Rural–Urban Migration and Fertility Ideation in Senegal: Comparing Returned, Current, and Future Migrants to Dakar to Rural Nonmigrants

IF 4.6 2区 社会学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY Population and Development Review Pub Date : 2024-02-28 DOI:10.1111/padr.12609
Yacine Boujija, Simona Bignami, John Sandberg
{"title":"Rural–Urban Migration and Fertility Ideation in Senegal: Comparing Returned, Current, and Future Migrants to Dakar to Rural Nonmigrants","authors":"Yacine Boujija, Simona Bignami, John Sandberg","doi":"10.1111/padr.12609","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In low- and middle-income countries, significant differences in fertility beliefs between rural and urban areas arise from the differential timing and pace of fertility declines. Demographers have long hypothesized about the diffusion of these beliefs and behaviors from urban to rural areas, potentially via temporary rural–urban labor migration. In this paper, we investigate the association between temporary internal migration from rural Senegal to the capital city, Dakar, and differences in the fertility and contraceptive beliefs and preferences of migrants and nonmigrants. We test socialization, selection, and adaptation hypotheses by comparing the fertility ideation of current and returning migrants with that of nonmigrants and future migrants from their place of origin. Our results support selection effects, explaining half of the differences between nonmigrants and migrants. Once selection effects are removed, significant differences remain between nonmigrants and current or returning migrants. These differences are largely explained by two complementary measures of adaptation: years lived in Dakar and the number of ties to residents of that city. The results indicate that adaptation is as important, if not more so than selection in explaining differences between migrants and nonmigrants. This holds true even for returned migrants five years after their last migration spell. Of the two potential adaptation mechanisms explored, the time spent in Dakar generally explained adaptation better than ties to nonmigrants in Dakar. However, our complementary analyses do not rule out the importance of urban networks on fertility, as they contribute to migrant selection.","PeriodicalId":51372,"journal":{"name":"Population and Development Review","volume":"83 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Population and Development Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padr.12609","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In low- and middle-income countries, significant differences in fertility beliefs between rural and urban areas arise from the differential timing and pace of fertility declines. Demographers have long hypothesized about the diffusion of these beliefs and behaviors from urban to rural areas, potentially via temporary rural–urban labor migration. In this paper, we investigate the association between temporary internal migration from rural Senegal to the capital city, Dakar, and differences in the fertility and contraceptive beliefs and preferences of migrants and nonmigrants. We test socialization, selection, and adaptation hypotheses by comparing the fertility ideation of current and returning migrants with that of nonmigrants and future migrants from their place of origin. Our results support selection effects, explaining half of the differences between nonmigrants and migrants. Once selection effects are removed, significant differences remain between nonmigrants and current or returning migrants. These differences are largely explained by two complementary measures of adaptation: years lived in Dakar and the number of ties to residents of that city. The results indicate that adaptation is as important, if not more so than selection in explaining differences between migrants and nonmigrants. This holds true even for returned migrants five years after their last migration spell. Of the two potential adaptation mechanisms explored, the time spent in Dakar generally explained adaptation better than ties to nonmigrants in Dakar. However, our complementary analyses do not rule out the importance of urban networks on fertility, as they contribute to migrant selection.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
塞内加尔的城乡迁移与生育观念:将返回达喀尔的移民、当前移民和未来移民与农村非移民进行比较
在低收入和中等收入国家,由于生育率下降的时间和速度不同,城乡之间的生育观念也存在显著差异。长期以来,人口学家一直假设这些观念和行为会从城市扩散到农村地区,可能是通过农村到城市的临时劳动力迁移实现的。在本文中,我们研究了从塞内加尔农村到首都达喀尔的临时国内移民与移民和非移民的生育和避孕观念及偏好差异之间的关联。我们通过比较当前移民和返乡移民的生育观念,以及非移民和原籍地未来移民的生育观念,检验了社会化、选择和适应假说。我们的结果支持选择效应,解释了非移民和移民之间一半的差异。一旦剔除了选择效应,非移民与当前或回国移民之间仍存在显著差异。这些差异在很大程度上是由两个互补的适应性衡量指标所解释的:在达喀尔生活的年数以及与该城市居民的联系数量。结果表明,在解释移民与非移民之间的差异方面,适应与选择同样重要,甚至更为重要。即使是在上一次移民五年后返回的移民也是如此。在所探讨的两种潜在适应机制中,在达喀尔度过的时间通常比与达喀尔非移民的联系更能解释适应性。然而,我们的补充分析并没有排除城市网络对生育率的重要性,因为它们有助于移民选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
4.00%
发文量
60
期刊介绍: Population and Development Review is essential reading to keep abreast of population studies, research on the interrelationships between population and socioeconomic change, and related thinking on public policy. Its interests span both developed and developing countries, theoretical advances as well as empirical analyses and case studies, a broad range of disciplinary approaches, and concern with historical as well as present-day problems.
期刊最新文献
Revisiting Women's Empowerment and Contraception The Globalization of International Migration? A Conceptual and Data‐Driven Synthesis Contraceptive Change and Fertility Transition The Next 2 Billion: Can the World Support 10 Billion People? The Potential of Internal Migration to Shape Rural and Urban Populations Across Africa, Asia, and Latin America
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1