Migration and Fertility: A Review of Theories and Evidences

Abstract

There are four main theoretical perspectives or models that have been suggested for explaining differentials in fertility behaviors and attitudes between migrants and non-migrants. These theories of migration and fertility differ in several respects, the main difference being in the relationship between the timing of migration and changes in the reproductive attitudes and behaviors of migrants. The four theoretical perspectives can be termed Generational (socialization) perspective, adaptation perspective, selectivity perspective and disruptive perspective [1,2]. The generational theoretical perspective is based on the observation that rural fertility is generally higher than urban fertility. It starts from the premise that fertility goals are formed during childhood and they reflect family environment during childhood [3]. The model assumes that the adaptation of lower urban fertility norms and values by rural-urban migrants, not only takes a long time, but their acceptance will occur only after a generation has elapsed [2]. The socialization hypothesis predicts that no significant change in the fertility of migrants (rural-urban) compared to that of stayers at origin would take place, irrespective of their duration of stay in the urban area. It also implies that the first generation of migrants to be born in the urban areas will have lower fertility compared to rural-urban migrants. Further, generational hypothesis emphasize that culture, norms and values of place of origin continue to prevail even after migrating to a new low fertility setting [4]. The adaptation model on the other hand takes the premise that changes in tastes and adoption of urban fertility norms by migrants occur gradually by time at destination among the families of migrants themselves and do not require an entire generation to pass before they take place. The hypothesis does not specify how long it will take rural-urban migrants to adapt to small family norms in the urban areas. According to Ribe and Schultz [3] the adaptation hypothesis assumes that fertility differences are in part due to different relative wages received by men and women and different price and income constraints confronting different families. The constraints facing families in terms of relative income and price of children between urban and rural areas explain fertility differentials between them. After being exposed to