Ijmet 10 01_175

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1762 editor@iaeme.com
International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET)
Volume 10, Issue 01, January 2019, pp. 1762-1771, Article ID: IJMET_10_01_175
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=01
ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359
© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed
A FEW DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS AFFECTING
THE DECLINE OF TOTAL FERTILITY RATE:
AN EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE
D.Srinivasa Kumar
Associate Professor, GMR Institute of Technology, Rajam
K.V.S.Prasad
Sr.Assistant Professor, GMR Institute of Technology, Rajam
A.Vinod Kumar
Scientific Officer "H", Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Mumbai
ABSTRACT
This paper investigates the a few demographic factors affecting the decline of Total
Fertility Rate. It is based on survey conducted in Kovvada region, Srikakulam district,
Andhra Pradesh. According to GIS information the study area divided into three zones
with 5km, 15km and 30km radius distance from the Nuclear Plant situated in Kovvada
labeled as core zone, Buffer Zone - I and Buffer Zone - II covering 153 villages. Data
were collected from 11297 household through pre designed questionnaire in these zones
and entered CAPI using DESOFT software and analyze. Children ever born and children
surviving data used to estimate age specific rates. Association between education level
and fertility rates have been established by applying chi square. Results revealed that 61
percent women were illiterate and TFR 2.7. The TFR range 2.7 to 3.4 in all three zones
high and there is significant association between fertility and a few demographic factors
like occupation and education level of women. It may be inferred that literacy rate of
female and women age groups are the most imperative components influencing TFR.
Which proved that the existence of some kind of dependency between level of education
and total fertility rate.
Key Words: Fertility Rate, Women Education, Age Groups, Childbearing, Literacy Rate
Cite this Article: D.Srinivasa Kumar, K.V.S.Prasad and A.Vinod Kumar, A Few
Demographic Factors Affecting the Decline of Total Fertility Rate: an Empirical Evidence,
International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 10(01), 2019, pp.1762–
1771
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&Type=01

D.Srinivasa Kumar, K.V.S.Prasad and A.Vinod Kumar
1. INTRODUCTION:
Although fertility decline often correlates with improvements in socioeconomic conditions, many
demographers have found flaws in demographic transition theories that depend on changes in
distal factors such as increased wealth or education (Campbell et.la, 2013).A recent study by Yoo
(2014) estimates completed cohort fertility by utilizing the question in the census that asks the
number of children ever born. Yoo (2014), uses past censuses to estimate completed cohort
fertility for women born between 1926 and 1970. Based on these estimates, Yoo (2014)
concludes that fertility differentials in Korea havebeen diminishing across all educational levels,
arguing that Korea does not conform to Bongaarts’ (2003) finding that educational differentials
in fertility continue to persist in post-transitional societies such as Korea.Education is a standout
amongst the most vital elements affecting fertility behavior. A study on Nigeria investigated a
universal primary education program that took place between 1976 and 1981, and found that it
also influenced fertility behavior (Osili and Long, (2008).This paper analyzes the a few
demographic factors influencing the decline of Total Fertility Rate (TRF), women Education
level of attainment, the fewer children she is probably going to bear. Given that fewer childrenper
women and postponed marriage and childbearing could mean more resources per child and better
wellbeing and survival rates for mother and children this critical connection. Men had
significantly lower fertility awareness than women on almost all parameters (Hammarberg et al,
2013).However, educational uplift along with economic opportunities of women, improved
access to reproductive health information, services at schools, health campaigns, and involvement
of men in family planning decision making have an impact on fertility. In addition, age and
employment; maternal age, level of education, family size and breastfeeding; age of mother, age
at marriage, and education were proved to be significant influencers of birth interval,
(Nadahindawa et al, 2014), (Rasheed and Dabal, (2007), (AI-Almaie, 2003), (Ai-Nahedh, (1999).
One of the significant difficulties in a large portion of the creating nations today is the quick
increment in population, which is in charge of an expansive number of social and economic
problems. Female education has a greater impact on determining the age at marriage and number
of children (Breierva and Duflo, 2002).The fertility rates in creating countries are high versus
developed countries. An extensive number of factors are responsible of high fertility rates in
developing countries of the world. The age at marriage is one of the key determinants of fertility
rate. The lower the age at marriage time, longer the reproductive span, which results in higher
fertility rate. There are numerous reasons behind early marriages in developing countries, which
incorporate both the social and economic factors.Education is considered as a standout amongst
the most vital factor influencing women decision regarding the number of children.
Educated women exercise higher command over their reproduction, as even after controlling
husband’s education, advanced women education is positively associated with the use of modern
contraceptives (Omariba, 2006). Another argument is that women’s higher education empowers
them to make decisions on their fertility. In fact, women’s empowerment could be the driving
force for the effect of education on fertility (Chicoine, 2012).Women’s education level could
influence fertility through its effect on women’s health and their physical ability to give birth,
children’s health, the quantity of children wanted, and women’s ability to control birth and
knowledge of different birth control methods. There was no significant relationship between
demographic characteristics and gender (Srinivasa& Prasad, 2018).
TFR is the number of children a women can expect to have over her lifetime given current
rates of age specific fertility. The figure is demonstrates TFR drifts after some time in core zone,
Buffer Zone - I and Buffer Zone - II in study area among women varying levels of education
accomplishment. What it appears for each of the three zones is that there are striking contrasts in
TFR between women with no schooling and women with a higher education

A Few Demographic Factors Affecting the Decline of Total Fertility Rate: an Empirical Evidence
2. STUDY AREA:
The study area is defined as 30 km radius of proposed Nuclear Power Plant in Kovvada Region
(NPPKR) of Ranasthalam Mandal, Andhra Pradesh, India. In this connection, we made GIS
based village generation thematic maps in Kovvada region. According to those maps 0-5 Km
radius named as Core Zone where we identified 13 villages; 5-15 km radius named as Buffer
Zone – I, we identified 101 villages and 15-30 radius named as Buffer Zone – II, where we
identified 283.
3. OBJECTIVES:
To assess the Sex Ratio
To assess the Literacy rate
To assess the Age groups as per gender
To assess the occupation of participants
To assess the women fertility rate
4. METHODOLOGY:
Before commencing the door to door survey we collected the required data from the available
agencies (Census, Municipality, Panchayath office, Mandal Revenue office, Mandal
Development offices etc.) as it is a field intensive work. In the core zone 13 villages, Buffer Zone
- I 72 villages and Buffer Zone - II 68 villages were selected and we made door to door survey in
these zones through well-structured questionnaire from households (HHs). The responses of
household heads information was entered in their laptops by using the Data Entry Software
(DSOFT).
According to GIS information, Buffer Zone -I consists of 101 villages and we made it into 72
PSUs (Primary Sample Units) with its hamlet villages. Buffer Zone -II consists of 283 villages
but we selected 74 PSUs in this zone. We selected 10 PSUs in urban area and 64 PSUs in rural
area and data collected from 45 households in each PSU. Data analysis was carried out by using
statistical tools like SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science) for statistical analysis simple
averages, percentages and chi-square tests are used. The hypotheses are tested at both 0.05% and
0.01% significant levels.
Hypotheses:
H0: Women education level and total fertility rate are independent
H1: Women education level and total fertility rate are significantly dependent
4.1. Sex Ratio Distribution:
The number of males and females in study area,the distribution may refer to how many men or
women presented in table-1.
Table 1: Sex Wise Distribution of Participants
Sl.No. Sex Core Zone Buffer Zone - I Buffer Zone - II Total
1 Male 9092 (51.78) 6400 (51.40) 6407 (51.49) 21899 (51.59)
2 Female 8466 (48.22) 6052 (48.60) 6035 (48.51) 20553 (48.41)
Total 17558 12452 12442 42452
Data Format: Number (%)

Total 42452 populations were covered during survey from all the three zones. Of these,
21899(51.59%) are males and 20533 (48.41%) are females. In all the three zones, male to female
population ratio is constant. In core zone 9092 (51.78%) population is male and 8466 (48.22%)
are females. In Buffer zone - I, 6400 (51.40%) population is male and remaining 6052 (48.60)
are females. In Buffer Zone - II, 6407 (51.49) population is male and remaining 3035 (48.51) are
females. As per the census 2011, at national level male population is 51.47%and 48.52% females.
At state level 50.17% are males and 49.82% are females. At district level, Srikakulam district is
having 49.65% of males and 50.34% females. In the given area population distribution is similar
to the National level.
4.2. Age Wise Distribution:
Age composition by residence were broadly classified by ages groups like Up to 5, 6 to 15, 16 to
49, 50 to 60 years and above 60 years in my study area is shown in the table-2.
TABLE 2: AGE WISE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS
Sl.No. Age Groups Core Zone Buffer Zone - I Buffer Zone - II Total
1 Up to 5 1682 (9.58) 1062 ((8.53) 848 (6.82) 3592 (8.46)
2 6 to 15 3154 (17.96) 2106 (16.91) 1958 (15.74) 7218 (17.00)
3 16 to 49 9454 (53.84) 6579 (52.83) 6621 (53.21) 22654(53.36)
4 50 to 60 2133 (12.15) 1825 (14.66) 1972 (15.85) 5930 (13.97)
5 >60 1135 (6.46) 880 (7.07) 1043 (8.38) 3058 (7.20)
Total 17558 12452 12442 42452
Age wise distribution of participants is as following. In core zone 1682 (9.58%) participants are
below five years of age, and in the Buffer Zone - I and Buffer Zone - II was 1062 (8.53%) and
848 (6.82%) participants are below five years age, respectively. Total 3592 (8.46%) participants
are below five years of age from all three zones. 22654 (53.36%) participants are from the 16 to
49 years of age group from all three zones. Participants over sixty years of age are 3058 (7.20%)
from all two zones. In this study indicates that more fertility age group peoples were living in
the proposed plant area.
4.3. Mean Age of Marriage:
Marriage is for bliss not for misery. Studies have also revealed that an average marriageable age
in India for men is 26 years and for women 22.2 years. Rural and urban India shows sharp
difference between the ages at marriage. Overall the age in urban areas is 21 years whereas in
rural areas it is 19 years in study area Average age of marriage showed in table - 3
Table 3: Average Age of Marriage
Sl.No. Gender Core Zone Buffer Zone-I Buffer Zone-II Total
1 Boys 24.50 25.30 26.44 25.41
2 Girls 19.35 19.60 18.98 19.31

Average age of boys who married in study area was 25.41 years and girl’s average age was
19.31. Average age of marriage is steadily increasing in all parts of state. In 2011 census average
age of marriage for boys and girls was 24.3 and 19.8 years in Andhra Pradesh, respectively.
4.4. Total Fertility Rate:
The cumulative value of the Age Specific Fertility Rates at the end of the child bearing age gives
a measure of fertility known as Total Fertility Rate (TFR). TFR indicates the average number of
children expected to be born per women during her entire span of reproductive period assuming
that the age specific fertility rates to which she exposed to continue to be the same and there is
no mortality. Delayed childbearing is not necessarily an informed decision-making but could be
a less conscious choice associated with lack of knowledge regarding the impact of female age on
fertility (Cooke et al, 2010).The TFRs worked out on the basis of average specific fertility rate in
the core zone 3.37 children are born per women, 2.82 children in Buffer Zone - I and 2.67 children
in Buffer Zone - II. The TFR in India is 2.4 and in the Andhra Pradesh are 1.8 children per
women, implying that the state has reached below replacement level of fertility.
Mean age of childbearing in core zone at the age of 24.38 years, inBuffer Zone - I and Buffer
Zone - II is 23.08 and 23.67 years respectively. At national level mean age of childbearing was
26.6 years and in state level was 24.3 years, in study area it exactly matches with state level
childbearing value was presented in table-4.
Table 4: Age specific fertility rates derived from CEB data* for Core, Buffer I and II zone areas of KOVADA
NPP area
Sl.No.
Age Group of
Women
Core Zone Buffer Zone - I Buffer Zone - II
Children
Ever Born
(CEB)
Fertility
consistent
with CEB
A.S.F.R *
Children
Ever Born
(CEB)
Fertility
consistent
with CEB
A.S.F.R *
Children
Ever Born
(CEB)
Fertility
consistent
with CEB
A.S.F.R *
1 15 – 20 0.64935 0.23610 0.56522 0.21865 0.62963 0.21542
2 20 – 25 1.31055 0.08677 1.32391 0.10893 1.09350 0.05452
3 25 – 30 2.0445 0.14299 2.00416 0.11927 1.76225 0.13002
4 30 – 35 2.40704 0.02783 2.28795 0.01435 1.99097 0.00689
5 35 – 40 2.67994 0.09334 2.41718 0.05184 2.12127 0.07339
6 40 – 45 2.96606 0.06411 2.58868 0.03787 2.27838 0.05005
7 45 – 50 3.23746 0.02358 2.98396 0.01404 2.39773 0.01849
Mean Age of Child
bearing:
24.38500 23.08345 23.67504
Total Fertility Rate: 3.37358 2.82477 2.674972
*Arraiga's approach for estimation of ASFR for one point in time CEB (MORTPAK)
4.5. Occupation:
Agriculture is the backbone of the economy of the district. More than half of its population is
engaged in agriculture in order to earn their livelihood.Formalization, decentralization and
communication indicate that there is very highly significant variation of mean percentage when
analysis is made according to occupations of the staffs (Kangjam & Devi, 2018).Occupation of
people in study area presented in the table – 5

Table 5: Occupation of the Households
Sl.No. Occupation Core Zone Buffer Zone-I Buffer Zone-II Total
1 Cultivation 595 (3.39) 564 (4.53) 715 (5.75) 1874 (4.41)
2 Agriculture Labour 2775 (15.80) 1921 (15.43) 2246 (18.05) 6942 (16.35)
3
Non Agricultural
Labour
1569 (8.94) 1631 (13.10) 1160 (9.32) 4360 (10.27)
4
Traditional
Occupation
984 (5.60) 105 (0.84) 210 (1.69) 1299 (3.06)
5 Self-Business 1320 (7.52) 379 (3.04) 434 (3.49) 2133 (5.02)
6 Service (Govt.) 83 (0.47) 102 (0.82) 149 (1.20) 334 (0.79)
7 Service (Pvt.) 307 (1.75) 484 (3.89) 376 (3.02) 1167 (2.75)
8 Others 440 (2.51) 415 (3.33) 65 (0.52) 920 (2.17)
9 Student 3976 (22.64) 3023 (24.28) 3018 (24.26) 10017 (23.60)
10 House Wife 2572 (14.65) 2015 (16.18) 2106 (16.93) 6693 (15.77)
11 No Work 2937 (16.73) 1813 (14.56) 1963 (15.78) 6713 (15.81)
Total 17558 12452 12442 42452
Occupation of the participants is as following. 1874 (4.41%) participants are farmers and
engaged exclusively in cultivation. Core Zone 595 (3.39%) participants are engaged in cultivation
which is less than Buffer Zone-I and II, which is 564 (4.53%) and 715 (5.75%) respectively. 6942
(16.35%) participants are engaged in agriculture related labor, in the Core Zone 2775 (15.80%)
participants are engaged in the agricultural labor, in Buffer Zone-I and II, 1921 (15.43%) and
2246 (18.05%), respectively . 334 (0.79%) participants are in government services only.
Percentage of participants in government services is less compared to other occupations. As per
census 2011, total work force population is 29.86% in India and 64.43% in Andhra Pradesh. In
Srikakulam district is 47.73% , in study area work force population more than the national level
but less than the state level.
4.6. Literacy Status:
Literacy is an essential aspect of our everyday lives that is embedded in our activities, social
interactions and relationships. It is the ability to read and write, in this research the literacy rates
shown in the table – 6.
TABLE 6: GENDER WISE LITERACY STATUS
Sl.No.
Literacy
Status
Core Zone Buffer Zone - I Buffer Zone - II Total
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
1 Literates
4324
(47.56)
3028
(35.77)
3443
(53.80)
2531
(41.82)
3657
(57.08)
2527
(41.87)
11424
(52.17)
8086
(39.34)
2 Illiterates
4768
(52.44)
5438
(64.23)
2957
(46.20)
3521
(58.18)
2750
(42.92)
3508
(58.13)
10475
(47.83)
12467
(60.66)
Total 9092 8466 6400 6052 6407 6035 21899 20553
*Excluding Up to 5 years population
In this study male literacy is 52.17% and female literacy is 39.24%, in the core zone male
literacy is 47.56% and female literacy is 35.77%. In Buffer Zone - I, male literacy is 53.80% and

female literacy is 41.82%. In Buffer Zone - II, male literacy is 57.08% and female literacy is
52.17%.At the district level total literacy is 61.74%, in this 71.61% are male and 52.08% are
females. In the given study overall literacy status is less compared to district, state and national
average. The level of education can be classified in three groups.
4.7. Educational Levels in Different Age Groups of Females:
Educational attainment or level of education has become basic necessity of life. The status of
educational levels of residence in the study area as per age groups was presented in table – 7.
Table 7 : Educational Levels of Females as per Age Groups
Name of the
Zone
Age Group
in Years
Educational Levels
Primary Upper Primary High School
Higher
Education
Core Zone
15-25 439 (41.07) 288 (51.89) 418 (46.29) 206 (41.12)
25-35 254 (23.76) 102 (18.38) 269 (29.79) 164 (32.73)
35-50 376 (35.17) 165 (29.73) 216 (23.92) 131 (26.15)
Total 1069 555 903 501
Buffer Zone -
I
15-25 257 (30.09) 170 (40.96) 343 (45.01) 266 (53.20)
25-35 291 (34.07) 101 (24.34) 222 (29.13) 160 (32.00)
35-50 306 (35.83) 144 (34.70) 197 (25.85) 74 (14.80)
Total 854 415 762 500
Buffer Zone -
II
15-25 230 (32.08) 110 (32.64) 291 (38.14) 281 (39.58)
25-35 191 (26.64) 106 (31.45) 256 (33.55) 233 (32.82)
35-50 296 (41.28) 121 (35.91) 216 (28.31) 196 (27.61)
Total 717 337 763 710
In the age group 15-25 years women having highest fertility rate, in a core zone upper primary
level of education have 51.89% followed by high school was 46.29%, higher education was
41.12%, but primary level of education was 41.07% shown as lowest level of education in core
zone. In Buffer Zone - I higher education level was highest shown as 53.20%, lowest was primary
education level is lowest shown as 30.39%. In Buffer Zone - II higher education also shown as
highest 39.50%, compare to remaining levels, primary level also shown as lowest 32.08%.
5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:
The major objective of present study was to find out the direct and indirect impact of females
education on TFR in study area. TFR is treated as dependent variable; level of education an
important explanatory variable has been limited to primary, upper primary, higher school and
higher education. This paper analyze the TFR is significant influences on female level education,
in this connection independent variables expected frequencies calculated in different age groups
like 15-25, 25-35 and 35-50 years are considered for analysis. The expected frequency values of
female educational level in all three zones at different age groups present in table – 8.

Table 8: Expected Frequency (fe) Values of Educational Levels at different Age Groups
Educational Status
Core Zone Buffer Zone - I Buffer Zone - II
15-25 25-35 35-50 15-25 25-35 35-50 15-25 25-35 35-50
Primary 476.95 278.55 313.50 349.56 261.16 243.28 258.77 223.02 235.22
Upper Primary 247.62 144.62 162.76 169.87 126.91 118.22 121.62 104.82 110.56
High School 402.89 235.29 264.82 311.91 233.03 217.07 275.37 237.32 250.31
Higher Education 223.53 130.54 146.92 204.66 152.90 142.43 256.24 220.84 232.92
The chi-square values are calculated in all three zones and test the 0.05% and 0.01%
significance levels and presented in the table – 9.
Table 8: Summarizing the data for Calculating Chi-square Values
Name of the Zone Observed (fo) Expected (fe) fo-fe (fo-fe)2
(fo-fe)2
/ fe
Core Zone
439 476.95 -37.95 1440.56 3.02
254 278.55 -24.55 602.57 2.16
376 313.50 62.50 3906.50 12.46
288 247.62 40.38 1630.23 6.58
102 144.62 -42.62 1816.06 12.56
165 162.76 2.24 5.01 0.03
418 402.89 15.11 228.29 0.57
269 235.29 33.71 1136.17 4.83
216 264.82 -48.82 2383.04 9.00
206 223.53 -17.53 307.33 1.37
164 130.54 33.46 1119.26 8.57
131 146.92 -15.92 253.60 1.73
χ2 62.89
Buffer Zone - I
257 349.56 -92.56 8567.91 24.51
291 261.16 29.84 890.42 3.41
306 243.28 62.72 3934.18 16.17
170 169.87 0.13 0.02 0.00
101 126.91 -25.91 671.34 5.29
144 118.22 25.78 664.60 5.62
343 311.91 31.09 966.89 3.10
222 233.03 -11.03 121.57 0.52
197 217.07 -20.07 402.77 1.86
266 204.66 61.34 3762.33 18.38
160 152.90 7.10 50.35 0.33
174 142.43 31.57 996.42 7.00
χ2 86.19
Buffer Zone - II
230 258.77 -28.77 827.54 3.20
191 223.02 -32.02 1025.04 4.60
296 235.22 60.78 3694.59 15.71
110 121.62 -11.62 135.12 1.11
106 104.82 1.18 1.39 0.01
121 110.56 10.44 109.09 0.99
291 275.37 15.63 244.35 0.89
256 237.32 18.68 348.79 1.47
216 250.31 -34.31 1177.00 4.70
281 256.24 24.76 613.03 2.39
233 220.84 12.16 147.89 0.67
196 232.92 -36.92 1363.12 5.85
χ2 41.59
α = 0.01, df = (4-1)(3-1) = 6 the critical value is 16.812
α = 0.05, df = (4-1)(3-1) = 6 the critical value is 12.592

The above table indicates that significance dependence is clearly seen between different levels
of female education on the TFR in a study area. At 1% level of significance in a core zone χ2 is
62.89 > 16.812, Buffer Zone – I χ2 is 86.19 > 16.812 and Buffer Zone - IIχ2 is 41.59 > 16.812
and also at 5% level of significance In a core zone χ2 is 62.89 > 12.592, Buffer Zone – I χ2 is
86.19 > 12.592 and Buffer Zone – II χ2 is 41.59 > 12.592, hencethere is enough statistical
evidence torejectthe null hypothesis (H0) and accepted the H1. Comparing the level of education
on fertility rates all three zones, it can be observed that the highest TFR 3.37 in core zone because
the literacy rate in female is lowest and level education is upper primary is highest 51.89% in the
age group of 15-25 years. TFR is lowest in Buffer Zone - I and Buffer Zone - II is 2.82 and 2.67
respectively. Because the literacy rate 41.82% in Buffer Zone - I and 41.87% in Buffer Zone - II
it is almost all similar, that is reason the TFR is also similar in these zones. The level of education
in Buffer Zone - II is higher education level is 53.20%, which proved that the existence of some
kind of dependency between level of education and total fertility rate. So that level of education
also shows impact on fertility rate.
6. CONCLUSION
The present examination analyzed there is a huge impact demographic factors on TFR in stud
area based on results obtained from chi-square test it can be concluded that mean age at marriage
of male and female, education levels of women and occupation of male are most important factors
affecting the TFR, it very well may be inferred that literacy rate of female and women age groups
are the most imperative components influencing TFR in the examination all three zones. Women
education can be effective if it is at higher education level. An inverse relation between the TFR
and education level suggest that higher the women education the lower will be TFR. In addition,
in case of male, primary education has significant impact on the TFR. On the basis of present
investigation focus on high rate female education will enable them as part decision making with
regarding to the number of children. Finally, I conclude that TFR is decreases when women
educational levels are increased.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT:
The authors would like to extend their sincere gratitude to the Board of Research in Nuclear
Science (BRNS), Mumbai for funding of this research project with grant No.36 (4)/14/59/2014-
BRNS/10133.
REFERENCES:
[1] Bongaarts, J. (2003). Completing the fertility transition in the developing world: The role of
educational differences and fertility preferences. Population Studies, 57(3): 321–335.
doi:10.1080/0032472032000137835.
[2] Breierova, L. and E.Duffo (2002), the impact of education on Fertility and child Mortality:
Do fathers really matter less than Fathers”. Working Paper 10513 NBER Working Paper
Series.
[3] Campbell MM, Prata N, Potts M, The impact of freedom on fertility decline, J
FamPlannReprod Health Care 2013;39:44-50.
[4] Chicoine, L. Education and Fertility: Evidence from a Policy Change in Kenya, IZA
Discussion Paper No.6778.
[5] Cooke A, Mills TA, Lavender T (2010). ‘Informed and uninformed decision-making’ –
Women’s reasoning, experiences and perceptions with regard to advanced maternal age and
delayed childbearing: a meta-synthesis. Int J Nurs Studies, 47:1317–29.
[6] D.Srinivasa Kumar & K.V.S.Prasad, A Logical Investigation of Demographic Characteristics
of Human Population in Selected Area of Srikakulam District, Internal Journal of Mechanical
Engineering and Technology, Volume, 9, Issue. 2, PP: 539-546, February, 2018.

[7] HammarbergK, Setter T, Norman RJ, Holden CA, MichelmoreJ, Johnson
L.Knowledge about factors that influence fertility among Australians of reproductive
age: a population-based survey.FertilSteril, 99:502–7.
[8] KangjamMukhara Devi and W. C. Singh, Effect of Socio-Demographic Factors on
Organizational Climate in Hospital, Internal Journal of Mechanical Engineering and
Technology, Volume, 5, Issue. 5, PP: 239-245, September, 2018.
[9] N.N. Al-NahedhThe effect of sociodemographic variables on child-spacing in rural Saudi
Arabia, Eastern Mediterr. Health J., 5 (1), pp.136-140
[10] Omariba, D.W.R. (2006), “Women’s Educational Attainment and Intergenerational Patterns
of Fertility Behaviour in Kenya” J.biosoc.Sci, Cambridge University Press. Vol. 38, 449–479
[11] Osili, U. O., and B. T. Long. “Does female schooling reduce fertility? Evidence from
Nigeria.” Journal of Development Economics 87:1, 57–75.
[12] P. Rasheed, B.K. Al-DabalBirth interval: perceptions and practices among urban-based Saudi
Arabian women, Eastern Mediterr. Health J., 13 (4), pp.881-892.
[13] S.M. Al-AlmaieThe pattern and factors associated with child spacing in eastern Saudi
ArabiaJ. Roy. Soc. Promot.Health, 123 (4), pp.217-221.
[14] V. Ndahindwa, C. Kamanzi, M. Semakula, F.Abalikumwe, B. Hedt Gauthier, D.R. Thomson
Determinants of fertility in Rwanda in the context of a fertility transition: a secondary analysis
of the 2010 Demographic and Health Survey Reprod. Health, 11 (1), pp. 87-95.
[15] Yoo, S.H. (2014). Educational differentials in cohort fertility during the fertility transition in
South Korea. Demographic Research 30(53): 1463–1494, doi:10.4054/DemRes.2014.30.53.

Ijmet 10 01_175

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Ijmet 10 01_175

Similar to Ijmet 10 01_175 (20)

More from IAEME Publication

More from IAEME Publication (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Ijmet 10 01_175