measured as either total fertility or surviving children, is best explained by models emphasizing economic factors and related motivations for parental investment. Our results also suggest important synergies between models, implicating multiple causal pathways in the rapidity and degree of recent demographic transitions.
authors: Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211-1440, USA. shenkm@missouri.edu
authors: Mary K
authors: MK
authors: Shenk
authors: Mary C
authors: MC
authors: Towner
authors: Howard C
authors: HC
authors: Kress
authors: Nurul
authors: N
authors: Alam
mesh_terms: D001459:Bangladesh; D001723:Birth Rate; D003466:Cultural Characteristics; D003710:Demography; D019049:Developed Countries; D005260:Female; D005298:Fertility; D006801:Humans; D008017:Life Expectancy; D008297:Male; D018803:Models, Economic; D009026:Mortality; D011153:Population; D011157:Population Dynamics; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors
references: Stud Fam Plann. 1994 Mar-Apr;25(2):65-76
references: 8059447
references: J Popul Econ. 1992 Aug;5(3):185-201
references: 12285413
references: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1998 Mar 29;353(1367):389-97
references: 9569432
references: Am J Hum Biol. 2002 Mar-Apr;14(2):168-83
references: 11891932
references: Am J Hum Biol. 2009 Jul-Aug;21(4):501-11
references: 19408251
references: Am Econ Rev. ;95(5):1653-72
references: 29125727
references: Am J Hum Biol. 2002 Mar-Apr;14(2):145-8
references: 11891930
references: Popul Stud (Camb). 2006 Jul;60(2):153-87
references: 16754250
references: Popul Res Policy Rev. 2001 Oct 1;20(5):365-396
references: 24648602
references: Trends Ecol Evol. 1998 Jul 1;13(7):266-70
references: 21238295
references: Demography. 1999 Feb;36(1):41-58
references: 10036592
references: Am J Hum Biol. 2002 Mar-Apr;14(2):149-67
references: 11891931
references: Demography. 1997 Nov;34(4):443-54
references: 9545624
references: Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2009 Apr;28(4):304-10
references: 19289979
references: Lancet. 2007 Jun 23;369(9579):2121-31
references: 17586307
references: Demography. 2001 Feb;38(1):43-58
references: 11227844
references: Cliometrica (Berl). 2012 Jan;6(1):1-28
references: 25089157
references: Popul Dev Rev. 2011;37(Suppl 1):81-112
references: 21280366
references: J Biosoc Sci. 2007 Mar;39(2):245-56
references: 16686965
references: Hum Nat. 1993 Mar;4(1):1-45
references: 24214292
references: Demography. 2011 Nov;48(4):1231-62
references: 22005884
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Jan 7;274(1606):121-5
references: 17134996
references: Health Transit Rev. 1996;6 Suppl:155-67
references: 10165304