TEMPO EFFECTS ON PERIOD FERTILITY IN TURKEY: A STUDY FROM TURKEY DEMOGRAPHIC AND HEALTH SURVEYS

Öz

Turkey has been experiencing significant fertility decline since the 1950s. Increasing mean ages at childbearing have accompanied this decline, thus studies regarding tempo effects are necessary for Turkey. The main aim of this study is to reveal the tempo distortions in recent period fertility in Turkey as a whole and for different sub-groups by using an adjustment procedure. A procedure by Bongaarts and Feeney corrects period TFR for tempo distortions, using changes in mean ages at childbearing by birth order. The adjusted TFR reflects the level of fertility that would have been observed in the absence of changes in timing. Since vital registration system in Turkey does not provide necessary data for the method, the study employs data from two successive demographic surveys, TDHS-1998 and TDHS-2003. Findings show the existence of tempo distortions in period fertility in Turkey. Tempo distortions appear to be higher for women in higher fertility areas.

TÜRKİYE’DE DÖNEMSEL DOĞURGANLIK ÜZERİNDEKİ ZAMANLAMA ETKİLERİ: TÜRKİYE NÜFUS VE SAĞLIK ARAŞTIRMALARI’NDAN BİR ÇALIŞMA

Öz

Türkiye’de doğurganlık 1950’li yıllardan beri ciddi bir şekilde düşmektedir. Bu düşüşle birlikte ortalama çocuk doğurma yaşlarında artışlar da görülmüştür. Bu nedenle Türkiye’de doğurganlık göstergeleri üzerinde zamanlama etkilerine ilişkin çalışmalara ihityaç vardır. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı Türkiye’de yakın dönemdeki toplam doğurganlık hızlarındaki zamanlama etkilerini ortaya çıkartmaktır. Bu işlem hem Türkiye geneli için, hem de nüfusun çeşitli alt-grupları için yapılmıştır. Kullanılan düzeltme işlemi Bongaarts ve Feeney tarafından geliştirilmiştir. Bu yöntem doğum sırasına göre toplam doğurganlık hızını, ortalama çocuk doğurma yaşlarındaki değişimi kullanarak düzeltmektedir. Düzeltilmiş TDH, doğurganlığın zamanlamasındaki değişimlerin yokluğunda gözlemlenecek olan doğurganlık düzeyini işaret eder. Hayati kayıt sistemlerinden bu yöntem için gerekli bilgiler temin edilemediği için iki tane demografik araştırmanın verileri kullanılmıştır: TNSA-1998 ve TNSA-2003. Bulgular Türkiye’de dönemsel doğurganlık göstergelerinde zamanlama etkilerinin olduğunu göstermiştir. Bu etkilerin yüksek doğurganlık görülen bölgelerde daha yüksek olduğu gözlenmiştir.

Kaynakça

1. Adalı, T., (2007). The Analysis of Tempo and Quantum Components of Period Fertility in Turkey. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies, Ankara.
2. Behar, C., (1995). ‘The Fertility Transition in Turkey: Reforms, Policies and Household Structure 1965-1980’, in Family, Gender and Population in the Middle East: Policies and Context, Cairo, American University in Cairo Press, p.36-56.
3. Bongaarts, J. and Feeney G. (1998). ‘On the quantum and tempo of fertility’, Population and Development Review (24) p. 271-291.
4. Bongaarts, J., (1999). ‘The Fertility Impact of Changes in the Timing of Childbearing in the Developing World’, Population Studies (53), p. 277-289.
5. Bongaarts, J. and Feeney, G., (2005). ‘On The Quantum and Tempo of Fertility’, Population and Development Review (26) p. 560-564.
6. Bongaarts, J. and Feeney, G., (2005). ‘The Quantum and Tempo of Life-Cycle Events’, Population Council, Policy Research Working Paper, No.207
7. Duben, A. and Behar, C. (1991), lstanbul Households, Marriage, Family and Fertility, 1880- 1940, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies, (1980). 1978 Turkish Fertility Survey,

9. Hacettepe University, Institute of Population Studies, Ankara, Turkey.
10. Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies, (1987). 1983 Turkish Population and Health Survey, Hacettepe University, Institute of Population Studies, Ankara, Turkey.
11. Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies, (1989). 1988 Turkish Population and Health Survey, Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies, Ankara, Turkey.
12. Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies, (1994). Turkish Demographic and Health Survey 1993. Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies, Ministry of Health and Macro International Inc., Ankara, Turkey.
13. Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies, (1999). Turkish Demographic and Health Survey 1998, Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies, Ministry of Health General Directorate of Mother and Child Health and Macro International Inc., Ankara, Turkey.
14. Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies, (2004). Turkish Demographic and Health Survey 2003. Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies, Ministry of Health General Directorate of Mother and Child Health and Family Planning, State Planning Organization and European Union, Ankara, Turkey.
15. Hajnal, J., (1947). ‘The analysis of birth statistics in the light of the recent international recovery of the birth-rate’ Population Studies (1) p. 137–164.
16. Lesthaeghe, R. and Willems, P., (1999). ‘Is Low Fertility a Temporary Phenomenon in the European Union?’, Population and Development Review (25), p. 211-228.
17. Macro International Inc., (1996). Sampling Manual. DHS-III Basic Documentation No. 6. Calverton, Maryland.
18. Ryder, N. B., (1964). ‘The process of demographic translation’, Demography, (1) p. 74-82.
19. Ryder, Norman B. 1956. “Problems of trend determination during a transition in fertility,” Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly 34: 5–21.
20. Ryder, Norman B. 1959. “An appraisal of fertility trends in the United States,” in Thirty Years of Research in Human Fertility: Retrospect and Prospect. New York: Milbank Memorial Fund, pp. 38–49.
21. Ryder, Norman B. 1964. “The process of demographic translation,” Demography 1: 74–82.
22. Ryder, Norman B. 1980. “Components of temporal variations in American fertility,” in R.W. Hiorns (ed.), Demographic Patterns in Developed Societies, London: Taylor & Francis, pp. 15-54.
23. Ryder, Norman B. 1983. “Cohort and period measures of changing fertility,” in Rodolfo A. Bulatao and Ronald D. Lee (eds.), Determinants of Fertility in Developing Countries. New York: Academic Press, Vol. 2, pp. 737–756.
24. Sobotka, T., (2004), ‘Is Lowest-Low Fertility in Europe Explained by the Postponement of Childbearing?’, Population And Development Review (30), p. 195-220
25. State Institute of Statistics (SIS), (1995). The Population of Turkey, 1923 – 1994: Demographic Structure and Development, With Projections to the Mid 21st Century. Ankara: State Institute of Statistics, Prime Ministry of Republic of Turkey (Publication No. 1716).
26. State Institute of Statistics (SIS), (2003). 2000 Census of Population: Social and Economic Characteristics of Population, State Institute of Statistics, Prime Ministry of Republic of Turkey,Ankara.
27. TÜSİAD, (1999). Turkey’s Window of Opportunity: Demographic Transition, Process and its Consequences, Publication No. TÜSİAD-T/99-1-251, İstanbul.