|
Malthus, Marx and Miro:
Demographic transition in Latin America, 1930-
|
 |
Population (in millions) by world regions, 1950 - 95 (table 1)
Region 1950 1995 1975 1995
Latin Amer 164 481 2.7 1.9
Developed 832 1169 1.1 0.2
|
 |
Total population: South America, 1900-1990 (steeper slope, faster growth)
|
 |
Mesoamerica and Latin Caribbean, 1900-1990 (steeper slope, faster growth)
|
 |
Demographic transition: phase shifts in mortality and fertility (see table 5)
A post-modern phase?--low death rates, lower birth rates, negative growth rates.
|
 |
Two social philosophers: Malthus and Marx (p. 7)
Thomas R. Malthus, An Essay on the Principle of Population (1798): Population increases geometrically; subsistence, arithmetically. Poverty is the result unless there is moral restraint.
Karl Marx, Das Kapital (1867): Each mode of production has its corresponding mode of reproduction.
|
 |
The technocrat, Carment Miro, founding director of CELADE, UN Demographic Center for LA
From 1955, CELADE trained generations of demographers, who studied all aspects of population change.
CELADE students and their research influenced population policy throughout the Americas.
Shifted public policies to reduce natural increase through family planning.
|
 |
The mortality transitions (Table 3)
Earlier and faster in Argentina, Uruguay, Cuba, and Costa Rica
Later and slower in Chile, Mexico, Brazil and Peru
Slowest in Guatemala, much of Central America, and Haiti
|
 |
Life Expectancy, 1900-1980, table 3 (unequal in 1900; now converging)
|
 |
Mortality transition in Mexico: gap with the USA (e0)
|
 |
Infant mortality declined from 13% in 1950 to 3% in 1992 (still more than 3 times the US rate).
|
 |
The fertility transitions
Earliest in Argentina, Uruguay, Puerto Rico and Cuba (see boom/bust)
Later in Chile and Costa Rica
Late in Mexico, Brazil, Peru, etc.
Very late in Nicaragua, Guatemala, and Haiti
|
 |
Two fertility transitions--early and middle--compared with USA
|
 |
Revolutions and fertility: booms, busts, and transitions
|
 |
Fertility decline in Latin America, 1952 - 1992 (table 4)
|
 |
Obstacles to fertility transition
Politics. “to govern is to populate” dictators and democrats
Culture. Religion: “Who listens to the Pope?” Family: Principal social matrix Machismo: Household politics
Is development the best contraceptive? Or is it education?
|
 |
Mexico’s fertility transition: 7 children in 1970 to 3.2 in 1992
|
 |
Fertility in Mexico: A comparison with the USA
|
 |
Mexico’s fertility in 1971 lagged USA by a century
|
 |
Very rapid fertility decline, 1970-1992.
|
 |
Educations effects: the case of Mexico, 1990
Natural fertility (no restraints) versus
Mexico: All women (babies per thousand women aged 15-19 … 55-59)
Four levels of education: none, primary, secondary, post
Language spoken: Indigenous only, Spanish only, Bilingual indigenous.
|
 |
Total fertility by age, a model: no restraints on childbearing.
|
 |
Total fertility by age, Mexico 1990: all married women
|
 |
… women with post-secondary education (Mexico 1990)
|
 |
… women with post-secondary education, and secondary
|
 |
… women with post-, secondary and primary education
|
 |
… women with post-, secondary, and no education at all
|
 |
… Mexican women who speak only Spanish
|
 |
… Spanish vs. Spanish and an indigenous language
|
 |
… female speakers of an indigenous language vs Span. & Span+Ind.
|
 |
Conclusions: Optimism.
Minimal levels of female education are sufficient to initiate the fertility transition.
Prolonged socio-economic difficulties are likely to push down birth rates as well.
The demographic explosion is nearly over in Latin America.
|