Fertility, ethnicity and religion: recent trends in the UK · PDF fileWhy fertility estimates by ethnic and religious groups? how ethnicity and religion may impact on fertility? social

Sylvie DubucUPTAP workshop, Leeds, 23-25 of March 2009

Fertility, ethnicity and religion: recent trends in the UK

General project

Demographic characteristics by ethnic and religious groups

& projections

with D. Coleman (co-I)

Why fertility estimates by ethnic and religious groups?

how ethnicity and religion may impact on fertility?social and cultural composition of the UK population,changes and future expectationsTo develop plausible fertility assumptions for population projection models

No direct methods available

Fertility, ethnicity and religion: recent trends in the UK

Ethnic groups show differences in fertility

For the UK, fertility rates by ethnic groups up to 2001 need to create / update existing rates, inter-censuses rates

Religious affiliation may support childbearing (norms supporting childbearing, rejecting contraception/abortion)

No estimates available by religious groups for the UK Few reports on fertility estimates by religion (e.g. for Austria (Goujon et al.2005,), for Europe (Kaufman, 2007)

Introduction

Here LFS data (2001-2006) is used togetherwith the Own Child Method to producefertility estimates by ethnic and religiousgroups from 1987 to 2006 at national level.

Ethnic and religious groupof the mother only2001 census definitions (LFS 2001 to 2006)

Introduction

Outline

The OCM and method refinements

TFR trends and ASFRs patterns by ethnic groups, 1987-2006.Is there convergence between ethnic groups?

UK born and foreign born, impact on fertility.Does country of up-bringing impact on reproductive

behaviour?

TFR by religious groups.Does religion matter?

Introduction

Own Child Method

LFS data, household survey, yearlySurveys pooled across yearsMatching children to mothers within household Allowing reverse survival calculations

15 years estimates (14 prior to the survey)

Berthoud, 2001; Coleman and Smith,2005

UK total fertility 1961 - 2006, from own-child method and vital registration

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.5019

61

1963

1965

1967

1969

1971

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

UK total fertility own-childUK total fertility vital registration

Figure 1. Total fertility from own-child method from LFS compared with ONS registration statistics, 1961 - 2006

Total Period Fertility Rate (TFR)Good agreement of ONS data with LFS-OCM data

Total Period Fertility Rate is the average number of children that women would have if they experienced the ASFRs for a particular year throughout their childbearing lives

TFR

Refined Own Child Method Retro-correction for mortalityReverse survival table

using the ONS England & Wales death ratesby age and sex between 1986 and 2006.

Matching children to women within family unit instead of household to minimise possible mismatching

Correct for small underestimationsVariation 1.25% for all women 2000-20060.37% due to mortality correctionunderestimation vary across groups (1 to 2.7%)

Total Period Fertility rate by ethnic group, 1987-2006

Fertility trends by ethnicity

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

TFR

WbritishWotherCaribbeanBafricanIndianPakistaniBangladeshiChinese

1987-2006 ALL UK TFR: 1.78

Fertility estimates for women of mixed origin

Small numbersMixed population: majority children

Group Period TFR CI95%

UL CI95%

LL Group Period TFR CI95%

UL CI95%

LL Mix-Africa 1987-2006 Mix-Asia 1987-2006 Mix-Carib 1987-2006 Mix-Other 1987-2006 Mix-Total 1987-2006

1.640 1.915 1.3661.659 1.870 1.4481.949 2.155 1.7431.460 1.668 1.2511.724 1.837 1.612

Mix-Africa 1987-2006 Mix-Asia 1987-2006 Mix-Carib 1987-2006 Mix-Other 1987-2006 Mix-Total 1987-2006

1.640 1.915 1.3661.659 1.870 1.4481.949 2.155 1.7431.460 1.668 1.2511.724 1.837 1.612

WBritish

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-49Age group of mothers

WBritish

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-4915-19

25-2920-24

30-3435-39

40-4445-49

Age group of mothers

WOther

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-49 Age group of mothers

WOther

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-4915-19

25-2920-24

30-3435-39

40-4445-49 Age group of mothers

Delayed childbearing

Age Specific Fertility Rates of women by ethnicity

1987-19971998-2006

White other UK-born versus foreign born

White Other foreign-born women

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

White Other UK-born women

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

1987-19971998-2006

immigration and

delayed childbearing

(2/3 in 2002-2006)

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-49Age group of mothers15-19

25-2920-24

30-3435-39

40-4445-49

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-49Age group of mothers

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-49Age group of mothers15-19

25-2920-24

30-3435-39

40-4445-49

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-49Age group of mothers

Indian

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-49Age group of mothers

Indian

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-4915-19

25-2920-24

30-3435-39

40-4445-49Age group of mothers

Fertility decrease and delayed childbearing

1987-19971998-2006

Age Specific Fertility Rates of women by ethnicity

Bangladeshi

020406080

100120140160180200220240

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-49 Age group of mothers

Bangladeshi

020406080

100120140160180200220240

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-4915-19

25-2920-24

30-3435-39

40-4445-49 Age group of mothers

Pakistani

020406080

100120140160180200220

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-49Age group of mothers

Pakistani

020406080

100120140160180200220

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-4915-19

25-2920-24

30-3435-39

40-4445-49Age group of mothers

Fall in fertilityat all ages

Age Specific Fertility Rates of women by ethnicity

UK-born Indian women: 5 years ASFRs

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1987-19971998-2006

Age group of mothers

Birt

hs p

er 1

,000

wom

en

Delayed fertility of the Indian UK-born…

Indian

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Bir

ths

per 1

,000

wom

en

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-49Age group of mothers

Indian

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Bir

ths

per 1

,000

wom

en

15-1925-29

20-2430-34

35-3940-44

45-4915-19

25-2920-24

30-3435-39

40-4445-49Age group of mothers

Fertility and religion

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Christian No religion Muslim Hindu Sikh Jew Other Not stated

Religion

TFR

TFR average 1988-2006 by religious groups

TFR for Indian ethnic group by main religious denomination**Only the main religious groups are represented

Period All Muslim Indian Muslim 1988-1997 3.1 2.9 1998-2006 3.0 2.2

Comparison of TFR for All Muslim with Indian Muslim, 1988-2006

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Hindu Sikh Muslim

TFR 1988-1997

1998-2006

50% 28% 13% % of Indian women (15-49 yrs) in 2006

Crossing Indian ethnicity and religion

Conclusions (Method, Religion)

LFS-OCM has been refined and provides goodestimates for inter census fertility rates by ethnic andreligious groups.

Differences exist in the TFR by religious groupsNo evidence for Christian faith supporting higher fertility compared to non–religious.

Recent relatively low TFR of Indian Muslim compared to all Muslim women, suggests ethnicity more than religion influences fertility behaviour.

socio-economic differences by ethnicity within Muslim group?Cultural influence of the region of origin (of immigrant generation) on fertility behaviour independent of the religious affiliation?Difference in the duration of settlement?

Conclusions (ethnicity)

Converging TFR between ethnic groups, albeit atdifferent speeds.

Preliminary results for UK-born women by ethnicityfurther support the “converging trends” hypothesis.

Ethnic fertility assumptions: with stable flow of migration by ethnic groups the UK-bornproportion of the main ethnic minorities will increasepreliminary results of fertility estimates by UK-born womensuggest that less differences across groups (migration beenconstant) should be expected in the future decades.

Finalise the fertility estimates by ethnicity & by religious denominationsExplore other sources

Other components of population projection modelsBase population by sub-group Mortality Estimation of migration flows by ethnic groups

Run projections

Ongoing and future work

Thank you

[email protected]