declines in aggregate Turkish fertility also in the near future

417 Pages·2008·6.06 MB·English

by  Sutay Yavuz

HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF POPULATION STUDIES
Economic and Social Demography Program

FERTILITY DECLINE IN TURKEY FROM THE 1980s
ONWARDS: PATTERNS BY MAIN LANGUAGE GROUPS

SUTAY YAVUZ

Dissertation Submitted In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
In Economic and Social Demography

ANKARA, FEBRUARY 2008
HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF POPULATION STUDIES
Economic and Social Demography Program

FERTILITY DECLINE IN TURKEY FROM THE 1980s
ONWARDS: PATTERNS BY MAIN LANGUAGE GROUPS

Supervisor
Assoc. Prof. TURGAY ÜNALAN
Assoc. Prof. GUNNAR ANDERSSON

ANKARA, FEBRUARY 2008
ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL
This is to certify that we have read and examined this thesis and that in our opinion it
is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy in Economic and Social Demography.
Examining Committee Members
Member (Supervisor): …………………………………………
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Turgay Ünalan, Hacettepe University, Institute of Population
Studies
Member (Chair): ………………………………………………
Prof. Dr. Ahmet İçduygu, Koç University, College of Administrative Sciences and
Economics, Department of International Relations
Member: ………………………………………………………
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Banu Ergöçmen, Hacettepe University, Institute of Population
Studies
Member: ………………………………………………………
Assoc. Prof. Dr. İsmet Koç, Hacettepe University, Institute of Population Studies
Member: ………………………………………………………
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ayşe Gündüz-Hoşgör, Middle East Technical University, Faculty of
Art and Sciences, Department of Sociology
This thesis has been accepted by the above-signed members of the Committee and
has been confirmed by the Administrative Board of the Institute of Population
Studies, Hacettepe University
Date:
…………………….
Prof. Dr. Sabahat Tezcan
Director
i

ABSTRACT

Turkey entered into the last phase of its demographic transition since the
1980s, with a wide regional disparity ranging from east to west. The purpose of this
thesis is to examine recent fertility decline and differentials by main language groups
in Turkey from a birth order perspective. The study aims to identify different groups
in the fertility decline process: the pioneers and the laggards. The empirical part of
the study is based on recent approaches and methods of causal analysis and has
exploited information provided by the latest ‘Turkey Demographic and Health
Survey-2003 (TDHS-2003)’.
The analysis has shown that the propensity for first time motherhood has
been declining since the 1980s. However, the duration between first marriage and
first birth did not notably change. The period effects in the quantum and tempo of
fertility are clearly visible at the second and higher birth orders. There has already
been a substantial decline in the transition to third and fourth births and the
postponement has begun to emerge in the transition from first to second birth as well.
Parity progression intensities of Turkish speaking mothers are lower than Kurdish
speaking mothers which implies that the fertility decline started much later for the
latter group. The study points out important distinctions according to different groups
of women in the contemporary fertility decline. Highly educated Turkish speaking
women appear to be pioneers of very low fertility behavior, whereas Kurdish
speaking women who don’t know Turkish constitutes the laggards in the fertility
transition.
A combination of individual socioeconomic and socio-cultural factors is
necessary but not sufficient to explain the fertility decline process and differential
fertility behavior between the two mother tongue groups in Turkey. The study
suggests that the fertility transition in Turkey can be attributed to both structural
changes in society and a diffusion process of modern parity-specific fertility
limitation, via the Turkish language.
ii
ÖZET

Türkiye 1980’lerden sonra, doğu batı doğrultusundaki büyük farklılıklar
devam etmekle birlikte, doğurganlık geçişinin son aşamasına girmiştir. Bu tezin
amacı Türkiye’de ana dil gruplarına göre doğurganlıkta yakın zaman içinde
gerçekleşen azalma ve farklılıkları doğum sırası yaklaşımı ile incelemektir. Çalışma,
doğurganlığın düşüş sürecine öncülük eden ve bu süreçte geride kalan farklı grupları
belirlemeyi hedeflemektedir. Çalışmanın ampirik bölümünde en güncel nedensellik
araştırması yaklaşım ve yöntemleri, ‘2003 Türkiye Nüfus ve Sağlık Araştırması
(TNSA-2003)’ verisine uygulanmıştır.
Analiz, 1980’lerden beri ilk defa anne olma hızının azalmakta olduğunu
göstermiştir. Buna karşın, ilk evlenme ve ilk doğum arasındaki sürede önemli bir
değişim gerçekleşmemiştir. Doğurganlığın kuatum ve tempo boyutları üzerinde
dönem etkileri ikinci ve daha üst sıralardaki doğumlarda açık bir biçimde
gözlenmektedir. Üçüncü ve dördüncü doğumlara geçiş hızları önemli derecede
azalırken, ilk doğumdan ikinci doğuma geçiş süresi uzamaktadır. Türkçe konuşan
annelerin bir sonraki doğuma geçiş hızları Kürtçe konuşan annelere göre daha
düşüktür. Bu durum, doğurganlığın düşmesinin ikinci grupta çok daha sonra
başladığı anlamına gelmektedir. Çalışma yakın zamandaki doğurganlığın düşmesinde
önemli derecede farklılık gösteren grupları işaret etmektedir. Yüksek eğitimli Türkçe
konuşan kadınlar düşük düzey doğurganlık davranışının öncüleri olarak görülürken,
Kürtçe konuşan ve Türkçe bilmeyen kadınlar doğurganlık geçişinde geride kalan
grubu teşkil etmektedirler.
Türkiye’deki doğurganlığın düşmesi ve ana dil gruplarına göre farklılıkların
açıklanmasında bireylerin sosyoekonomik ve sosyokültürel özelliklerinin
bileşenlerinin incelenmesi gerekli fakat yetersiz bir yaklaşım olacaktır. Türkiye’de
doğurganlık geçişinin açıklanmasında hem yapısal değişimlerin etkisi hem de doğum
sayısına bağlı doğurganlığı sınırlama davranışının Türkçe vasıtasıyla yayılmasının
etkisi göz önünde tutulmalıdır.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all those who gave me the
possibility to complete this study. There are many people who contributed to my
work at different stages with their support, patience and understanding, all of which
made the outcome worthwhile.
At first, I want to thank to Hacettepe University, Institute of Population
Studies (HUIPS) for giving me the opportunity to commence and finish this thesis.
My first encounter with the HUIPS goes back to summer of 1998 when I had the
chance to join the research group of the ‘1998 Turkey Demographic and Health
Survey’ (TDHS-1998) project. After having a three-week intensive training course, I
worked nearly two months as a ‘field editor’ in the eastern region of Turkey. This
first fieldwork experience was so exciting and stimulating that I decided to follow a
career as an academician; specifically, a demographer. The next year, I registered in
the masters program of the institute and start to work as a research assistant. Having
completed the M.A. program in mid-2002, I decided to enroll in the doctoral
program at HUIPS.
I would like to express my gratitude to all the lecturers at HUIPS for my
initial training in demography. Besides taking courses, I took part in different survey
projects between 2000 and 2005. I had the chance to take part in the ‘2003 Turkey
Demographic and Health Survey’ (TDHS-2003) project from beginning to end.
During its fieldwork, I worked as a ‘field supervisor’ in the southern region of
Turkey. The work was a very exciting experience because I was aware that I could
use the data for my PhD dissertation.
By the time I began the doctoral program at HUIPS, one of my colleagues,
Elif Kurtuluş Yiğit, drew my attention to the interesting courses offered by the
‘International Max Planck Research School for Demography (IMPRSD)’ in
Rostock,Germany. I applied to this school three times—for the 2002/2003,
2004/2005 and 2005/2006 winter semesters—and each time my applications were
accepted. Starting from September 2005, I was accepted as a PhD student at the
iv
‘Laboratory of Contemporary European Fertility and Family Dynamics’ (Division 2),
where I completed this dissertation. My gratitude goes to two directors here. First, I
owe my thanks to Proff. Dr. Sabahat Tezcan, director of HUIPS, for allowing me to
use official vacations during the first two winter semesters. Second, I give my
thankfullness to Proff. Dr. Jan Hoem, director of ‘Max Planck Institute for
Demographic Research (MPIDR)’, for accepting me into the winter schools and,
later, to Division 2.
During the winter semesters, I took several courses and seminars on recent
developments in demopraphy in Rostock and Stockholm. Students were often
required to write a mini-project to complete their courses at IMPRSD. The time and
effort I spent on finishing mini-projects became the driving force of my academic
progress. While producing these papers, I actually developed the core structure of the
dissertation. The material I produced also helped me to give several presentations,
publish two working papers and one peer-reviewed research article.
From the beginning of my first stay in MPIDR, I was fortunate to meet and
work with distinguished demographers and friends. At first, I should mention my
supervisor and friend Assoc. Proff. Dr. Gunnar Andersson. I find myself one of the
luckiest PhD students in the institute for taking his courses and for his supervision. I
am deeply indebted to Gunnar for his stimulating suggestions, insightful comments,
editorial help, positive thinking and encouragement throughout the time I spent
researching and writing this thesis. My appreciation also goes to Proff. Dr. Jan
Hoem, Gerda Ruth Neyer, Michaela Kreyenfeld and Laura Bernardi. Their lectures
and suggestions enriched my demographic knowledge and scientific reasoning.
At different stages of my work, I presented my study at team meetings of
Division 2. The members of the team changed over time, though enthusiasm of the
group remained high. I want to give thanks to all the colleagues who were ready to
read and discuss different stages of my work; Annett Fleischer, Avia Jasilioniene,
Cordula Zabel, David Alich, Dora Kostava, Dorothea Rieck, Hill Kulu, Karin
Böttcher, Katja Köppen, and who all gave me a lot of helpful comments.
v
During my stay as a PhD fellow in Rostock, I met many promising young
people from different countries who supported me with their friendship. From the
beginning of my stay at MPIDR, I was fortunate to have friendly officemates. I
always enjoyed the pleasant company of Maggie, Laura, Setsuya, Cordula, David
and Sunnee during my stay in the East Wing. I owe thanks especially to David for his
patience and help with all sorts of practical problems I had in Rostock and to Sunnee
for her encouragement and language editing of the thesis. I have to express my
gratitute to Domantas whom has offered his warm friendship whenever I went
through difficulty. I want to thank Anna, Avia, Camarda, Caroline, Dora, Elke, Eleni,
Harald, Michelle, Nadja, Nuria, Sabine, Samuel, Trifon, Tiziana, Uta, and also all
other colleagues with whom we had good times for the countless talks, lunches,
dinners, table tennis matches, bike trips, parties, movie-nights, picnics and journeys.
Moreover, I wish to express my gratitude to all the administrative staff of the
institute for their research support, especially Birgit Moeller and Brigitte Daebeler
for all the times I needed their skilful secretarial support.
This study was carried out as a collaborative work between the two institutes.
I wish to extend my thanks and appreciation to Assoc. Proff. Dr. Turgay Ünalan,
who supervised the dissertation at HUIPS. At various stages of my work I also
received helpful comments and ideas from Assoc. Proff. Dr. İsmet Koç and Mehmet
Ali Eryurt. Yadigar Çoşkun and Şebnem Canpolat offered me ‘logistic’ help by
sending various documents.
Finally, my thanks and gratitude goes to my family members. They have
always supported me in various ways during my stay in Ankara and Rostock. I send
my love and gratitude, especially to my parents and my aunt Filiyet for their
continual devotion from the beginning of my life.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT............................................................................................................. i
ÖZET……................................................................................................................ ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...................................................................................... iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS....................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................. ix
LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................ xii
I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................... 1
I.1.RESEARCH AIMS AND RELEVANCE OF THE TOPIC......................... 3
I.2.ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS........................................................... 6
II. GLOBAL DEMOGRAPHIC AND FERTILITY TRANSITION................. 9
III. THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO FERTILITY TRANSITION AND
25
DIFFERENTIALS..................................................................................................
III.1. DEMOGRAPHIC TRANSITION THEORY............................................ 25
III.1.a. Early literature: the idea of ‘demographic transition’.……………... 27
III.1.b. Early literature: the seminal ideas on causes of the fertility decline.. 37
III.1.c. Classical demographic transition theory............................................ 45
III.2. ECONOMIC APPROACHES...............................................................… 62
III.2.a. The classical framework on the relationship between women’s
income and fertility decisions………………………………………………. 63
III.2.b. A synthesis of demographic, sociological and economic
perspectives…………………………………………………………………. 68
III.3. INSTITUTIONAL AND CULTURAL APPROACHES.......................... 81
III.3.a. Cultural dimensions of education and fertility relationship…..…..… 92
III.3.b. Modernization of family-oriented institutions and low fertility…...... 94
III.4. INNOVATION AND DIFFUSION APPROACHES……………….…... 101
III.4.a. Two versions of the diffusion theory…………..……….……..…….. 102
III.4.b. The role of social interaction ………....………..……….……….….. 106
III.5. ETHNICITY AND FERTILITY IN DEMOGRAPHIC STUDIES.......... 113
III.5.a. The ethnicity concept in demographic studies ……..….………...…. 113
III.5.b. Explanations of the fertility differences between majority and
minority groups……………………………………………………………... 123
IV. DEMOGRAPHIC AND FERTILITY TRANSITION IN TURKEY......... 133
IV.1. THE FIRST STAGE: FROM THE 1920s TO THE 1950s.……..……... 135
IV. 1.a. Pro-natalist population policy… ………….………………….……. 139
IV. 1.b. Republican reforms …………………….….………………………. 140
vii
IV.2. THE SECOND STAGE: FROM THE 1950s TO THE BEGINNING
OF THE 1980s.................................................................................................... 143
IV. 2.a. Anti-natalist population policy… ………………………….………. 144
IV. 2.b. The onset of the nation-wide fertility decline ………………………147
V. THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENTS IN TURKEY
FROM THE 1980s ONWARDS............................................................................ 161
V.1. GENERAL TREND IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT........................ 161
V.2. LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION AND EDUCATION....................... 164
V.3. UNEMPLOYMENT.................................................................................. 172
V.4. HOUSEHOLD INCOME DISTRIBUTION AND CONSUMPTION...... 174
VI. MAIN LANGUAGE GROUPS IN TURKEY............................................... 177
VI.1. SIZE AND SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION ………………………………. 177
VI.2. SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS............................................ 183
VI. 2.a. Economic activity… ………………………………………………. 183
VI. 2.b. Education ……………………………….…………………………. 185
VI. 2.c. Health…. ……………………………….………………………….. 188
VI.3. SOCIO-CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS........................................... 189
VI. 3.a. Patriarchy and gender relations.……………………………...…….. 189
VI. 3.b. Knowledge of Turkish as second language among Kurdish
speaking women…………………………………………………………….. 191
VI.4. SOCIOPOLITICAL SITUATION OF LANGUAGE
MINORITIES..................................................................................................... 194
VI.5. FERTILITY DIFFERENCES BY MAIN LANGUAGE GROUPS......... 201
VII. MAIN RESEARCH QUESTIONS OF THE STUDY................................. 205
VII.1. RESEARCH QUESTIONS ON THE FERTILITY DECLINE
PROCESS FROM THE 1980s ONWARDS IN TURKEY............................... 205
VII.2.IMPACT OF STRUCTURAL FACTORS ON THE DIFFERENTIAL
FERTILITY PATTERNS OF THE MAIN LANGUAGE GROUPS................ 210
VII.3.IMPACT OF SOCIO-CULTURAL FACTORS ON THE
DIFFERENTIAL FERTILITY PATTERNS OF THE MAIN LANGUAGE
GROUPS............................................................................................................ 212
VII.4. IMPACT OF MINORITY GROUP STATUS ON THE
DIFFERENTIAL FERTILITY PATTERNS OF THE MAIN LANGUAGE
GROUPS............................................................................................................ 214
VIII. METHODOLOGY....................................................................................... 219
VIII.1. METHOD OF ANALYSIS…................................................................ 219
VIII.1.a. Censoring issues in birth order analysis…. ……..…..….………… 220
VIII.1.b. Descriptive indicators for quantum and tempo of fertility
developments...…………………………….…………….………………….. 223