1. ETHNIC DIFFERENCES IN FERTILITY TRANSITION IN TURKEY Political Demography: Ethnic, National and Religious Dimensions Session I : Differential Fertility I (LSD: Room S50 ) September 29, 2006 Sutay Yavuz Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock/Germany (PhD Candidate) yavuz@demogr.mpg.de

2. ETHNIC DIFFERENCES IN FERTILITY TRANSITION IN TURKEY 1. Introduction: Fertility Transition 2. Brief information on Ethnic Composition 3. Differential Fertility Behavior of Ethnic Groups: Period Fertility Measures and Childbearing Behavior 4.The threshold in Fertility Transition: Determinants of the Third Births by Ethnicity 5. Conclusion

3. Introduction: Fertility Transition The natural fertility: the reproductive behavior characterized by the absence of deliberate birth control. The modern family limitation: fertility behavior turns into a matter of the calculus choice. Natural Fertility Modern Fertility Behavior Fertility Transition: natural fertility behavior shifts to modern family limitation (parity-specific birth limitation ) MODERNIZATION (?) Mortality decline Socio-economic development Innovation & Diffusion Institutional change Early Stage Early Stage: Increasing age at marriage Celibacy Traditional contraceptive methods: Withdrawal Late Stage Late Stage: Modern contraceptive methods Postponement and limiting of births

4. Fertility Transition in Turkey - I 2.1 Total Fertility Rate: The average number of children that would be born alive to a woman (or group of women) during her lifetime if she were to pass through her childbearing years conforming to the age-specific fertility rates of a given year. Replacement level fertility: 2.1 children per woman's life time. 2 children to replace the parents, with one-tenth of a child extra to make up for the mortality of children

5. Brief information on Ethnic Composition : Percent Distribution Ethnic Group 1935 1 1965 2 1990 3 1992 4 1993 5 1998 6 2003 7 Turks89.290.1-85.882.783.283.0 Kurds9.29.912.612.413.014.414.0 Arabs1.0 -1.41.71.9 Other * 0.61.1- 0.42.60.51.2 1 1935 Population Census 2 Mutlu, 1995 (1965 Population Census) 3 Mutlu, 1995 (projection) 4 Özsoy, Koç and Toros 1992 (projection) 5 (Koç et al.1999) TDHS-1993 (ever-married women) 6 (Koç et al.2000) TDHS-1998 (never- married and ever-married women) 7 (own estimation) TDHS-1993 (ever-married women) * Other ethnic groups: Greeks, Circassians, Georgians, Armenians, Jew etc. Percentage Distribution of Ethnic Groups in Turkey

6. Absolute Numbers (in thousand) 1965 19931998 2003 Percent per annum population increase 1965-2003 Turks 27 62449 06054 08158 292 1.97 Kurds 3 1087 7129 3609 832 3.03 Arabs 3081 0081 2351 334 3.81 Other 1 3451 542325843 2.35 Turkey* 31 39159 32365 00170 231 2.12 http://www.tuik.gov.tr/VeriBilgi.do 1 Other ethnic groups: Greeks, Circassians, Georgians, Armenians, Jew etc.

7. Inter-marriage among ethnic groups in Turkey Mother Tongue of Wife Mother Tongue of Husband TurkishKurdishOther 1 (N) Turkish 97.51.90.66123 Kurdish 4.994.11.01270 Other 1 22.95.172.0275 Source: TDHS-2003 (own estimation) 1 Other ethnic groups: Arabs, Greeks, Circassians, Georgians, Armenians, Jews etc.

8. Differential Fertility Behavior of Ethnic Groups: Age Specific Fertility Rates Age Specific Fertility Rate (2000-2003) By Mother Tongue (Turkey TFR is 2.2) Age Specific Fertility Rate (ASFR): The number of live births to women in a specified age group and period per 1,000 women in the same age group.

9. Fertility Differentials : Welfare Status and Ethnicity Total Fertility Rate: The average number of children that would be born alive to a woman

10. Fertility Differentials: Education Level and Ethnicity Total Fertility Rate: The average number of children that would be born alive to a woman

11. General Pattern of Childbearing Patterns by Ethnicity Turkish Kurdish (don't know T.) Kurdish (knows T.)ArabOther M * - 192.590.391.989.789.4 1 – 272.995.392.489.778.1 2 – 345.396.079.379.542.5 3 – 442.595.776.575.929.4 4 – 539.591.275.570.225.3 5 – 642.989.772.472.8- 6 – 740.783.772.776.3- 7 – 842.684.760.476.9- 8 – 954.679.062.356.7- 9 – 1044.885.855.770.0- M* refers to marriage (parity 0). Source: TDHS-2003 data file (own estimation) Cumulative proportion of ever-married women who progress to next parity within five years of the previous birth, by the mother tongue of women.

12. Threshold in Fertility Transition: Third Birth The progression from second to third birth is as a critical component of the fertility transition. The third births were seen as a marker of a strong two-child family norm in modern societies As two-child family norm is becoming more and more widespread, the third child mothers are forming a special group with different motivations and fertility ideals. We use event-history approach for examining the determinants of the third births; (piecewise constant) proportional-hazard (or intensity-regression) models. Data is originated from 2003 Turkey Demographic and Health Survey How progression risks (intensities) are dependent on different combinations of characteristics of the women?

13. Threshold in Fertility Transition: Third Birth A relative risk of 1 for the level of a covariate indicates that the estimated third birth risk is the same as that of the reference group of the same covariate. A relative risk estimated to be greater (smaller) than 1 indicates a higher (lower) third birth risk than for the reference category. A woman’s third birth risk is defined as the probability that she will experience a third birth the next month, given her individual characteristics and given that she has not had such a birth by the beginning of the month.

14. Threshold in Fertility Transition: Third Birth The progression to a third birth, as with any other type of life-course transition, does not occur at random or in isolation, but in relation to certain to structures in society. Thus we cover certain areas of life that assumed to be related fertility behavior of women: 1. Childhood Socialization 2. Socio-economic Characteristics 3. First Marriage Specific Cultural Characteristics 4. Past Fertility Experience 5. Husband Charactersitics 6. Context Variables

15. Transition to Third Birth: Determinants Event history model - relative risks of the transition to third birth Turkish SpeakerKurdish Speaker Woman's Mother was literate No1.32***0.99 Yes11 Woman's Mother: Total Children Ever Born ≤ 711 7+1.32*1.19 Woman's Father was literate No1.15*1.03 Yes11 Childhood Place of Residence Urban11 Rural1.20***1.08 CHILDHOOD SOCIALIZATION *** p ≤ 0.01 0.01 < ** p ≤ 0.050.05 < *p ≤0.1

16. Transition to Third Birth: Determinants Event history model - relative risks of the transition to third birth SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS *** p ≤ 0.01 0.01 < ** p ≤ 0.050.05 < *p ≤0.1 Turkish SpeakerKurdish Speaker Education No Education/Primary Incomplete 1.43***1.12 Primary and higher 11 Literacy Not at all 1.43***1.24** Reads 11 Working Status before Marriage 1 Not worked 1.41**1.14 Worked 11 1 For Turkish Speaker women the levels are: Not worked/Worked without social security Worked with social security

17. Transition to Third Birth: Determinants Event history model - relative risks of the transition to third birth FIRST MARRIAGE SPECIFIC CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS *** p ≤ 0.01 0.01 < ** p ≤ 0.050.05 < *p ≤0.1 Turkish SpeakerKurdish Speaker Family Type at Marriage Neo-local 11 Patri-local 1.29***1.00 Marriage Arrangement By Couple 11 By Family 1.16**1.04 Bride's Money Paid No 11 Yes 1.23**1.46*** Relationship to Husband Not Related 11 First degree relative 1.15*1.06 Other relative 1.120.58***

18. Transition to Third Birth: Determinants Event history model - relative risks of the transition to third birth PAST FERTILITY EXPERIENCE *** p ≤ 0.01 0.01 < ** p ≤ 0.050.05 < *p ≤0.1 Turkish SpeakerKurdish Speaker Age at Second Birth <=22 2.28***1.68*** 23-25 2.15***1.80*** 26-29 1.59***1.35 30+ 11 Previous birth interval < 24 Months 1.36***1.08 >=24 Months 11 Survival Status of the First Child Alive before 3rd conception 11 Death before 3rd conception 2.63***1.22 Sex of previous children MM 1.17**1.09 FF 1.71***1.68*** MIX 11

19. Transition to Third Birth: Determinants Event history model - relative risks of the transition to third birth HUSBAND CHARACTERISTICS *** p ≤ 0.01 0.01 < ** p ≤ 0.050.05 < *p ≤0.1 Turkish SpeakerKurdish Speaker Husband Education No Education /Primary Incomplete 1.36*1.11 Primary and higher 11

20. Transition to Third Birth: Determinants Event history model - relative risks of the transition to third birth CONTEXT VARIABLES *** p ≤ 0.01 0.01 < ** p ≤ 0.050.05 < *p ≤0.1 Turkish SpeakerKurdish Speaker Mother Tongue Kurdish_ Don't Know Turkish 1.63*** Kurdish_ Know Turkish 1 Period (Time-Varying Cov.) 1983-87 11 1988-92 0.90**0.93 1993-97 0.81*1.07 1998-03 0.77*0.75**

21. Interaction: Period and Mother Tongue

22. Conclusion The fertility behavior turns out to be parity specific limitation behavior for Turkish speaker women after parity one and more significantly, after the parity two. The educated Turkish women may be now ‘pioneer’ of the lowest-low fertility behavior. In contrast, the Kurdish speaker women who do not speak Turkish, could not read and who did not work, married traditionally compose ‘laggard’ group in fertility transition process of Turkey. The results can be seen as supportive of the argument that the segments of the population that have been more integrated into social, economic and political modernization and urbanization trends are changing their fertility behavior more rapidly. The socio-economic determinants of important however effect is modified by mother tongue (ethnicity) and cultural characteristics (dimensions of the patriarchy) The fertility dynamics of Kurdish parents is an important factor in determining when and how the demographic transition in Turkey will be completed

23. Sutay Yavuz (PhD Candidate) yavuz@demogr.mpg.de Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock www.demogr.mpg.de Thank you very much