European Population Conference 2016. Demographic Change and Policy Implications
This electronic publication contains all papers prepared for EPC 2016.
From 2007 to 2014 total fertility rate in Russia increased from 1.42 to 1.75. To what extent this growth is related to a package of family policy measures introduced in 2007? Although the maternity (family) capital program is the most well-known innovation of the 2007 reform, we argue that the new rules of monthly childcare allowance assignment is its another major component. Since all measures were introduced simultaneously, it is only possible to estimate their cumulative effect on subsequent fertility behavior. Using panel Russian Generations and Gender Survey data collected in 2004, 2007 and 2011, this study assesses how family policy changes introduced in 2007 were related to the fertility behavior in Russia in recent years. Eventually we do not find any statistically significant increase in the chances of having second and subsequent births in 2007-2011 in comparison with the period of 2004-2007. We also find that the policy changes might have influenced women differentially, and might have had significant influence on less educated women and women from low income households. Unfortunately, the size of the GGS sample does not allow to capture it within this study. We acknowledge that the observed effects might be related only to the calendar shifts in fertility behavior and recuperation of fertility decline observed in 1990-s.
The study considers the relationship between internal migration and fertility in Russia. Authors use a sample of 28.2 million women born in 1950-1979 withdrawn from the Russian population Census-2010 database. The data shows that women who have continuously lived in their birthplace since birth have on average lower fertility compared to those who have a migration experience. The authors attribute this to the fact that in Russia internal migrants usually aim to escape from economically depressed areas, and positive effects of these changes overcome negative effects coming from the disruption of their childbearing careers. At that moves within the region have stronger positive impact on fertility than interregional ones, which confirms that migration and fertility are still competing life events. One major exception are migrants heading to the capital cities. Due to the need to adapt to the high competition in every sphere of economic life on the one hand and to the very low fertility norms in the destination region on the other hand they demonstrate lower eventual fertility than their non-migrant compatriots. Spatial analysis of fertility differences between migrant and non-migrant women revealed that regions that loose in fertility due to internal migration are few and they are clustered around the Caucasus Mountains and near the Altai. These are regions just entering the second demographic transition characterized by high fertility together with relatively low average age for motherhood. Overall, authors conclude that Russia benefits from internal migration in terms of eventual fertility.