Cultural Grounds and Local Differences for Fertility in Tehran Megalopolis

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor of Demography, University of Tehran

2 MA, demography from Tehran University

Abstract

Today, various aspects of human behavior are studied in diversified urban fabrics. Fertility behavior is one of these aspects and components. Fertility behavior is different, not only from city to city, but also among city districts and neighborhoods. The purpose of this article is to investigate and analyze regional and neighborhood differences in fertility in Tehran metropolis. The study method is secondary analysis of 1390 census data and analysis unit is neighborhoods of Tehran city. Findings indicate the role of district and cultural grounds in formation of fertility behavior and significant differences in the level of fertility in various districts of the city of Tehran (from 9/1 to 4/3 children). Results of multivariate testing show a negative relationship between socioeconomic state and quality of life and fertility in various districts of Tehran. The socio-economic composition of the neighborhood, by controlling other variables, still has a significant effect on the differences and fluctuations of fertility of neighborhoods. Therefore, fertility behaviors are not only affected by personal features, but also are seriously under the influence of structure and diversified conditions of districts and their cultural norms.

Keywords

References

1. رفیعیان، مجتبی و محمد شالی. (1391). تحلیل فضایی سطح توسعه‌یافتگی تهران به تفکیک مناطق شهری. فصلنامه برنامه‌ریزی و آمایش فضا. دوره شانزدهم. شماره 4.
2. صادقی، رسول و نسیبه زنجری. (1396). الگوی فضایی نابرابری توسعه‌ در مناطق 22گانه کلان‌شهر تهران. فصلنامه رفاه اجتماعی. سال هفدهم. شماره 66. 
3. عباسی‌شوازی، محمدجلال و زهره خواجه‌صالحی. (1392). سنجش تأثیر استقلال، مشارکت اجتماعی و تحصیلات زنان بر تمایل به فرزندآوری (مطالعه موردی شهر سیرجان). نشریه زن در توسعه و سیاست، دوره 11. شماره 1.
4. عباسی‌شوازی، محمدجلال و میمنت حسینی‌چاوشی. (1392). تحولات باروری در ایران در چهار دهه اخیر، کاربرد و ارزیابی روش فرزندان خود با استفاده از داده‌های سرشماری، 1365، 1375، 1385، 1390، پژوهشکده آمار، مرکز آمار ایران. 
5. Adhikari R. (2010). Demographic, Socio-Economic, and Cultural Factors Affecting Fertility Differentials in Nepal. BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth. 10(19).
6. Anderson, G.; M. Rønsen; L. B. Knudsen; T. Lappegård; G. Neyer; K. Teschner. & A.Vikat. (2009). Cohort Fertility Patterns in the Nordic Countries, Demographic Research. No. 20.
7. Bandura, A. (1971). Social Learning Theory. General Learning Press. New York.
8. Battaglia, M.; B. Chabe-Ferret. & L. Lebedinski. (2017). Segregation and Fertility: The Case of the Roma in Serbia, IZA Discussion Paper Series DP No. 10929, IZA Institute of Labor Economics. 
9. Bean, F. D. & J. P. Marcum. (1978). Differential Fertility and the Minority Group Status Hypothesis: An Assessment and Review. In F. D. Bean & W. P. Frisible (eds). The Demography of Racial and Ethnic Groups. New York: Academic Press.
10. Fulda, B. (2015). Culture’s Influence: Regionally Differing Social Milieus and Variations in Fertility Rates. MPIFG Discussion Paper 15/4, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies. Germany. 
11. Hank, K. (2001). Regional Social Contexts and Individual Fertility Decisions: A Multilevel Analysis of First and Second Births in Western Germany, MPIDR Working Paper. WP2001-015.
12. Khadr Z. (2007). Policies to Address Fertility Plateau in Egypt, Social Research Center (SRC) of the American University in Cairo (AUC). Cairo: Egypt. 
13. Kim, D. S. & Y. J. Song. (2015). Neighborhood Effects of Ethnic Composition on Fertility among Foreign Wives in South Korea. Development and Society. 44(3).
14. Kulu, H. & P. Boyle. (2009). High Fertility in City Suburbs: Compositional or Contextual Effects?. European Journal of Population. No. 25.
15. Matthews, S. A. (2008). The Salience of Neighborhood: Some Lessons from Sociology. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 34(3).
16. McNicoll, G. (1980). Institutional Determinants of Fertility Transition. Population and Development Review. 6(3).
17. McNicoll, G. 1994. Institutional Analysis of Fertility”, in K. Lindahl – kiessling and H. Landberg, Population, Economic Development and the Environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Pp. 199-229.
18. Myrskyla, M.; H. Kohler. & F. C. Billari. (2009). Advances in Development Reverse Fertility Declines. Nature. 460. 
19. Schultz-Nielsen, M. L. (2010). Peer Effects in Fertility: The Effect of Children in the Neighborhood. Doctoral Thesis. Aarhus University.
20. Teitler, J. O. (1996). The Impact of Neighborhood Norms on Youth Sexual and Fertility Behavior. PhD Dissertation. https://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI9713015. 
21. Tofaily R. (2004). Do Women with Higher Autonomy have Lower Fertility?. Evidence from Malaysia, Philippine and Thailand, Genus. 2(1).
22. Tumen, S. (2012). Fertility Decisions and Endogenous Residential Sorting. Regional Science and Urban Economics. 42(1-2).
23. Wolfe, B.; R. Haveman; K. Pence. & J. A. Schwabish. (2007). Do Youth Nonmarital Childbearing Choices Reflects Income And Relationship Expectations?. Journal of Population Economics. No. 20.
24. Weeks. J. R.; A. Getis; A. G. Hill; S. Agyei-Mensah. & D. Rain. (2010). Neighborhoods and Fertility in Accra, Ghana: An Amoeba-based Approach. Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 100(3).
Strategy for Culture
Volume 14, Issue 54
September 2021
Pages 143-159

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics