Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-n9wrp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T14:58:16.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SIBSHIP SIZE AND YOUNG WOMEN’S TRANSITIONS TO ADULTHOOD IN INDIA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 November 2017

K. G. Santhya  and
A. J. Francis Zavier
K. G. Santhya*
Affiliation:
Population Council, New Delhi, India
A. J. Francis Zavier
Affiliation:
Population Council, New Delhi, India
*
1Corresponding author. Email: kgsanthya@popcouncil.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

In India, a substantial proportion of young people are growing up in smaller families with fewer siblings than earlier generations of young people. Studies exploring the associations between declines in sibship size and young people’s life experiences are limited. Drawing on data from a sub-nationally representative study conducted in 2006–08 of over 50,000 youths in India, this paper examines the associations between surviving sibship size and young women’s (age 20–24) transitions to adulthood. Young women who reported no or a single surviving sibling were categorized as those with a small surviving sibship size, and those who reported two or more surviving siblings as those with a large surviving sibship size. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were conducted to ascertain the relationship between sibship size and outcome indicators. Analysis was also done separately for low- and high-fertility settings. Small sibship size tended to have a positive influence in many ways on young women’s chances of making successful transitions to adulthood. Young women with fewer siblings were more likely than others to report secondary school completion, participation in vocational skills training programmes, experience of gender egalitarian socialization practices, adherence to gender egalitarian norms, exercise of pre-marital agency and small family size preferences. These associations were more apparent in low- than high-fertility settings.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 49 , Special Issue S1: Low Fertility in Developing Countries: Causes and Implications , November 2017 , pp. S74 - S95
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press, 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Basu, A. (1995) Women’s roles and the gender gap in health and survival. In Das Gupta, M., Chen, L. C. & Krishman, T. N. (eds) Women’s Health in India: Risk and Vulnerability. Oxford University Press, Bombay, India.Google Scholar
Blake, J. (1981) Family size and the quality of children. Demography 18, 421–442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blake, J. (1985) Number of siblings and educational mobility. American Sociological Review 50, 94–105.Google Scholar
Blake, J. (1989) Family Size and Achievement. University of California Press, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Brody, C. J. & Steelman, L. C. (1985) Sibling structure and parental sex-typing of children’s household tasks. Journal of Marriage and the Family 47, 265–273.Google Scholar
De Tray, D. (1983) Children’s work activities in Malaysia. Population and Development Review 9, 437–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downey, D. B. (1995) When bigger is not better: family size, parental resources, and children’s educational performance. American Sociological Review 60, 746–761.Google Scholar
Downey, D. B. (2001) Number of siblings and intellectual development: the resource dilution explanation. American Psychologist 56, 497–504.Google Scholar
Dyson, T. & Moore, M. (1983) On kinship structure, female autonomy, and demographic behaviour in India. Population and Development Review 9(1), 35–60.Google Scholar
Elder, G. H. & Bowerman, C. E. (1963) Family structure and childrearing patterns: the effect of family size and sex composition. American Sociological Review 28, 891–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, J., Lutz, W. & Testa, M. R. (2003) The emergence of sub-replacement family size ideals in Europe. Population Research and Policy Review 22(5–6), 479–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IIPS & Population Council (2010) Youth in India: Situation and Needs (2006–2007). International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai.Google Scholar
Jæger, M. M. (2008) Do large sibships really lead to lower educational attainment? New evidence from quasi-experimental variation in couples’ reproductive capacity. Acta Sociologica 51(3), 217–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jæger, M. M. (2009) Sibship size and educational attainment: a joint test of the Confluence Model and the Resource Dilution Hypothesis. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 27, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jejeebhoy, S. J. (1993) Family size, outcomes for children, and gender disparities: the case of rural Maharashtra. In Lloyd, C. B. (ed.) Fertility, Family Size, and Structure: Consequences for Families and Children. Population Council, New York, pp. 445–479.Google Scholar
Kelly, A. C. (1996) The consequences of rapid population growth on human resource development: the case of education. In Ahlburg, D. A., Kelly, A. C. & Mason K. O. (eds) The Impact of Population Growth on Well-Being in Developing Countries. Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, pp. 67–173.Google Scholar
Lloyd, C. B. (1994) Investing in the next generation: the implications of high fertility at the level of the family. In Cassen, R. (ed.) Population and Development: Old Debates, New Conclusions. Overseas Development Council, Washington, DC, pp. 181–202.Google Scholar
Lutz, W., Skirbekk, V. & Testa, M. R. (2007) The Low-Fertility Trap Hypothesis: Forces that May Lead to Further Postponement and Fewer Births in Europe. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Austria.Google Scholar
Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (2008) New Series (1999–2000) Statement: Gross State Domestic Product at Current Prices. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, New Delhi. URL: www.mospi.nic.in/6_gsdp_cur_9394ser.htm (accessed 27th March 2013).Google Scholar
National Research Council & Institute of Medicine (2005) Growing Up Global: The Changing Transition to Adulthood in Developing Countries. National Academies Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner (2011) Provisional Population Totals. Paper 1 of 2011: Census of India 2011, Series 1 – India. Controller of Publications, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Office of the Registrar General (2013) Sample Registration System: Statistical Report 2011. Report No. 1 of 2013. Office of the Registrar General, New Delhi. URL: http://www.censusindia.gov.in/vital_statistics/SRS_Reports.html (accessed 11th April 2013).Google Scholar
Pong, S-L. (1997) Sibship size and educational attainment in Peninsular Malaysia: do politics matter? Sociological Perspectives 40(2), 227–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Régnier-Loilier, A. (2002) Influence of own sibship size on the number of children desired at various times of life: the case of France. Institut National d’Etudes Demographiques 61(3), 165–194.Google Scholar
Sen, A. & Clemente, A. (2010) Intergenerational correlations in educational attainment: birth order and family size effects using Canadian data. Economics of Education Review 29, 147–155.Google Scholar
Steelman, L. C., Powell, B., Werum, R. & Carter, S. (2002) Reconsidering the effects of sibling configuration: recent advances and challenges. Annual Review of Sociology 28, 243–269.Google Scholar
Zajonc, R. B. & Markus, G. B. (1975) Birth order and intellectual development. Psychological Review 82, 74–88.Google Scholar