Abstract
This chapter explores cross-national differences in fertility-related norms. In particular, we study whether such norms are weaker in countries that have progressed further along the path of the Second Demographic Transition (SDT) than in countries where the SDT has not yet ‘caught on’. Based on an analysis of ESS data, three key conclusions are drawn. First, country differences in the lower and upper age deadline for childbearing are small. At the same time, there is substantial cross-national variation in approval of voluntary childlessness, having a child while one is cohabiting unmarried, and women combining a full-time job and small children. Secondly, cross-national variation in approval of voluntary childlessness and in approval of having children in a consensual union are strongly related to how far a country is ‘advanced’ in the SDT process. The link between the SDT and deadlines for childbearing and approval of combining a full-time job and having small children is much weaker or non-existing. Thus, the SDT does not imply a general weakening of demographically relevant norms. Thirdly, across Europe, the highly educated, the religiously uncommitted, and those who value autonomy are much more likely to approve behaviours that are in line with the SDT than people with the opposite set of characteristics. At the same time, country-level differences in norms about voluntary childlessness and having a child outside marriage remain prominent, even if compositional differences in individual-level characteristics are taken into account. Thus, this study clearly shows the importance both of compositional and genuinely contextual effects.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The mean length of the social reproductive life span in Table 6.2 does not always exactly match the difference between the mean lower and upper age deadlines in Table 6.1, because the number of respondents on which the calculation of the lower and upper age limit is based differs somewhat within a country.
References
Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(5), 453–474. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(86)90045-4.
Billari, F. C., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2007). Should I stay or should I go? The impact of age norms on leaving home. Demography, 44(1), 181–198. doi:10.1353/dem.2007.0000.
Billari, F. C., Goisis, A., Liefbroer, A. C., Settersten, R. A., Aassve, A., Hagestad, G. O., et al. (2011). Social age deadlines for the childbearing of women and men. Human Reproduction, 26(3), 616–622. doi:10.1093/humrep/deq360.
Durkheim, É. (2009 [1894]). Les règles de la méthode sociologique. Paris: Payot.
Finch, J., & Mason, J. (1991). Obligations of kinship in contemporary Britain: Is there normative agreement? British Journal of Sociology, 42(3), 345–367. doi:10.2307/591185.
Fischer, C. S. (1995). The subcultural theory of urbanism: A twentieth-year assessment. American Journal of Sociology, 101(3), 543–577. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2781994.
Goldstein, H., Browne, W., & Rasbasch, J. (2002). Partitioning variation in multilevel models. Understanding Statistics, 1(4), 223–231. doi:10.1207/S15328031US0104_02.
Heckhausen, J. (1999). Developmental regulation in adulthood: Age-normative and sociostructural constraints as adaptive challenges. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kalmijn, M. (2007). Explaining cross-national differences in marriage, cohabitation, and divorce in Europe, 1990–2000. Population Studies, 61(3), 243–263. doi:10.1080/00324720701571806.
Klobas, J. (2010). Social psychological influences on fertility intentions: A study of eight countries in different social, economic and policy contexts. In Repro deliverable 3.18. Milano: Dondena Centre, Bocconi University.
Lesthaeghe, R. (1995). The second demographic transition in western countries: An interpretation. In K. O. Mason & A.-M. Jensen (Eds.), Gender and family change in industrialized countries (pp. 17–62). Oxford: Clarendon.
Lesthaeghe, R., & Moors, G. (2002). Life course transitions and value orientations: Selection and adaptation. In R. Lesthaeghe (Ed.), Meaning and choice: Value orientations and life course decisions (Vol. 37, pp. 1–44). The Hague: NIDI/CBGS.
Lesthaeghe, R., & Surkyn, J. (1988). Cultural dynamics and economic theories of fertility change. Population and Development Review, 14(1), 1–45. doi:10.2307/1972499.
Lesthaeghe, R., & Surkyn, J. (2008). When history moves on: The foundations and diffusion of the second demographic transition. In R. Jayakody, A. Thornton, & W. G. Axinn (Eds.), International family change. Ideational perspectives (pp. 81–118). New York: Erlbaum.
Liefbroer, A. C. (2011). On the usefulness of the theory of planned behaviour for fertility research. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 9, 55–62. doi:10.2307/41342803.
Liefbroer, A. C., & Billari, F. C. (2010). Bringing norms back in: A theoretical and empirical discussion of their importance for understanding demographic behaviour. Population, Space and Place, 16(4), 287–305. doi:10.1002/psp.552.
Liefbroer, A. C., & Goldscheider, F. K. (2007). Transitions to adulthood: How unique is Sweden in the European context? In E. Bernhardt, C. Goldscheider, F. K. Goldscheider, & G. Bjerén (Eds.), Immigration, gender, and family transitions to adulthood in Sweden (pp. 203–227). Lanham: University Press of America.
Liefbroer, A. C., & Merz, E.-M. (2009). Report on analysis of ESS data on cross-national differences in perceived norms concerning fertility-related behaviour. In REPRO deliverable 6.16. The Hague: Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute.
Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. 1968 enlarged edition. New York: The Free Press.
Merz, E.-M., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2011). Cross-national differences in the effect of educational attainment on fertility quantum: A study based on ESS data. In REPRO deliverable 6.18. The Hague: Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute.
Merz, E.-M., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2012). The attitude toward voluntary childlessness in Europe: Cultural and institutional explanations. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74(3), 587–600. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.00972.x.
Moore, L. M., & Vanneman, R. (2003). Context matters. Effects of the proportion of fundamentalists on gender attitudes. Social Forces, 82(1), 115–139. doi:10.1353/sof.2003.0099.
Schwartz, S. H. (2007). Value orientations: Measurement, antecedents and consequences across nations. In R. Jowell, C. Roberts, R. Fitzgerald, & G. Eva (Eds.), Measuring attitudes cross-nationally. Lessons from the European social survey (pp. 169–204). London: Sage.
Settersten, R. A. (1998). A time to leave home and a time never to return? Age constraints on the living arrangements of young adults. Social Forces, 76(4), 1373–1400. doi:10.1093/sf/76.4.1373.
Settersten, R. A., & Hagestad, G. O. (1996a). What’s the latest 2. Cultural age deadlines for educational and work transitions. Gerontologist, 36(5), 602–613. doi:10.1093/geront/36.5.602.
Settersten, R. A., & Hagestad, G. O. (1996b). What’s the latest? Cultural age deadlines for family transitions. Gerontologist, 36(2), 178–188. doi:10.1093/geront/36.2.178.
Settersten, R. A., & Mayer, K. U. (1997). The measurement of age, age structuring, and the life course. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 23–261. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2952551.
Sobotka, T. (2008). Does persistent low fertility threaten the future of European populations? In J. Surkyn, P. DeBoosere, & J. Van Bavel (Eds.), Demographic challenges for the 21st century. A state of the art in demography (pp. 27–90). Brussels: Brussels University Press.
Sobotka, T., & Toulemon, L. (2008). Changing family and partnership behaviour: Common trends and persistent diversity across Europe. Demographic Research, 19(6), 85–138. doi:10.4054/DemRes.2008.19.6.
Stoop, I., Billiet, J., Koch, A., & Fitzgerald, R. (2010). Improving survey response: Lessons learned from the European social survey (Wiley series in survey methodology). Chichester: Wiley.
Testa, M.-R. (2010). Child-number and child-timing intentions: A micro-macro framework. In REPRO deliverable 6.17. Vienna: Vienna Institute of Demography.
Thornton, A., Alwin, D. F., & Camburn, D. (1983). Causes and consequences of sex-role attitudes and attitude-change. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 211–227. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2095106.
Van de Kaa, D. J. (1987). Europe’s second demographic transition. Population Bulletin, 42(1), 1–64.
Van de Kaa, D. J. (2001). Postmodern fertility preferences: From changing value orientations to new behavior. In R. A. Bulatao & J. B. Casterline (Eds.), Global fertility transition (pp. 290–331). New York: Population Council.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Liefbroer, A.C., Merz, EM., Testa, M.R. (2015). Fertility-Related Norms Across Europe: A Multi-level Analysis. In: Philipov, D., Liefbroer, A., Klobas, J. (eds) Reproductive Decision-Making in a Macro-Micro Perspective. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9401-5_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9401-5_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-9400-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-9401-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)