Childlessness trends, religious trends:

are they associated?

Marion Burkimsher

Affiliated to the University of Lausanne

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Puzzles…

The average number of children of women born in 1960 recorded in the Swiss census of 2000 was 1.73. But the mean TFR for the period 1980-1999 was 1.53! Why the difference?

In Georgia young people are significantly more religious than older people: how unusual is this pattern?

In Switzerland around 20% of women aged 40 are childless. But of those who have ‘no religion’, the proportion is 38%, whereas for the Orthodox/evangelicals the proportion is only 12%

In Georgia, the association is the opposite: religious women are more likely to be childless (and more highly educated)

Structure of presentation

Childlessness trends:

• Data sources

• Summary of trends

Religious trends

• Data sources

• Summary of trends

Association of childlessness and religiosity

• Across Europe

• In Switzerland and Georgia

Further work

Published paper on religious trends:

Burkimsher, Marion. 2014. Is Religious Attendance Bottoming Out? An Examination of Current Trends Across Europe. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 53.2 (2014): 432-445.

Paper at the “revise and resubmit” stage:

Burkimsher, Marion. 2014? Europe-wide fertility trends since the 1990s: turning the corner from declining first birth rates. Demographic Research.

Structure of presentation

Childlessness trends:

• Data sources

• Summary of trends

Religious trends

• Data sources

• Summary of trends

Association of childlessness and religiosity

• Across Europe

• In Switzerland and Georgia

Further work

The challenge of assessing childlessness

We cannot know the proportion of women who will end up childless until they are approaching the end of their reproductive life; aged 45-50. For men it is even harder…

Period measures of fertility (eg. the Total Fertility Rate, TFR) are deflated because of ongoing postponement in age at first birth. We need an assessment of the cohort fertility rate

Childlessness is the complement of the first birth fertility rate (=1-TFR1). But for that we need births by biological birth order, which is not recorded (until recently) in many countries

Migration (often affecting young adults in their prime reproductive ages) means that tracking vital statistics (births) within the country may not produce an accurate assessment of childlessness

Data sources

Vital statistics: as provided by the national statistical offices and complied into the Human Fertility Database (http://www.humanfertility.org); includes fertility rates by age and cohort by each year. Data up to 2010, 15 countries

> Projection of cohort TFR1 calculated by the method proposed by Myrskylä, Goldstein and Cheng (2013). The 5 year trend for each age-specific rate is extrapolated for a further 5 years, then the rate is frozen (up to cohort born 1980)

Swiss census of 2000: question on number of own children

European Social Survey: Wave 3 in 2006 asked question on number of own children

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

196019611962196319641965196619671968196919701971197219731974197519761977197819791980Cohort (year of birth of women)

Netherlands

Norway

Sweden

Switzerland

Projected rate of childlessness: declining

Data source: HFD

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

196019611962196319641965196619671968196919701971197219731974197519761977197819791980Cohort (year of birth of women)

Austria

Bulgaria

Finland

Lithuania

Projected rate of childlessness: stability

Data source: HFD

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

196019611962196319641965196619671968196919701971197219731974197519761977197819791980Cohort (year of birth of women)

Czech Rep

Estonia

Hungary

Portugal

Russia

Slovakia

Slovenia

Projected rate of childlessness: increase

Data source: HFD

Structure of presentation

Childlessness trends:

• Data sources

• Summary of trends

Religious trends

• Data sources

• Summary of trends

Association of childlessness and religiosity

• Across Europe

• In Switzerland and Georgia

Further work

The challenge of assessing religiosity

Religiosity can be assessed in various ways: affiliation, attendance (prayer, belief, importance/relevance to life)…

Any dimension of religiosity can change for an individual over time (whereas childlessness can only change once!)

Religiosity is self-reported, so open to social norms in reporting. Often someone other than the individual completes the questionnaire / census form

Religiosity can be associated with different behaviours and social-demographic characteristics in different ways, in different places and at different times

Data on religiosity

European Social Survey and World/European Values Survey:

attendance and affiliation

Swiss census of 2000: affiliation

Swiss Household Panel: affiliation, attendance (prayer)

Generations and Gender Survey (Georgia): attendance (and

affiliation)

1. Cohort differentials in religious attendance

as in 2012 (mostly)

…but are the differences caused by age effects (people becoming more religious as they get older…)?

Inter-cohort comparison of religious attendance: decline

Data source: ESS 2012, Austria ESS 2010

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s

Austria

Bulgaria

Estonia

Hungary

Lithuania

Portugal

Russia

Slovakia

Slovenia

Switzerland

Inter-cohort comparison of religious attendance: stability

Data source: ESS 2012

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s

Czech Rep

Finland

Netherlands

Norway

Sweden

Inter-cohort comparison of religious attendance: growth

Data source: GGS 2006

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s

Georgia

2. Religious attendance of a cohort over time

> Trends in religious attendance of the Baby Boom cohort (born 1950-1981) from 1990-2012

…but are the changes caused by period effects (secularisation / revival) or age effects?

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014

Austria

Slovenia

Trends in attendance rates of 1950-1981 cohort: decline

Data sources: WVS, EVS, ESS

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014

Czech Rep

Estonia

Finland

Hungary

Netherlands

Norway

Portugal

Slovakia

Sweden

Trends in attendance rates of 1950-1981 cohort: stability

Data sources: WVS, EVS, ESS

Trends in attendance rates of 1950-1981 cohort: growth

Data sources: WVS, EVS, ESS, GGS

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014

Bulgaria

Lithuania

Russia

Switzerland

Georgia

3. Individual flux in religiosity

1 Never

2 Only family ceremonies

3 Only religious celebrations

4 Religious celebrations & family events

5 Few times/year

6 About once/month

7 Every 2 weeks

8 Once a week

9 Several times a week

1 Never

2 Occasional

3 Regular

Recoding religious attendance

(…any religion)

1 Protestant / Reformed

2 Roman Catholic

3 Christian Catholic

4 Other Christian

5 Jewish

6Muslim

7 Other

8 No religion or denomination

1 Protestant

2 Catholic

3 Other

4 None

Recoding religious affiliation

Year-on-year change in religious attendance

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Regular>never Decline 1 level Stay same Increase 1 level Never> regular

% in each category

Data source: SHP 1999-2009

Individual flux in religious attendance 1999-2009 Respondents with data in >1 wave (N=9363)

17%

37%

8%

12%

14%

2%

10%

Never attended

Mix never & occasional

Always occasional

Mix occasional & regular

Always regular

Mix never & regular

Mix never, occasional &regular

Data source: SHP 1999-2009

Comments

The proportion of respondents who have stayed at the same level of religious attendance across all waves is 39% (for all respondents who have valid responses for >1 year)

The proportion of respondents who have changed level of attendance at some stage is 61%

The proportion of respondents who have at some time been regular attenders is 36% - cf. to annual average attendance rate of ~24% (includes respondents with only 1 wave of data)

The proportion of respondents who at some stage have been ‘never’ attenders is 62%

Change in individual affiliation 2004 to 2009Respondents with valid data in 2004 AND 2009

92% kept same affiliation (N=4690)

Data source: SHP 1999-2009

Stayed Protestant

Stayed Catholic

Stayed other religion

Stayed no religion

Prot/Other to Catholic

Cath/Other to Protestant

Cath/Prot/Other to None

None to Cath/Prot/Other

Prot/Cath to Other

Comments

Religious affiliation is considerably more stable than level of

attendance (or frequency of prayer)

The main trend has been towards non-affiliation, slightly more

marked amongst Catholics

Structure of presentation

Childlessness trends:

• Data sources

• Summary of trends

Religious trends

• Data sources

• Summary of trends

Association of childlessness and religiosity

• Across Europe

• In Switzerland and Georgia

Further work

Data source: ESS 2006

Childless proportion by religiosity: M&W aged 25-59ordered by largest differentials

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Austria(Cyprus)

(Spain)

(Denmark)Switzerland

Portugal(Ireland)(Poland)Finland

Slovakia(Germany)

Slovenia

(UK)

Sweden

Netherlands(Ukraine)(Belgium)

Norway(France)HungaryRussia

BulgariaEstonia

Religious attender Affiliated, non-attender Non-affiliated, non-attender

Countries without birth order-specific data in HFD in ( )

Main determinants of a woman remaining childless, Main determinants of a man remaining childless, for groupings where N >60 and Wlcoxon test showed significance for groupings where N >60 and Wlcoxon test showed significance

N% childless at

age 50Median age at 1st

childN

% childless at age 50

Median age at 1st child

No Sibling 240 43 34.02 Ticino 68 45 36.62Politics unknown/undeclared 188 40 30.98 No sibling 229 38 35.60

No religious participation 648 38 32.16 Zurich ZH 242 35 35.00Urban 674 37 31.61 No religious participation 589 35 34.97

Very low socio-econ background 313 35 29.78 Some social life 492 32 33.97High socio-econ background 159 35 32.80 Very low socio-econ background 249 31 33.64

Zurich ZH 293 33 31.81 High socio-econ background 122 31 35.14Ticino 83 33 30.24 Traumatic event in childhood 194 30 33.84

Low ed parents & father's job 168 33 29.30

Main determinants that a woman will have a child Main determinants that a man will have a child

N% childless at

age 50Median age at 1st

childN

% childless at age 50

Median age at 1st child

Occasional Protestant 287 22 29.44 Practising protestant 65 13 30.61Practising Protestant 115 22 29.04 Occasional protestant 200 19 31.22

Rural 356 23 28.54 Central LU UR SZ OW NW ZG 124 20 30.99Practising Catholic 247 24 28.50 Little social life 183 20 31.69

East GL SH AR AI SG GR TG 249 26 29.80 East GL SH AR AI SG GR TG 220 21 32.16Occasional Catholic 293 26 30.15 Occasional Catholic 203 21 33.07

Some religious participation 1190 26 29.65 Some religious participation 944 21 31.82Mid socio-econ background 521 26 29.49 Leman VD, VS, GE 265 22 31.20

Practising Catholic 181 22 31.77

Data source: SHP biographical data

Primary determinants of childlessness in Switzerland

Data source: SHP biographical data

Primary determinants of singleness in Switzerland

Main determinants of a woman remaining single, Main determinants of a man remaining single, for groupings where N >60 and Wlcoxon test showed significance for groupings where N >60 and Wlcoxon test showed significance

N% single at

age 50Median age at 1st

marriageN

% single at age 50

Median age at 1st marriage

High socio-econ background 159 20 28.94 High socio-econ background 122 20 30.67Ticino 83 19 26.55 Zurich ZH 242 17 30.07Urban 674 19 27.16 Ticino 68 17 30.14

No religious participation 648 19 27.64 Right wing 108 17 28.22Socialist 327 18 28.44 No religious participation 589 15 29.59

Central LU UR SZ OW NW ZG 150 16 25.88 Left wing 71 14 29.62Quite high socio-econ background 198 16 27.92 Some social life 492 14 29.06

Very low socio-econ background 249 14 28.99

Main determinants that a woman will get married Main determinants that a man will get married

N% single at

age 50Median age at 1st

marriageN

% single at age 50

Median age at 1st marriage

Rural 356 7 25.27 Leman VD, VS, GE 265 5 28.32Politics Unknown/undeclared 187 7 26.66 Low ed parents & father's job 201 5 27.27

1940s age group 410 8 24.50 Little social life 183 5 28.13Some religious participation 1189 9 25.91 1940s age group 349 7 26.46

Low ed parents & father's job 167 9 25.11 Politics Unknown/undeclared 238 7 27.82Conservative 172 9 25.84 Some religious influence 944 8 28.47

Mid socio-econ background 412 8 29.04

Women who were childless, by religion: Switzerland

Data source: Swiss census 2000

38%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

195019511952195319541955195619571958195919601961196219631964196519661967196819691970

Protestant Catholic Other Christian Muslim

Other religion No religion No response

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1950-1954 1955-1959 1960-1964 1965-1969

Non-attender, no children yet Religious attender, no children yet

Non-attender, no children planned Attender, no children planned

Women who were childless, by religious attendance: Georgia

Data source: GGS 2006

Structure of presentation

Childlessness trends:

• Data sources

• Summary of trends

Religious trends

• Data sources

• Summary of trends

Association of childlessness and religiosity

• Across Europe

• In Switzerland and Georgia

Further work

Burning questions 1:

What are the characteristics of people who change their level of religious involvement (to become more or less religiously involved)? Compare Switzerland and Georgia…. Many factors to consider… education, politics, traditionalists/modern, rural/urban, happiness/satisfaction

As religiosity can change over time, which is the more usual pattern (in Switzerland): 1. becoming more religiously active > (marriage) > child

OR 2. having a child > becoming more religiously active (need a long-running panel survey, like SHP)

Burning questions 2:

Changing ‘meaning’ of religious attendance?

Ritual (duty) > community

Change in ‘meaning’ of childlessness?

Alternative calling / health issues > for everyone > constraints / choice (possible with contraceptives)

Trends are going up/down > change in behaviour

Who is changing their behaviour / embracing change?

Burning questions 3:

Are both fertility choices and religious behaviour determined by personality? (Can check for Switzerland using SHP data)

Do those who take on ‘new’ behaviour norms have specific personality attributes? (But does personality vary over time / space / for the individual?)

Inter-cohort differentials reflect change in opinions between generations > influence of (potential) grandparents…

What avenues to explore to discover general ‘rules’ that work across time / countries / different trends?

Childlessness trends, religious trends: are they associated?

In a static way childlessness and religious affiliation and practice are strongly associated (though not always in the same direction)

But we cannot say - yet - whether the trends in religiosity and fertility are necessarily linked

And if the trends are linked, then what is the underlying mechanism?

Thank you!

For further questions and comments please contact me:

drmarionb@gmail.com

0.75

0.80

0.85

0.90

0.95

1.40 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00 2.10

CTFR total

CTFR1

FIN 1970

FIN 1980

AUT 1970

HUN 1980

HUN 1970

AUT 1980

PRT 1980

PRT 1970RUS 1970

RUS 1980

SVK 1980

SVK 1970

BGR 1970

BGR 1980

SVN 1970

LTU 1970

CHE 1980

CZE 1980NLD 1970

SVN 1980

NLD 1980 EST 1980

LTU 1980

EST 1970

CZE 1970

SWE 1970

NOR 1970

CHE 1970

NOR 1980

SWE 1980

Data source: HFD

Association of change in childlessness and change in total fertility: trends from 1970-1970 cohorts

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

19701969196819671966196519641963196219611960195919581957195619551954Cohort - year of birth of women

Proportion of women who were childless in Switzerland, 2000

Derived from vital stats

From census16.5%

20.7%

Data source: vital statistics & census 2000

Proportion of women who are foreign for each age, in 2000

10

15

20

25

30

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

Age (women of reproductive age only)

%

Religious affiliation by cohort - female population in Switzerland in 2000

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

19301931193219331934193519361937193819391940194119421943194419451946194719481949195019511952195319541955195619571958195919601961196219631964196519661967196819691970

Protestant Catholic Other Christian Muslim Other religion None No response

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014

Austria

Lithuania

Portugal

Slovenia

Switzerland

Religious attendance of young people (18-29): decline

Data sources: WVS, EVS, ESS

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014

Bulgaria

Czech Rep

Estonia

Finland

Hungary

Netherlands

Norway

Russia

Slovakia

Sweden

Religious attendance of young people (18-29): stable/growth

Data sources: WVS, EVS, ESS

Pattern of religious attendance by country

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Proportion of young people who are attenders (%)

Proportion of older people who are attenders (%)

Ratio 2:1 of old:young attendance rates

Ratio 1:1 of old:young attendance rates

Georgia

Armenia

Bulgaria

Bosnia/Herz

PhilippinesZimbabwe

Uganda

Nigeria

Ireland

Switzerland

Spain

Greece

Japan

China

Andorra

Lithuania

Luxembourg

Hungary

NetherlandsBelgium

Zambia

Ghana

Rwanda

Australia

1 Never

2Few times a year

3 Once a month

4 >once a week

5Daily/almost daily

1 Never

2 Occasional

3 Frequent

Recoding prayer frequency(prayer outside religious services)

Individual flux in frequency of prayer 1999-2009Respondents with data in >1 wave (N=9320)

17%

18%

5%

18%

28%

4%

10%

Never prayed

Mix never & occasional

Always occasional

Mix occasional & frequent

Always frequent

Mix never & frequent

Mix never, occasional &frequent

Comments The proportion of respondents who have stayed at the same level of prayer frequency across all waves is 50%

->Level of prayer is more stable than level of religious attendance

The proportion of respondents who have changed frequency of prayer at some stage is 50%

The proportion of respondents who have at some time have prayed frequently is 56% (cf. to annual average proportion of respondents who pray frequently ~45%)

The proportion of respondents who at some stage have ‘never’ prayed is 47%

The proportion who never attend (17%) is the same as the proportion who never pray (also 17%). However, of the respondents who regularly attend, 5% never pray! And of those who frequently pray, 22% never attend religious services!

Definition of variables

Age Group – four decade-long cohort groupings based on year of birth: 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s (see discussion elsewhere on why older and younger cohorts were not included)

Region – seven regions of Switzerland: Lemanic, Mitteland, NorthWest, Zich, East, Central and Ticino. It is the current place of residence of the respondent.

Rural-Urban – three groupings defined by type of current commune of residence of respondent, formed from the 9 groups coded in the survey. Urban includes centres and industrial/tertiary communes. Suburban includes communes defined as suburban, rich and peri-urban. Rural includes those defined as rural and commuter communes, agricultural, agricultural/peripheral and tourist areas.

Foreign nationalities – 6 different foreign nationalities were studied, those with most representation in Switzerland: German, ‘Anglo’ (British and American), Italian, French, Spanish and Turkish . A score of zero indicated that neither the respondent or their parents had that nationality as their first, second or third nationality. A score of 1 meant that one of those three individuals (ego, mother or father) included it as one of their nationalities; a score of 2 meant that 2 of the people did; a score of 3 indicated that all three had that nationality.

Swiss nationality (‘Pure Swiss’) – a two-way dichotomy. If the respondent and both parents had Swiss nationality and no other nationality, then the person was considered ‘pure Swiss’; if any of the three people had any other nationality, then they were considered not ‘pure Swiss’.

Educational level – The original survey classified respondents by levels 0 to 10, plus several for special education situations. For this analysis, the level ‘Basic’ was considered to be levels 0 to 4 of the original groupings, plus codes -6 and -4 for special education. ‘Intermediate’ covered groups coded 5, 6 and 7, and ‘Advanced’ as groups 8 to 10.

Catholic/Protestant influence. To be considered ‘Catholic’ the respondent had to classify themselves as either ‘Roman Catholic’ or ‘Christian Catholic’; if they attend religious services a few times a year or just for religious festivals, they were considered as ‘occasional’ (level 1); if at least once a month, then as ‘practising’ (level 2). There was a similar grading for ‘Protestants’; they had to define themselves as ‘Protestant or Reformed’.

If Religious – a two-way dichotomy. For a person to be ‘not religious’ they had to either say they had no confession or religion or never attend any religious services or only for family ceremonies. For a person to be considered ‘religious’ they had to both classify themselves as having some confession and attend religious services at least for some religious festivals.

If Sibling – a two-way dichotomy. Considered positive only if the respondent has lived with a sibling, otherwise negative.

Trauma – this quantified the number of traumatic events a person had experienced: separation/divorce of parents; death of mother or father before the respondent was 18. They were summed, so a maximum score of 3 was possible (though in reality a maximum of 2 was observed in the sample).

Background – scores were awarded for mother’s and father’s educational level plus the status of the father’s job (of the original 13 levels of parent’s education, the bottom 2 levels were grouped into ‘low educational level’ and the top 4 into ‘high educational level’). A score of 0 (for low level of parent’s education and low status of father’s job) to 6 (highly educated parents and high status of father’s job) was possible.

Sociability – 4 variables were combined and the score from each was summed. From the frequency of meeting with friends, then a score of 2 was given if this was at least once a week or every day; a score of 1 was given if the frequency was at least once per month. A score of 1 was added if the respondent was an active member of a sport/leisure club, a cultural association and/or an ‘association caritative’. Although other types of associations were listed in the questionnaire, they had fewer participants, so were not considered.

Politics - the original coding for responses gave scores of 0 to 10. A score of 0 and 1 were recoded as ‘left wing’; 2 and 3 ‘socialist; 4, 5 and -4 (‘no strong political leanings’) were coded as ‘centre’; 6 and 7 as ‘conservative; 8, 9 and 10 as ‘right wing’; and other (negative) codes as ‘unknown/undeclared’.

If Lived Abroad – a 2-way dichotomy for any period lived abroad.

Lerch,Mathias, Michel Oris, Philippe Wanner, Yannic Forney (2010). “Religious Affiliation and Mortality in Switzerland, 1991-2004”, Population-E, 65; 02, June 2010, pp 217-250

Roman Catholic

Protestant Other Christian church

Other religion

No religion

Life expectancy at birth (males)

76.5 75.6 76.8 74.3 75.7

Life expectancy at birth (females)

82.5 81.7 83.6 77.4 79.4