Measuring fertility with the 1901 Canadian census: a critical assessment.

IF 1.6 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY Historical Methods Pub Date : 2000-01-01 DOI:10.1080/01615440009598964
D Gavreau, P Gossage, L Gingras
{"title":"Measuring fertility with the 1901 Canadian census: a critical assessment.","authors":"D Gavreau, P Gossage, L Gingras","doi":"10.1080/01615440009598964","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"n demography, the most sophisticated measures of fertility are usually based on the registration of births I combined with census data. But where the registration of vital statistics is nonexistent-as in Canada before 1921 'demographers have found other ways of measuring fertility. Censuses are one source that can be used for this purpose, at both the aggregate and household levels. Aggregate measures of fertility-also referred to as macrolevel measures-are the most commonly used to describe historical fertility trends. They are comparatively easy to establish, because they can usually be derived from published material available for specific geographic areas.2 But the analytical power of such measures is limited to associations between fertility indices and the other characteristics of a given territory. The high aggregate fertility in Quebec counties with large proportions of Francophones, for example, tends to support a link between linguistic features and fertility beha~ior.~ But this \"ecological\" association actually tells us nothing about how Francophone women in various counties actually behaved in comparison with their English-speaking contemporaries. Household-level measures differ from aggregate measures in that they are based on a direct count of each mother's own children. That observation can then be linked to the mother's personal characteristics and to those of the household in which she lived. For obvious reasons, these microlevel research tools provide much greater analytical power. However, they are not particularly common in the literature. Furthermore, when they are used, it is most often with relatively small samples because household-level measures are much more difficult to establish than aggregate fertility indices. Constructing household-level fertility measures involves looking beyond published census tables to the raw data pertaining to each individual and family that were collected by enumerators, in this case almost a century ago. We have recently done this kind of work using the Canadian manuscript census of 1901, both in the context of the Canadian Families Project (CFP) and our separate research project on the Quebec fertility de~ l ine .~ The careful transcription of nominative data from enumerators' lists has allowed us to develop more detailed household-level measures of fertility. It thereby opened new opportunities for testing specific hypotheses about individual reproductive behavior, at a time when fertility rates in Quebec were showing some signs of a decline but when differentials with other parts of Canada (where fertility change had begun earlier) were still substantial. Our focus in this article on the Province of Quebec is of interest from the perspective of ethnic, religious, and linguistic variation. The Province of Quebec-where the quality of parish registers, at least for the Catholic majority, was high-also offers interesting possibilities for the independent testing of the fertility data derived from the 1901 census. It is well established that fertility levels in Quebec remained substantially above those in the rest of Canada until as recently as the 1 9 6 0 ~ ~ Researchers can use various measures to trace the overall pattern of fertility decline in the province (table 1). Crude birthrates show almost no sign of change before the period 1921-1931. More refined indices, however, suggest a very slight decrease in marital fertility toward the end of the nineteenth century, more precisely between 1871 and 1891. The sharper decline that took place between 1921 and 1941 (about 30 percent) was followed by the baby boom in the forties, an interlude that, in the case of Quebec, did not interrupt the downward trend in marital fertility. In Quebec, the higher birthrates of the","PeriodicalId":45535,"journal":{"name":"Historical Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2000-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01615440009598964","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historical Methods","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01615440009598964","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

n demography, the most sophisticated measures of fertility are usually based on the registration of births I combined with census data. But where the registration of vital statistics is nonexistent-as in Canada before 1921 'demographers have found other ways of measuring fertility. Censuses are one source that can be used for this purpose, at both the aggregate and household levels. Aggregate measures of fertility-also referred to as macrolevel measures-are the most commonly used to describe historical fertility trends. They are comparatively easy to establish, because they can usually be derived from published material available for specific geographic areas.2 But the analytical power of such measures is limited to associations between fertility indices and the other characteristics of a given territory. The high aggregate fertility in Quebec counties with large proportions of Francophones, for example, tends to support a link between linguistic features and fertility beha~ior.~ But this "ecological" association actually tells us nothing about how Francophone women in various counties actually behaved in comparison with their English-speaking contemporaries. Household-level measures differ from aggregate measures in that they are based on a direct count of each mother's own children. That observation can then be linked to the mother's personal characteristics and to those of the household in which she lived. For obvious reasons, these microlevel research tools provide much greater analytical power. However, they are not particularly common in the literature. Furthermore, when they are used, it is most often with relatively small samples because household-level measures are much more difficult to establish than aggregate fertility indices. Constructing household-level fertility measures involves looking beyond published census tables to the raw data pertaining to each individual and family that were collected by enumerators, in this case almost a century ago. We have recently done this kind of work using the Canadian manuscript census of 1901, both in the context of the Canadian Families Project (CFP) and our separate research project on the Quebec fertility de~ l ine .~ The careful transcription of nominative data from enumerators' lists has allowed us to develop more detailed household-level measures of fertility. It thereby opened new opportunities for testing specific hypotheses about individual reproductive behavior, at a time when fertility rates in Quebec were showing some signs of a decline but when differentials with other parts of Canada (where fertility change had begun earlier) were still substantial. Our focus in this article on the Province of Quebec is of interest from the perspective of ethnic, religious, and linguistic variation. The Province of Quebec-where the quality of parish registers, at least for the Catholic majority, was high-also offers interesting possibilities for the independent testing of the fertility data derived from the 1901 census. It is well established that fertility levels in Quebec remained substantially above those in the rest of Canada until as recently as the 1 9 6 0 ~ ~ Researchers can use various measures to trace the overall pattern of fertility decline in the province (table 1). Crude birthrates show almost no sign of change before the period 1921-1931. More refined indices, however, suggest a very slight decrease in marital fertility toward the end of the nineteenth century, more precisely between 1871 and 1891. The sharper decline that took place between 1921 and 1941 (about 30 percent) was followed by the baby boom in the forties, an interlude that, in the case of Quebec, did not interrupt the downward trend in marital fertility. In Quebec, the higher birthrates of the
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
用1901年加拿大人口普查测量生育率:一个重要的评估。
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
Historical Methods
Historical Methods Multiple-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: Historical Methodsreaches an international audience of social scientists concerned with historical problems. It explores interdisciplinary approaches to new data sources, new approaches to older questions and material, and practical discussions of computer and statistical methodology, data collection, and sampling procedures. The journal includes the following features: “Evidence Matters” emphasizes how to find, decipher, and analyze evidence whether or not that evidence is meant to be quantified. “Database Developments” announces major new public databases or large alterations in older ones, discusses innovative ways to organize them, and explains new ways of categorizing information.
期刊最新文献
A New Strategy for Linking U.S. Historical Censuses: A Case Study for the IPUMS Multigenerational Longitudinal Panel. Simple Strategies for Improving Inference with Linked Data: A Case Study of the 1850-1930 IPUMS Linked Representative Historical Samples. Reconstruction of Birth Histories for the Study of Fertility in the United States, 1830-1910. Introduction to Special Issues on Historical Record Linking. Linking the 1940 U.S. Census with Modern Data.
×
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