China Fertility (Zheng, 1996)1 "Is Fertility in China 1991-92 Far Below Replacement Level? Yi, Zeng. 1996. POPULATION STUDIES, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 27-

China Fertility (Zheng, 1996) China Fertility (Zheng, 1996) 11

""Is Fertility in China Is Fertility in China 1991-92 Far Below 1991-92 Far Below

Replacement Level?Replacement Level?““

Yi, Zeng. 1996.Yi, Zeng. 1996.

POPULATION STUDIES, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. POPULATION STUDIES, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 27-34.27-34.


China: Total fertility rate

Description: This measure indicates the number of children a woman would have during her reproductive years if in each five-year age interval from ages 15–49 she had the number of children that women of that age currently have in the population as a whole. The data refer to the average projected for the period 2000-2005.

Source: UNFPA, State of World Population 2003Category: PopulationRanking: 108 (2000-2005) - Show rankingUnit of

measurement:Average number of children

Bar chart(Only one data point) Table Year 2000-2005

http://globalis.gvu.unu.edu/country.cfm?Country=CN

Gender Equality - Girls in tertiary education


Population 2009 Estimates

Average population growth rate

0.7 Percent

Population aged 65 and above

7.00 Percent

Population under age 15

24.3 Percent

Total fertility rate

1.80Average number of children

Total population

1 320

Mill. inhabitants

Urban growth rate

3.22Percent

Urban Population

40.5 Percent

Source: http://globalis.gvu.unu.edu/country.cfm?Country=CN


Source and Comparisons Fertility Rate

Year

1992 Report SFPC (State Family Planning Commission)

1.65 1991

1.52 1992

China Replacement Rate 2.20

1995 US Rate 2.10 1995

PAST DECADE IN CHINA

MAX 1982 2.87 1982

MIN 1985 2.20 1985

1990 Census 2.3 to 2.2

1990

Summary of

Results

Across

Time


ISSUEISSUE

Why the huge and sudden drop Why the huge and sudden drop recorded in 1992 survey?recorded in 1992 survey?– Is it correct? Is it correct? – What might have effected its What might have effected its

outcome? outcome? – Can it be corrected? Can it be corrected?


A. Why 1992 Survey might A. Why 1992 Survey might have increased have increased underreportingunderreporting

1. Background: Coverage of Study1. Background: Coverage of StudyAll China Covered All China Covered 385,000 people or 0.35 per 1000 385,000 people or 0.35 per 1000 women women

50% Women of reproductive age50% Women of reproductive age


A. Why 1992 Survey might A. Why 1992 Survey might have increased underreportinghave increased underreporting

2. 2. Three Unique FeaturesThree Unique Features -- purpose -- purpose to guarantee quality of results, to guarantee quality of results, unfortunately unfortunately might have in fact might have in fact biased results --biased results --

1)1)EnumeratorsEnumerators

2)2)QuestionnaireQuestionnaire

3)3)RegisterRegister


1) 1) EnumeratorsEnumerators

In In past Surveyspast Surveys: Not FPC (Family : Not FPC (Family Planning Commission) personnelPlanning Commission) personnel– For example: 1990 census generally For example: 1990 census generally

were not FPC employees were not FPC employees – Many not highly skilled – high school Many not highly skilled – high school

students, retirees,… students, retirees,… – When FPC employees used, used When FPC employees used, used

outside area they administered outside area they administered


Change for StudyChange for Study

1992 study1992 study exclusively used FPC exclusively used FPC workers and they checked areas that workers and they checked areas that they administeredthey administered– Why such approach Why such approach

Cut costs Cut costs Locals well acquainted with Locals well acquainted with situation, harder to hide situation, harder to hide information from theminformation from them


ResultsResults

Although promised punishment would Although promised punishment would not occur to FPC officials if results not occur to FPC officials if results show changes from past, trust was show changes from past, trust was lowlow

Local Officials already caught in a lie Local Officials already caught in a lie may need to continue to liemay need to continue to lie


Why low trust??? Past Why low trust??? Past Problem of 1990 CensusProblem of 1990 Census

Example in Anhiu Province for 1990 census Example in Anhiu Province for 1990 census stated:stated:– Truth to be unpunished -- please report Truth to be unpunished -- please report

the truth the truth – However after count conducted law was However after count conducted law was

changed and punishment applied changed and punishment applied sorry, we caught you sorry, we caught you Typical of post-Liberation government Typical of post-Liberation government

programsprograms


2) Questionnaire Issues 2) Questionnaire Issues (how it was written)(how it was written)

Unplanned births highlightedUnplanned births highlighted in in 1992 survey (tip-off) 1992 survey (tip-off)

ResultResult -- least likely to report most -- least likely to report most recent unplanned birth when fine recent unplanned birth when fine not yet paid not yet paid

Focus on unplanned births could Focus on unplanned births could cause officials to suggest lying as cause officials to suggest lying as the correct strategy -- long history the correct strategy -- long history of telling the Govt. what it wants to of telling the Govt. what it wants to hear hear


3) Title of survey made it 3) Title of survey made it look like permanent look like permanent

registerregister Increase fear level of respondentsIncrease fear level of respondents No one wants to get on permanent No one wants to get on permanent

listlist ““the nail that sticks out gets the nail that sticks out gets

hammered”hammered”


C. "One Vote Down" C. "One Vote Down" Campaign 1991 -- Another Campaign 1991 -- Another

problemproblem

Officials made personally Officials made personally responsible for targets responsible for targets

Basic reaction -- Basic reaction -- cover one's own cover one's own backsidebackside -- villagers explicitly -- villagers explicitly asked to lie asked to lie


D. Empirical Evidence of D. Empirical Evidence of UnderreportingUnderreporting

1. Studies demonstrates 1. Studies demonstrates underreporting close to 30%underreporting close to 30% -- -- see 1993 survey as examplesee 1993 survey as example

2. 2. Systematic errors (bias)Systematic errors (bias) apparent apparent by reviewing past surveysby reviewing past surveys


Summary of Data -- note Summary of Data -- note trendstrends

UnderreportinUnderreportingg

Systematic Systematic errors (bias)errors (bias)

Matching-up Matching-up Catching-up Catching-up PhenomenaPhenomena

Special 1992 Special 1992 ErrorsErrors

Reported Total Fertility from various sources

Survey

Survey

Census Survey

Year 1987 1988 1990 1992

1986 2.37 2.42 2.39 2.45

1987 2.51 2.59 2.58 2.55

1988 2.29 2.46 2.27

1989 2.30 2.24

1990 2.18 2.04

1991 1.65

1992 1.52


Before 1992 Survey: Before 1992 Survey: Matching-up/Catching-up Matching-up/Catching-up

PhenomenaPhenomena LaterLater valuesvalues always always

bigger than bigger than initialinitial valuevalue (note each row) (note each row)– Why? Perhaps fine Why? Perhaps fine

already paid or dealt already paid or dealt with in other manner with in other manner

– Officials might Officials might benefit from higher benefit from higher "corrected" numbers "corrected" numbers and lower "false" and lower "false" current values current values

Reported Total Fertility Reported Total Fertility from various sourcesfrom various sources SurveSurve

yySurveSurveyy

CensusCensus

YeaYearr

19871987 19881988 19901990

19819866

2.372.37 2.422.42 2.392.39

19819877

2.512.51 2.592.59 2.582.58

19819888

2.292.29 2.462.46

19819899

2.302.30

19919900

2.182.18


1992 Survey1992 Survey

Seems to have Seems to have special new special new problemsproblems, ,

Perhaps result of Perhaps result of "one vote down" "one vote down" and other factorsand other factors

Errors even in Errors even in earlier data starting earlier data starting with 1988 with 1988 – note values are even note values are even

lower than previouslower than previous

Reported Total Reported Total Fertility from various Fertility from various sourcessources

SurveSurveyy

SurveSurveyy

CensusCensus SurveySurvey

YeaYearr

19871987 19819888

19901990 19921992

19819866

2.372.37 2.422.42 2.392.39 2.452.45

19819877

2.512.51 2.592.59 2.582.58 2.552.55

19819888

2.292.29 2.462.46 2.272.27

19819899

2.302.30 2.242.24

19919900

2.182.18 2.042.04

19919911

1.651.65

19919922

1.521.52


So What’s Correct???So What’s Correct???

Can we determine actual values???Can we determine actual values??? Yi presents his methodology for Yi presents his methodology for

doing just that (we will accept his doing just that (we will accept his method and look at his results)method and look at his results)


D. Yi’s Adjustment of D. Yi’s Adjustment of 1992 results1992 results

Based on 1993 Based on 1993 study adjust study adjust upward 1992 upward 1992 results by results by about 30% about 30%

– Note error Note error greater in greater in latest years latest years

– Note greater Note greater error in rural error in rural areas areas (see (see paper) paper)

Table 3: Adjustment of Table 3: Adjustment of TF in 1992 SurveyTF in 1992 Survey

YearYear ReporteReported TFd TF

Under-Under-reportinreporting rateg rate

AdjusteAdjusted TFd TF

19901990 2.0422.042 0.1600.160 2.4322.432

19911991 1.6531.653 0.2480.248 2.1972.197

19921992 1.5201.520 0.2750.275 2.0972.097


ConclusionsConclusions1. Fertility Seriously 1. Fertility Seriously

underreported in early underreported in early 1990s 1990s

Reasons include: Reasons include: pressure to reach targetpressure to reach target one vote down one vote down

campaign campaign questionnaire title and questionnaire title and

design design selection of selection of

enumeratorsenumerators


Conclusions…Conclusions…

2. After adjustment true total 2. After adjustment true total fertility for 1991-92 at or slightly fertility for 1991-92 at or slightly below replacement level below replacement level

Reasons: Reasons: More implementation of More implementation of

family planning post 1991 family planning post 1991 Economic development Economic development Move from rural to urban Move from rural to urban

areasareas


CURRENT SITUATION http://www.indexmundi.com/china/total_fertility_rate.html

China - Total fertility rateHome > China > People > Total fertility rate

1.77 children born/woman (2008 est.)Total fertility rate by Year Chart

Total fertility rate Rank Chart

Year

Total fertility rate (children born/woman)

2000 1.822001 1.822002 1.822003 1.72004 1.692005 1.722006 1.732007 1.752008 1.77



Final ThoughtFinal Thought

As a Confucian Culture, Why is there As a Confucian Culture, Why is there such difficulty in determining the such difficulty in determining the truth?truth?


Documents

China Fertility (Zheng, 1996)1 "Is Fertility in China 1991-92 Far Below Replacement Level? Yi, Zeng. 1996. POPULATION STUDIES, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 27-