Natural fertility: concepts and methods of measurement. Natural fertility Reproductive behavior: definition, reproductive strategies, main trends recorded in the 21st century

When studying the reasons that determine the state and dynamics of the birth rate, demographers have long sought to distinguish between structural factors and behavioral factors of people and families in their cumulative influence on the birth rate. All of them, one way or another, are based on the concept of natural fertility, proposed in 1961 by the French demographer L. Henri. Natural fertility b - this is the birth rate, the level of which is determined only by physiological and structural factors, i.e. the state of fertility and the structure of the population by gender, age and marital status, in the complete absence of intentional birth control. Natural fertility exists quite realistically in any population (regardless of the prevalence of measures of intra-family fertility limitation) in the form of some socio-biological potential, which is realized only partially depending on socio-economic, cultural, psychological and other factors influencing the formation and satisfaction of needs people including children.

Of course, in modern populations with widespread practice of intra-family limiting the number of children in a family, the level of natural fertility can only be determined hypothetically. Nevertheless, measuring such a hypothetical level of socio-biological potential seems important and even necessary precisely in order to, by comparing the actual level of fertility with its potential specific for each real population, have an idea of ​​the extent of the prevalence of methods of intentional intra-family fertility limitation among the population, about the role of the behavioral factor of fertility.

The essence of the GMR model is that there is a standard that determines the minimum natural fertility, i.e. a level below which it cannot fall without the influence of any negative circumstances (Table 4.5).

Table 4.5 - Minimum age-specific rates of marital natural fertility adopted in the GMR model as a standard, ‰.

The age group 15-19 years is not included in Table 4.4. The fact is that in this age group, annual age-specific birth rates increase very sharply as women grow older and get married. Therefore, the average value of the indicator for a five-year age interval is too unstable a value not suitable for inclusion in the model. A similar unstable nature of the birth rate is typical for age groups over 50 years of age. In this regard, all births in extreme age groups of women are combined in a correction factor, which is introduced to the calculated hypothetical number of births under natural fertility conditions (1.06).

To calculate the overall GMR coefficient, it is enough to have data on the distribution of married women by five-year age groups. To calculate the overall GMR coefficient, it is enough to multiply the number of married women by five-year age groups by the corresponding minimum age-specific rates of natural marital fertility from Table 4.4 and adjust the resulting amount by an adjustment index of 1.06. As a result, the total hypothetical number of births can only be divided by the corresponding average population size and the general GMR coefficient is obtained:

Where
- general GMR coefficient;

-number of married women of age ;

-age-specific rates of minimum marital natural fertility, used as a standard;

-average population.

Thus, the general GMR coefficient in one number characterizes the marriage and age structure of the population from the point of view of the socio-biological potential of fertility. From this point of view, an increase or decrease in the value of the GME coefficient indicates, respectively, an improvement or deterioration in the marriage-age structure. The ratio of the actual total fertility rate to the GMR coefficient for the same population allows us to get an approximate idea of ​​the degree of realization of the fertility potential:

Where
- fertility potential,

- general birth rate,

-general GMR coefficient

An example of calculating the GMR index for Russia for 2002 is presented in Table. 4.6.

Table 4.6 - Calculation of the overall GMR coefficient in Russia for 2002

The number of births under the hypothesis of natural fertility in Russia in 2002 would have been 4187 thousand people. The population according to the 2002 All-Russian Population Census was 145,200 thousand people. Accordingly, the overall GMR coefficient is 30.6‰ (
).

In this example, the value of the GME coefficient should be interpreted as follows. Under the conditions of natural fertility, if it, of course, existed in Russia, with the actual marriage-age structure of the population as it was at the time of the 2002 census, the total fertility rate would be at least 30.6‰. The potential for the implementation of the GMR was 31.2% in 2002 (the actual total fertility rate was 9.6‰).

At the same time, it must be emphasized that GMR cannot be considered literally, as a fertility potential that supposedly can be fully realized. This is, by and large, impossible. Besides, this is not necessary. The significance of GME lies in the fact that it shows the real state of the marriage-age structure and its role as a factor in the level of fertility, and, accordingly, the relationship between structural and behavioral factors in their combined influence on fertility rates. It also shows the possibility of increasing the birth rate by intensifying demographic policy and stimulating the population to increase the birth rate.

Unlike foreign works, in which attempts are made to determine maximum natural fertility, in the method I developed in 1971 and proposed below, a hypothetical minimum natural fertility (hereinafter abbreviated as NMR), i.e. a level of fertility below which it cannot fall without the influence of any negative circumstances (low fertility of a significant part of the country’s population, a high proportion of spouses living separately for a long time, etc.). Based on a specially developed mathematical model and data on the parameters of human fertility, the author determined the minimum rates of marital natural fertility, which were then used in calculating specific GMR indicators for any real population and specific time. These coefficients outline the limit below which the level of marital fertility can fall under the influence of only four factors: 1) underestimation of the number of births, 2) a high proportion of infertile marriages, 3) a high proportion of separated spouses, 4) intentional limitation of fertility in marriage. This alone, i.e. reducing the huge number of factors affecting fertility to just four makes the method useful.

Table 5.9

Minimum natural marriage coefficients

fertility rates taken as standard in the GMR model

The age group 15-19 years is not included in Table 5.9. This is not an accident. The fact is that in this age group, one-year age-specific fertility rates increase very sharply as women grow older and get married (within a given age interval). Therefore, the average value of the indicator for a five-year age interval turns out to be too unstable, too dependent on the intragroup structure, a value unsuitable for inclusion in the model. The same applies to ages over 50, at which births also occur (and in some nations, fertility rates in the age groups of women 50-54 and 55-59 years are still quite significant), especially in conditions of natural fertility. Therefore (and also because of the poor study of the birth rate in adolescence and in the oldest ages of women), it was decided to combine all birth rates in extreme age groups of women in one correction factor, which is introduced to the calculated hypothetical number of births under natural fertility conditions. Having summarized the proportion of children born to women under the age of 15 and over 50 in 35 countries of the world that publish the statistics necessary for this calculation, the author derived an average correction index of 1.06.

To calculate the overall GMR coefficient, it is enough to have only data on the distribution of married women by five-year age groups. Such data is available in the results of the population census of any country. A more accurate calculation can be made if we have age-specific marital fertility rates, but such indicators are so far calculated and published in very few countries. For our country we have to use population census data, and accordingly the calculation is timed to coincide with the critical moment of the census. To calculate the overall GMR coefficient, it is enough to multiply the number of married women by five-year age groups by the corresponding minimum age-specific rates of natural marital fertility from Table 5.9 and to the resulting hypothetical sum of those born to women aged 20-49 years, add the number of births to women under 15 and over 50 years of age . For our country and most other countries, this is done by multiplying the hypothetical number of births by an adjustment index of 1.06. As a result, the total hypothetical number of births (for conditions of natural fertility) can only be divided by the corresponding average population size and the overall GMR coefficient is obtained. The calculation method can be presented in the form of a formula, where all symbols are clear from the previous text.

An example of calculating the GMR index for Russia for 1988-1989. presented in table 5.10.

Table 5.10

Calculation of the general GMR coefficient in Russia for 1988-1989.

The total population of Russia according to the 1989 census was 147,400.5 thousand people. From here n gmer = 7160 729: 147 400.5 = 48.6 ‰ (in this case there is no need to multiply by 1000, because the digit capacity of the numerator and denominator already contains this multiplication).

The GMR coefficient (or index) in one number characterizes the marriage and age structure of the population from the point of view of the socio-biological potential of fertility. From this point of view, an increase or decrease in the value of the GMR coefficient indicates, respectively, an improvement or deterioration in the marriage-age structure. The ratio of the actual total fertility rate to the GMR coefficient (for the same population) allows us to obtain an approximate, but quite realistic idea of ​​the degree to which the fertility potential is realized. In our example, the value of the GME coefficient, equal to 48.6 ‰, should be interpreted as follows. Under conditions of natural fertility (if there were one in Russia), with the actual age and marriage structures of the population as they were at the time of the 1989 census, the total fertility rate would be at least 48.6. In cases where the registration of births is sufficiently complete, and the amount of infertility and long-term separation of spouses is insignificant, the indicator of the degree of realization of the fertility potential characterizes minimum(but reliable) intra-family birth control. In our example, the degree of implementation of GME in Russia in 1988-1989. was: 15.3 (actual total fertility rate) : 48.6 (GMER rate) x 100 (to express the quotient as a percentage) = 31.5%. In other words, given the actual age and marriage structure of our population at the beginning of 1989 (at the time of the population census), the degree of implementation of the minimum natural fertility in our country was only 31.5% of the biologically possible level.

Here I must especially emphasize that GMR cannot be taken literally, as a fertility potential that supposedly can be fully realized. No, this is impossible, and it is not necessary, there is no need for this. The potential is very high, too high, it exceeds any modern social needs for population reproduction. Its significance lies only in the fact that it shows the real state of the marriage-age structure and its role as a factor in the level of fertility and, accordingly, the relationship between structural and behavioral factors in their combined influence on fertility rates. It also shows the possibilities of increasing the birth rate by intensifying demographic policy and stimulating the population to increase the birth rate (if it is considered too low).

Let us consider the dynamics of total fertility rates (CFR), GMR coefficients and the degree of implementation of GMR over a long period of time in our history. Due to the lack of data for Russia, I found it possible to use data for the Russian Empire and the USSR for some periods (Table 5.11).

The dynamics of indicators demonstrate the evolution of the birth rate in Russia throughout the 20th century. The difference between the USSR and the current territory of Russia should not confuse us much; it cannot be fundamentally large (although, probably, there is, and we must take it into account). You can clearly see how the total fertility rate decreased and to what extent, due to what factors this decrease occurred. The dynamics of the GMR coefficient reflects the change in fertility due to changes only in the marriage-age structure of the population, and the index of the degree of implementation of GMR reflects the change in fertility due to its intra-family control.

IN late XIX V. the value of the total fertility rate exceeded the value of the GMR index (49.9 and 47.7 ‰, respectively), the degree of implementation of the GMR was more than 100%, equal to 104.7%. This means that the degree of intra-family birth control in Russia at that time was close to zero. But this does not mean that it did not exist at all. Let us recall the observation of S. A. Novoselsky, who recorded the beginning of the rapid spread of “neo-Malthusianism” in Russia, not only in cities, but also in the countryside. However, GMR is a rather crude instrument that records only a fairly tangible scale of intrafamily birth control. And what happens above the minimum does not bother him.

Strange as it may seem, the marriage and age structure of the Russian population changed little throughout the century, with the exception, of course, of individual tragic upheavals that affected the entire life of the people, including family life.

When studying the reasons that determine the state and dynamics of the birth rate, demographers have long sought to distinguish between structural factors and behavioral factors of people and families in their cumulative influence on the birth rate. All of them, one way or another, are based on the concept of natural fertility, proposed in 1961 by the French demographer L. Henri. Natural fertility b - this is the birth rate, the level of which is determined only by physiological and structural factors, i.e. the state of fertility and the structure of the population by gender, age and marital status, in the complete absence of intentional birth control. Natural fertility exists quite realistically in any population (regardless of the prevalence of measures of intra-family fertility limitation) in the form of some socio-biological potential, which is realized only partially depending on socio-economic, cultural, psychological and other factors influencing the formation and satisfaction of needs people including children.

Of course, in modern populations with widespread practice of intra-family limiting the number of children in a family, the level of natural fertility can only be determined hypothetically. Nevertheless, measuring such a hypothetical level of socio-biological potential seems important and even necessary precisely in order to, by comparing the actual level of fertility with its potential specific for each real population, have an idea of ​​the scale of prevalence among the population of methods of intentional intra-family fertility limitation, about the role of the behavioral factor in fertility.

The essence of the GMR model is that there is a standard that determines the minimum natural fertility, i.e. a level below which it cannot fall without the influence of any negative circumstances (Table 4.5).

Table 4.5 - Minimum age-specific rates of marital natural fertility adopted in the GMR model as a standard, ‰.

The age group 15-19 years is not included in Table 4.4. The fact is that in this age group, annual age-specific birth rates increase very sharply as women grow older and get married. Therefore, the average value of the indicator for a five-year age interval is too unstable a value not suitable for inclusion in the model. A similar unstable nature of the birth rate is also typical for age groups over 50 years of age. In this regard, all births in extreme age groups of women are combined in a correction factor, which is introduced to the calculated hypothetical number of births under natural fertility conditions (1.06).

To calculate the overall GMR coefficient, it is enough to have data on the distribution of married women by five-year age groups. To calculate the overall GMR coefficient, it is enough to multiply the number of married women by five-year age groups by the corresponding minimum age-specific rates of natural marital fertility from Table 4.4 and adjust the resulting amount by an adjustment index of 1.06. As a result, the total hypothetical number of births can only be divided by the corresponding average population size and the general GMR coefficient is obtained:

where is the general coefficient of GMR;

Number of married women of age;

Age-specific minimum marital natural fertility rates used as a standard;

Average population.

Thus, the general GMR coefficient in one number characterizes the marriage and age structure of the population from the point of view of the socio-biological potential of fertility. From this point of view, an increase or decrease in the value of the GMR coefficient indicates, respectively, an improvement or deterioration in the marriage-age structure. The ratio of the actual total fertility rate to the GMR coefficient for the same population allows us to get an approximate idea of ​​the degree of realization of the fertility potential:

,

(4.22)

where is the fertility potential,

Total fertility rate,

General GMR coefficient

An example of calculating the GMR index for Russia for 2002 is presented in Table. 4.6.

Table 4.6 - Calculation of the overall GMR coefficient in Russia for 2002

The number of births under the hypothesis of natural fertility in Russia in 2002 would have been 4187 thousand people. The population according to the 2002 All-Russian Population Census was 145,200 thousand people. Accordingly, the overall GMR coefficient is 30.6‰ ( ).

In this example, the value of the GME coefficient should be interpreted as follows. Under conditions of natural fertility, if it, of course, existed in Russia, given the actual marriage-age structure of the population, as it was at the time of the 2002 census, the total fertility rate would be at least 30.6‰. The potential for the implementation of GMR was 31.2% in 2002 (the actual total fertility rate was 9.6‰).

At the same time, it must be emphasized that GMR cannot be taken literally as a fertility potential that supposedly can be fully realized. This is, by and large, impossible. Besides, this is not necessary. The significance of GME lies in the fact that it shows the real state of the marriage-age structure and its role as a factor in the level of fertility and, accordingly, the relationship between structural and behavioral factors in their combined influence on fertility rates. It also shows the possibility of increasing the birth rate by intensifying demographic policy and stimulating the population to increase the birth rate.

NATURAL FERTILITY

NATURAL FERTILITY, birth rate not limited by contraceptive measures and induced abortions. The term "E.r." introduced into scientific turnover in 1961 French demographer L. Henri in contrast to “controlled birth control”. E. r. is not identical to fertility, since fertility is not fully realized in E. r. It is also not equivalent to the sometimes inaccurate concepts of “purely biological” or “spontaneous” fertility. Fertility as a process is always social, and in the absence of the practice of contraception and induced abortions, childbearing is limited (controlled, regulated) by the influence of social norms regulating marital and family status, child care, etc.

Concept of E. r. used to approximate the degree of intra-family restriction of childbearing, edges are defined as relative. the difference between the levels of actual and E. r. In modern urbanizir. of the population that widely practices childbearing restriction, the level of E. r. can only be determined hypothetically. There are different approaches to its definition. One of them is the equation of hypotheticals. E. r. modern us. to actual the level of birth rate of any of us, who do not practice contraception and abortion, are not susceptible to mass diseases that reduce fertility, and in which celibacy and late marriages are not common. As a model of E. r. age coefficients are often used. The marital birth rate of the Hutterites is a small religion. sects of European persons origin existing in the North. America, members of the swarm by religion. beliefs do not practice restrictions on childbearing (A. Cole, 1967, 1969; I. Carlson, 1966; T. Espenshade, 1971, etc.). Using this approach, Cole built a system of indices that made it possible to compare changes in marriage and birth rates occurring in any given region. population, with Hutterite indicators and thereby measure the dynamics of intra-family restrictions on childbearing. Another approach is that what kind of model of E. r. the average distribution of age coefficients is accepted. marital birth rate for a group of populations that do not use methods of limiting childbearing (L. Henri, 1961, etc.). As a model of E. r. Math. are also used. simulation models of fertility that take into account the parameters of the reproductive process: age-related probabilities of fertilization, sterility, stillbirths, spontaneous abortions, etc. (M. Sheps, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969; J. Home, 1970; I. Holmberg, 1970 , 1972; G. Santou, 1978, etc.). Using a combination of a simulation model and the average distribution of age coefficients. marital birth rate for a group of populations with a maximum birth rate in the Soviet Union. liter (1971) proposed a method for measuring hypothetical. minimum E. r. (GMER) for any real us. with birth control. Unlike Cole's method, this method provides a more cautious assessment of the degree of intrafamily restriction of childbearing.

Borisov V. A., Fertility prospects, M. 1976, p. 25-69; Cole E. J., The Decline of Fertility in Europe from the French Revolution to the Second World War, trans. from English, in the book: Family for Three Centuries, M. 1979; Tekshe K., Features of fertility in Central and Southern Europe before the First World War, trans. from English, ibid.; Henry L., Some data on natural fertility, "Eugenics Quarterly", 1961, v. 8, no. 2, p. 81-91; Espenshade T. J. A new method for estimating the level of natural fertility in populations practicing birth control, "Demography", 1971, v. 8, M. 4, p. 525 - 536.

V. A. Borisov.

Demographic encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Editor-in-Chief D.I. Valentey. 1985 .

See what “NATURAL FERTILITY” is in other dictionaries:

Birth rate in the Russian Federation in 2007- Population of Russia in 1991 2008 As of January 1, 2009, the population of Russia, according to Rosstat, amounted to 141,903,979 people. Year Population 1600 11,300,000 1700 13,000,000 1800 27,000,000 1890 ... Wikipedia

DEMOGRAPHIC INDICES, indicators characterizing the intensity of demographic. process in the given us. in comparison with another nas., taken as a standard (standard). Used for dynamic and ter. comparisons, as well as in analysis... ... Demographic Encyclopedic Dictionary

Population of Mariupol- Population growth of Mariupol in the twentieth century... Wikipedia

Demography- (Demography) Contents Contents 1. History of the formation of demography Formation of demographic knowledge (XVI - early XIX centuries) The emergence of demographic science (XIX century) Modern development (mid-XX - until today) 2 ... Investor Encyclopedia

Demographic crisis in the Russian Federation- Population of Russia in 1950 2011 ... Wikipedia

Population of Russia- The permanent population of Russia as of October 1, 2012 was 143.3 million people. Currently, Russia is experiencing natural population growth, the birth rate exceeds the death rate. In January October 2012, the coefficient ... ... Wikipedia

Population of the Nizhny Novgorod region- Number of permanent population of the Nizhny Novgorod region (1990 2008) The population of the Nizhny Novgorod region according to the State Statistics Committee of Russia as of January 1, 2012 is 3.297 million inhabitants. Of these, 2,605 ... Wikipedia

Lecture outline
5.1. Fertility: definition, indicators; balance of natural and regulated fertility in modern society.
5.2. Reproductive behavior: definition, reproductive strategies, main trends recorded in the 21st century.
5.3. Evolution of fertility: the essence of the concept, directions of evolution of fertility during the transition from an industrial society to an information society.

5.1. Fertility: definition, indicators. Balance of natural and regulated fertility in modern society

Fertility- a mass statistical process of childbirth in the totality of people constituting a generation, or in the totality of generations - in the population.
The relationship between the terms “fertility” and “fertility” Fertility as a process consists of a mass of individual births, but is not reduced to them.
Fertility - biological ability to the conception and birth of living children (for a woman, a man, a married couple). It is determined by the internal (biological) parameters of the health of a woman, a man, a married couple, or civil partners.
Fertility is a social process, realization of the ability to bear children. Determined by external factors: social, cultural, historical, economic. Subject to the action of social forces and laws, it unfolds within certain, historically specific boundaries set by the action of biological, physiological factors.
Fertility range. Theoretically, the possible range of fertility is very wide: from infertility to 35 births in singleton births over the entire reproductive period.
Average species fecundity of a person is 15 - 16 births per woman during the reproductive period.
However real number of births per woman in economically developed countries of the world today is 1.5. This is almost ten times, i.e. an order of magnitude less biological ability to bear children. The reasons for this difference (the difference between the biological ability to bear children and the implementation of this ability in practice) lie in the conditions of social life and reflect the transition from natural models of childbearing to artificial (regulated). This transition is due to the historical and economic stage of development modern society and is an objective law.
Reproductive period- the time interval from menarche, which in modern conditions occurs at 12-14 years, to menopause, which occurs at 45-50 years. Within the reproductive period, there are two time intervals that are important from the perspective of social demography.
Protogenetic interval- this is the time between marriage (more precisely, the formation of a marriage union) and the birth of the first child. It is determined by biosocial factors: the moment of conception (before or after marriage) and fertility. Fertility- this is the frequency of pregnancy in a woman capable of conceiving in the first month of regular sexual relations, provided that contraception is not used. U modern women Fertility corresponds to a value of 0.2. This means that if the above conditions are met, pregnancy occurs in 20 women out of 100.
Intergenetic interval is the average length of the period between successive births. It depends not only and not so much on biological factors and fertility, but on socio-psychological factors, namely, the financial situation of the family, living conditions, professional status, career prospects, decisions of the spouses regarding the number of desired children, etc. In some cases, the key importance acquires the opinion of others about the advisability of having the next child, as well as the willingness of interested parties (grandparents, relatives, social service workers) to support materially, financially and organizationally the birth and subsequent socialization of the second and third child in the family.
Early pubertymaturation, According to the World Health Organization (WHO), it refers to the situation when menarche occurs at 8 years of age or earlier.
It is believed that the average human species fertility does not exceed 15-16 births per woman over the entire reproductive period. In modern economically developed countries, about 10-15% of married couples are absolutely infertile (i.e., have zero chances of having a child) and the same number are relatively infertile (i.e., have low fertility).
It should be especially emphasized that according to age criteria, the biological ability to bear children and social readiness for birth and upbringing, i.e. socialization of children do not coincide completely. This pattern is valid for both the lower and upper limits of the reproductive period.
The lower limit of the reproductive period corresponds to the onset of puberty and the physiological ability to conceive. But this age does not correspond to the social maturity of the young organism. Puberty occurs earlier than the end of school education, precedes the acquisition of a profession that makes it possible to support oneself and one’s offspring, and occurs before reaching the age of marriage, approved by moral norms, religious and ethnic traditions, and permitted by law. The appearance of children among persons in the period between biological and social maturity is critical from the point of view of their subsequent successful socialization and, in the case of a mass phenomenon, aggravates the demographic burden falling on the working population of the territory.
The upper limit of the reproductive period, approaching the age of 50 for a woman, even taking into account the achievements of modern medical technologies, also seems problematic from the point of view of the subsequent socialization of born children. It is known that 55 years of age corresponds to the end of a woman’s professional career and her acquisition of the right to an old-age pension. In addition, a number of professions are characterized by an earlier onset of retirement age (hazardous industries, some creative professions, development of length of service among medical and teaching workers, etc.). Even while maintaining health and professional activity, it is more difficult for a woman in adulthood to ensure a sufficient level of income necessary to adequately support herself and her child, as well as for the child to receive the necessary upbringing and education. This thesis becomes more justified if we take into account the following circumstances. Firstly, the complete socialization of children with their reaching adulthood, receiving higher education and the acquisition of a competitive profession is a long process lasting 23 - 25 years. Secondly, a woman who gives birth to a child in adulthood and is married to a man no younger than herself in age runs the risk of raising a child in an incomplete family, because the mortality rate of men is significantly different from that of women. Thus, according to 2001 data, the average life expectancy of men in the Russian Federation is 59.0 years, which is 13 years less than the average life expectancy of women and only slightly exceeds the upper limit of the reproductive period of the latter.
Consequently, the birth of “late” children, as well as “early” ones, does not contribute to the social stability of society, increases the demographic burden and reduces the potential of the population to be competitive in the global labor market. The socio-demographic features of the reproductive period are schematically depicted in Figure 16.

Rice. 16. Critical periods for childbearing from the point of view of their subsequent socialization

Let us summarize the above. Fertility - this is the potential for childbearing, and fertility - the embodiment of this possibility in real society. The presence of freedom of choice and will, the fusion of biological, psychological and social motives of behavior, the conflict of personal and public interests and much more determine the real readiness of the population to continue themselves in posterity. This readiness, along with the actual socio-economic and financial resources for the education and socialization of the younger generation, underlies the reproductive behavior of the inhabitants of the planet, individual countries and territories.
Of the socially significant problems of fertility that reduce the level of stability of society, increase the demographic burden and reduce the competitiveness of future generations, we can name several main ones. This is the birth of children among minors, the mass birth of children among women of mature age, the imbalance between natural and regulated fertility, between responsible and irresponsible parenthood.
All of the above phenomena have unidirectional social consequences. They naturally increase the demographic burden of the population, increase the risk of social orphanhood and insufficient socialization of the younger generation. All this is fraught with the formation of an uncompetitive society in the medium term. To avoid such negative phenomena and their consequences, it is necessary to carry out targeted work with young people, developing in them sustainable skills of responsible behavior and conscious parenting.
It is fundamentally important to understand that fertility patterns not only depend on the social infrastructure of society, but also change following their dynamics. It is not surprising that the birth rate of primitive, agrarian, industrial, industrial and information societies is different. These differences are of a social nature. They are due to the different social infrastructure of society, unequal periods of socialization of young people, as well as differences in the current needs of the population and the objective probability of fully satisfying them.
For the purposes of social management, the historically growing gap between the level of natural (natural) and artificial fertility, as well as the recognition of the fact that our modern society is a society of artificial (regulated) fertility, is important. And in the regulation of fertility, a subjective factor plays an increasingly important role - the decision of spouses (marriage partners) regarding the birth or refusal to have a child. Taking into account the rapid process of differentiation of Russian society according to social, economic and financial criteria, it is necessary to emphasize that models of birth control in different strata and social groups manifest themselves differently. Today they not only reflect the level of development of the social infrastructure of society as a whole, but also the specifics of the youth subculture, the peculiarities of stereotypes of group behavior of individual ethnic groups and socially different segments of the population.
Under natural fertility understand marital fertility in the absence of any interference in the reproductive cycle. This unrestricted “spontaneous” birth rate became the subject of special demographic studies in the 60s. last century, when the French demographer L. Henri (L. Henri, 1961) proposed the term “natural fertility”. However, natural fertility cannot be considered an exclusively biological phenomenon. Despite its name (natural or natural), it socially conditioned and depends on the age of marriage, duration of breastfeeding and other behavioral factors.
The desire of mankind to measure the value of natural fertility has a longer history than the introduction of this term into the theory of demography. Thus, back in the 17th century, J. Graunt proposed his own algorithm for calculating the possible maximum birth rate. J. Graunt proceeded from the fact that in his contemporary society, for every 1000 inhabitants there were 300 women of reproductive age (from 15 to 49 years), capable, taking into account the period of gestation and feeding, to give birth with a frequency of “one child every two calendar years.” Based on these assumptions, it is easy to calculate that the total fertility rate will be 150 ‰, or 150 births per 1000 population per year.
Two centuries later, in the 19th century, the indicated maximum birth rate was adjusted downward, taking into account the real living conditions of an industrial society. This was done by I. Wappeus, denoting a theoretically possible, but practically unattainable maximum birth rate of 100%.
In the 20th century, efforts to find a real corridor for the birth rate were intensified. L. Henri proposed titrating fertility standards, using as a standard the fertility of some African countries that were distinguished by particularly high birth rates at the turn of the 50s-6s. last century.
Around the same time, E. Cole substantiated a different approach to choosing a fertility standard. He noted the incomparability of the lifestyle of the African population and the population of economically developed countries in terms of indicators such as the level of socio-economic development, sanitary and hygienic culture, fetal and infant mortality, and age-sex birth rates. E. Cole proposed to take as the standard of the 20th century the birth rate of the Hutterite sect, whose members were characterized high level socio-economic development, high sanitary and hygienic culture, universal marriage rate, complete lack of contraception, a relatively short period of breastfeeding, as well as low levels of fetal and infant mortality. As a result of his work, E. Cowell found it necessary to separate total, marital and extramarital birth rates. They proposed appropriate formulas for calculation. These indicators entered the history of demography as Cowal indices(total fertility index, marital fertility index, extramarital fertility index). In addition, a nomogram was built - a graph reflecting the age-specific dynamics of natural fertility among the population of economically developed territories in the mid-20th century. This schedule is known as the Hutterite birth standard. It is shown in Fig. 17.

Rice. 17. Natural fertility standards and actual age-specific fertility of the Russian population in 1998 (Quoted from: V.M. Medkov, 2003. P. 229, Fig. 5.2.)

A logical continuation of the above work was research aimed at determining the lower limit of natural fertility among residents of industrialized countries. The assessment of the minimum values ​​of natural fertility was carried out by V.A. Borisov, based on an analysis of mass factual data using the example of a population whose living conditions are within the sanitary norm, but within it are considered the least favorable. The standard identified on this basis corresponds to the minimum level of natural marital fertility, below which it cannot fall under normal sanitary conditions in the absence of any extreme socio-economic (force majeure) circumstances. This standard is known as hypothetical minimum natural fertility standard or GMER. The age-specific dynamics of this standard are also shown in Fig. 17.
It is noteworthy that the real birth rate in Russia at the end of the 20th century (the period of perestroika and socio-economic reforms) differs significantly downward from both the Hutterite standard and the GMR standard for all age groups (see Fig. 17). This is proof that in real life conditions modern Russia It is not natural, but artificial (regulated) fertility that is implemented. The thesis put forward is documented by the statistical data in Table. 6.
The data in Table 6 indicate that during all periods of observation, i.e. Throughout the second half of the 20th century, in Russia the reproductive potential of the population was not fully realized. Even the hypothetical minimum natural birth rate (NMR) exceeded the real birth rate in the country (ROF) several times: from 1.7 times among the rural population in 1958-1959. up to 5.3 times among the urban population in 1993-1994.

Table 6.
Crude fertility rates (CBR), hypothetical minimum natural fertility rate (HMR) and the degree of implementation of GMR in Russia
(Quoted from: V.M. Medkov, 2003. P. 228, table 5.7.)

The stability of the phenomenon of GMR exceeding the real birth rate indicates that in Russian society the reproductive behavior of the population is more oriented towards external socio-economic factors and to a lesser extent - towards the biological instincts of procreation. In other words, the birth rate in Russian society in the second half of the 20th century is not natural, but artificial birth rate.
Artificial (regulated) fertility − this is one that is formed under the influence of the active use of contraceptives by the population. It is this variant of fertility that is typical today not only for Russia, but also for all economically developed countries of the world. In addition, it is typical for most developing countries that have chosen rapid rates of economic development as national priorities, for example, China. Among other things, the new model of fertility (regulated) is manifested in a change in the age of birth of the first child and the balance between marital and extramarital fertility. Both indicators have a general tendency to increase. Rice. 18 and 19 illustrate this thesis using the example of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (Quoted from: M. Klupt, 2008, pp. 99-100, Fig. 3.4 and Fig. 3.5.).

Rice. 18. Middle age women at the birth of their first child in some countries of Central and Eastern Europe, years. Gray rectangles - 1994, dark rectangles - 2004.
Source: Eurostst Release 29/2006, March 2006

Fig. 19. Proportion of out-of-wedlock births in some countries of Central and Eastern Europe, %. Gray rectangles - 1990, dark rectangles - 2004 Sources: Demoscope Weekly; Eurostst Release 136/2005, October 2005

The options for controlled birth control are quite varied. They constitute a whole group of socio-biological phenomena that lie in the range between fertility and fertility, between children and childlessness. This sterility, infertility, infertility, childlessness. The main variations of these phenomena are described below. The subordination of the main options for regulated fertility is presented in the following diagram (Fig. 20).

Rice. 20. Relationship between different forms of fertility

Let us briefly outline the significant differences between the demographic concepts shown in the diagram. Fertility is the ability to reproduce offspring. Sterility is the inability to conceive. Infertility is the inability to reproduce offspring. Infertility is the absence of births. Childlessness is the absence of children in the family (may be associated with the early death of children). A detailed description of each of the above forms of fertility can be found in the textbook by V.M. Medkova “Fundamentals of Demography”, Rostov-on-Don: “Phoenix”, 2003. For the purposes of social management and organization of work with youth, the key is the fact that in the world of high technology, the development of methods of artificial insemination simultaneously with an increase in the terms of socialization and professional training For young people, conflicts related to resolving issues of regulated infertility among married and extramarital couples are becoming increasingly relevant. While issues of sterility in married couples when spouses desire to have offspring are becoming less dramatic and are increasingly finding their positive medical resolution, the marked demographic transition is radically changing the need for social technologies for birth control. It changes the target audience, and also sharply increases the number of those to whom these technologies will be addressed. Thus, if before the demographic transition the tasks of sociologists included creating a favorable atmosphere in society for the preservation of childless families and their adoption of foster children; now these tasks have been supplemented by the need to create a public opinion that positively perceives the ideas of planned responsible parenthood, everyday contraception, long-term sexual abstinence in the absence of marriage and (or) long-term separation of spouses (business trips, internships, rotational work, etc.). Comparing the tasks of social managers before and after the demographic transition in fertility, we will clearly notice that they differ from each other not only in content and target audience. We will note that they are aimed at different cohorts of the population: leveling the social problems of sterility is aimed at married couples with a sufficient level of social adaptation, and the formation of regulated infertility is aimed at a wide audience with different social, marital and age characteristics. In addition, the first audience is relatively small (no more than 10% of married couples are absolutely sterile), while the second audience is extremely numerous and practically covers the entire population of the country of reproductive age.
Particularly noteworthy is the fact that social technologies, in demand before and after the demographic transition, relate differently to the natural instinct of procreation. Thus, social technologies aimed at smoothing out the socio-psychological problems of childlessness and encouraging cases of adoption are consistent with human natural instincts. In contrast, technologies for the formation of regulated and planned infertility (sexual abstinence and responsible contraception) are in conflict with the natural need to continue oneself in offspring. In addition, calls for planned fertility and responsible parenthood do not always correspond to the ethnic traditions of the titular nationalities of the Russian Federation and the basic provisions of traditional religions. In Fig. Figure 21 shows a diagram that illustrates the vector of transformation of natural fertility in a classic nuclear family in modern society.

Rice. 21. The influence of natural and artificial fertility on the continuity of generations and the social stability of society

The diagram reflects the influence of new medical technologies that translate the problems of sterility, civil and same-sex marriage into problems of infertility and adoptive parenthood. The diagram shows how the natural model of fertility, interacting with models of artificial fertility, creates new socio-biological phenomena and modifies the basis of stability of any society, namely the format of generational continuity.
Concluding this section, the following should be emphasized. The demographic transition from natural models of fertility to artificial ones is accompanied by an increase in intragenerational and intergenerational conflict, leads to an increase in the severity of anomies (worldview conflicts) in the mass and group consciousness, and actualizes the confrontation between the secular and religious picture of the world among residents of industrialized territories. This pattern is non-subjective. It is objective in nature and reflects the discrepancy between the level of development of industrial technologies and the level of development of social consciousness and the associated set of traditionally supported stereotypes of reproductive behavior. The discovery of this pattern allows us to conclude that unbalanced fertility, an imbalance between natural and artificial (regulated) fertility models in society, creates a threat to the stability of society in the medium and long term. These circumstances force social demographers to reconsider a number of technologies and calls, to adapt the concepts of demographic policy to the real living conditions of society. In these conditions, organizing work with youth requires specialists in the field of social management to have jeweler precision in their work, increased attention to the basic and current needs of young people, and the ability to organize social management using soft, non-directive methods.
Used to measure fertility scorecard , which make it possible to determine the overall level of fertility, its dynamics, intensity and magnitude in various population cohorts (socio-economic and demographic groups).
Absolute number of births shows how many total children were born in a population during a given period of time (usually a year). This indicator records the scale of the demographic phenomenon, but does not make it possible to compare different territories with each other, and therefore, to adopt the experience of social and demographic policies of one territory from another if these two territories differ significantly from each other in size and population density. To assess the comparability of demographic events and make decisions about the legality of transferring the experience of social management of one territory to another, relative indicators are used.
Total fertility rate(CBR) - the number of births per year per 1000 population. The rate is calculated as the ratio of the absolute number of births to the average population for a period, usually a year. The indicator is calculated using the formula:
N
n = x 1000 (‰),
P T
where n is the crude birth rate;
N – number of live births;
P – average population for the calculation period;
T is the length of the calculation period in years.

Scale of valuesCBR: indicators less than 16 ‰ are considered low,
ranging from 16 to 24 ‰ - average, from 25 to 29 ‰ - above average, from 30 to 40 ‰ - high, more than 40 ‰ - very high.
Crude birth rate in Russia in the 80s. last century (before the start of socio-economic reforms in the country) was at the level of 16 - 17 ‰ and corresponded to the average values ​​of the indicator in the 90s. at the peak of the perestroika events it dropped to the level of 8 - 9 ‰, i.e. to the low range. The dynamics of the indicator in the period from 1997 to 2004 are presented in table. 7. As follows from the table, during the period of transition to a market economy, the birth rate in the Russian Federation is characterized by instability in the values ​​of its overall coefficient. The indicator shows slight fluctuations in the period from 1997 to 2000, an upward trend in 2001 - 2003, then a decrease in 2004. Thus, wave-like dynamics are revealed with periods of increasing and decreasing indicator values. The minimum values ​​were recorded in 1999, i.e. in the year that followed the financial instability of 1998. The highest figures were noted in 2003, when the consequences of financial turmoil smoothed out and the attention of the Russian Government to demographic problems increased.
Table 7
Fertility dynamics in Russia for the period from 1997 to 2004

The presented data once again confirms the idea that the biological ability to bear children and its actual embodiment in the social behavior of people differ significantly from each other, and the difference between them is determined not only by historical eras, but also by a narrower time frame, within which the controlling factors are financial and economic living conditions of people. In addition, the above facts indicate the high dynamics of fertility rates in Russia and indicate the need for a mobile transformation of social technologies for fertility management, taking into account the financial situation in the country.
Speaking about planning social management technologies based on demographic indicators, it must be emphasized that conclusions based only on general coefficients may be false, since they do not take into account the complexity of demographic structures and processes. In particular, we must remember that the values ​​of all general indicators, including the total fertility rate, depend on the age structure of the population and the intensity of the demographic process being studied in the past. Therefore, when constructing a demographic policy and monitoring the effectiveness of this policy, it is advisable to analyze, in addition to the general fertility indicator, special and specific fertility indicators. Special and private indicators clarify the contribution of individual population groups to the fertility process.
Special Fertility Rate calculated in relation to that part of the population that “produces” births, i.e. only to the number of women of reproductive age (15-49 years). The demographic situation can be described in more detail using the age-specific birth rate.
Age-specific birth rate(ASFR) is calculated as the ratio of the number of births to women of a certain age to the average annual number of women of a given age.
Partial fertility rates provide even more accurate and targeted characteristics. For example, it is known that the frequency of childbearing among married and unmarried women is not the same. Partial coefficients are used to separately assess marital and extramarital birth rates.
The marital fertility rate is defined as the ratio of the number of children born in marriage to the average number of married women.
The out-of-wedlock birth rate is the ratio of the number of children born out of wedlock to the average number of unmarried women.
For the purposes of social management, of particular importance are those fertility indicators that characterize the reproductive potential of the population and the degree of its implementation; reflect the prospects for population growth in the near, medium and long term. Indicators of this kind include the childbearing index and the total fertility rate.
Childhood rate (index) - the ratio of the number of children aged 0-4 years to the number of women of reproductive age (15-49 years). In Russia, the childhood index according to the 1989 census was 0.747, including in cities - 0.682 and in rural areas 9.73. For comparison: Kenya - 1.004; Afghanistan - 0.895; China - 0.381; USA - 0.285; Germany - 0.191. A comparison of foreign indicators with Russian ones reveals an important pattern: the indicators of the Russian Federation are characterized by greater similarity with the data of developing countries than with the indicators of economically developed countries. This indicates that simply copying social management technologies from European, American and Chinese countries on Russian territories is not possible. On the contrary, transferring the experience of social management of countries with developed market economies to Russian reality should be carried out carefully, thoughtfully, with full consideration of the real demographic situation.
Totalbirth rate(TFR) characterizes the average number of births per woman in a hypothetical generation over her entire life. Total coefficients above 4.0 are considered high, below 2.15 - low, population stability is observed at 2.15-2.2. In table Figure 8 presents the geographical features of fertility in the modern world: countries with three ranges of TFR values ​​are highlighted (below 2.0; ranging from 2 to 3 and above 3).
Table 8
Geographical features of fertility
(total fertility rate - the number of births per woman)

It is obvious that the countries of the first group are in a situation where the number of parents is not reproduced in the generations of their descendants. The countries of the second group are characterized by population reproduction in constant numbers from generation to generation. The countries of the third group progressively increase in their numbers from generation to generation. It is logical to assume that the most dynamic demographic policy must be carried out in countries that are not stable in their numbers and demonstrate rapid dynamics both downward and upward, since it is in these countries that the transformation of reproductive behavior patterns is carried out at the fastest pace. It is noteworthy that low birth rates are demonstrated by countries that are classified as economically developed and rapidly developing, i.e. those where priority is given economic development territories.
Concluding the paragraph, we can draw the following conclusion: fertility is set by the biological framework of fertility, but is realized in society and is limited by social circumstances. The totality of natural instincts, individual desires and social capabilities of an individual form the final result - the reproductive behavior of the population, as well as stereotypes of the reproductive behavior of individual layers and groups of the population.

5.2. Reproductive behavior: definition, reproductive strategies, main trends recorded inXXIV.

Reproductive behavior − system of actions and relationships, as well as psychological states individuals associated with the birth or refusal to give birth to children of any order, within or outside of marriage.
Obviously, reproductive behavior is one of the types of social behavior. In its implementation, in addition to individual needs, ethnic, religious traditions, group stereotypes of behavior of various social groups and segments of the population are reflected (directly and indirectly).
The reproductive behavior of a person in society differs significantly from his biological ability to fertilize, bear healthy offspring and give birth to live children. In this discrepancy between biological inclinations and socially determined reproductive behavior options lie potentially great opportunities for social management. Often, especially in conditions of economic stagnation and the global financial crisis, the instinct of procreation forms the basis of social aggression and serves as the basis for the development of international terrorism. More detailed information about demographic imbalances in society as objective causes and the source of the socio-psychological roots of modern terrorism can be obtained on the Internet. For this topic, it is important to note that there is a large distance between the ability to conceive and actual fertility. And every person goes through this distance in his life, filling it with his own decisions about how to build his life, the life of loved ones and the fate of subsequent generations. In this struggle of instincts, freedom of choice and will, there is a huge field of activity for a thoughtful social manager. In order to successfully cope with complex management tasks in the field of demographic policy among young people, it is necessary to know the structure of demographic behavior. The main links of this structure are listed below.
Structure of reproductive behavior: reproductive needs - attitudes - motives - interests - plans - decisions - actions - results of actions.
In demography, the expression of reproductive behavior is the average number of children in a family and the average number of children born of a woman for her entire life, as well as the proportion between the number of ideal, desired and real children in the family. Information about this proportion is obtained as a result of special sociological research and sample surveys timed to coincide with general population censuses. The gap between the number of ideal, desired and real children in a family allows us to indirectly assess the degree of satisfaction of the biological and social needs of the population, draw a conclusion about the harmony or, conversely, disharmony of reproductive behavior, detect the phenomenon of insoluble conflicts (anomie) in the structure of life scenarios of the population as a whole or its individual social groups and layers. Assessing the degree of harmony of reproductive behavior is one of the important foundations for the prevention of abnormal behavior of young people and the development of successful technologies for social management of territories aimed at consolidating society. To create effective technologies of this type, it is necessary to take into account the relationship of reproductive behavior with environmental factors. These primarily include the following factors:

• social affiliation of people ( social norms, which may vary depending on the social status, income, occupation, profession of the respondents, the level of their workload, lack of free time, etc.; family and religious traditions; level of education);
• territorial differences in reproductive behavior (geographical and ethnic features, differentiation of fertility in settlements different types etc.).

Territorial and ethnic differences in the reproductive behavior of Russians were clearly revealed by the results of the 2002 general population census. It was established that low birth rates were registered in the Northwestern and Central, and high ones in the Volga-Vyatka, North Caucasus and Ural economic regions. Low birth rates are typical for Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians. Tatars, Bashkirs, Buryats, Tuvans, Yakuts, and indigenous peoples of the North and North Caucasus are characterized by high birth rates. We can say that in modern conditions on the territory of the Russian Federation there are simultaneously two strategies of reproductive behavior, studied in detail by population biology (Table 9).
Table 9
Basic strategies of reproductive behavior

When implementing demographic policy in the territories of the Russian Federation, it is necessary to fully take into account the diversity of reproductive behavior of the population and select optimal social management technologies based on the social, territorial and ethnic specifics of the reproductive behavior of their residents.
The economically developed countries of the modern world are characterized by a demographic transition in the reproductive behavior of their residents in the form of a rejection of large families and the demand for small families, which leads to narrowed population reproduction and a decrease in population dynamics. The relationship between fertility and the level of historical development of society is studied by the special field of historical demography. The identified relationships are reflected in the concept of the evolution of fertility.

5.3. Evolution of fertility: the essence of the concept, directions of evolution of fertility during the transition from an industrial society to an information society

Evolution of fertility− this is a change in fertility rates associated with the socio-economic development of society. Historically recorded natural process reducing the birth rate population with the development of productive forces, intellectual technologies, the involvement of women in social work, the lengthening of the period of socialization and professional training and formation younger generation. During the transition from an agricultural society to an industrial one, access to means of subsistence is facilitated for the majority of the population, the opportunity to ensure an acceptable level of prosperity increases, and the birth rate increases. But up to certain limits. The further development of industrial society and its transition to a high-tech information society requires a lot of effort and time for the socialization of young people and their achievement of a sufficient level of education and professional training. This leads to the transfer of concerns about planned parenthood and childbearing to a later age. In a market society, an increase in living standards occurs against the background of a decrease in birth rates. This pattern is illustrated in Fig. 22.

Rice. 22. Scheme of the evolution of fertility

In the formation of the descending branch of the graph shown in Fig. 22, a certain contribution is also made by the socio-demographic phenomenon, known in the specialized literature as the “feedback paradox”. This phenomenon was first described by demographers two centuries ago and consists in the fact that rich families, on average, have fewer children than poor ones. This phenomenon has a social stratification: first and most clearly it manifested itself historically among representatives of the intelligentsia, then among workers, and lastly among agricultural workers.
The fact of a change from one fertility model to another (large families to small children) is denoted by the term demographic transition. In Europe it became clearly visible in the 70s. last century, in Russia it was formed a generation later - in the 90s.
Rice. 23 clarifies this situation, showing that the transition from having many children to having few children in the countries of the European Union occurred in the mid-70s. last century.

Rice. 23. Dynamics of the total fertility rate in France (top graph) and Germany (bottom graph) in the second half of the 20th century
(Quoted from: M. Klupt, 2008. P. 48, Fig. 1.1.)

Rice. 24 details the chronology of the demographic transition in the dynamics of reproductive behavior in relation to the situation in Russia. It follows from the figure that in the Russian Federation a noticeable decrease in the number of births per woman of reproductive age occurred a decade later than in Europe, although the trend towards small children among the urban population had already formed in the early 60s. last century.

Rice. 24. Dynamics of the total fertility rate (TFR - the number of births per woman of reproductive age) in Russia for the period from 1961 to 2004. The upper broken line is the rural population; average – the entire population; the lower one is urban.