AUC GEOGRAPHICA
AUC GEOGRAPHICA

AUC Geographica (Acta Universitatis Carolinae Geographica) is a scholarly academic journal continuously published since 1966 that publishes research in the broadly defined field of geography: physical geography, geo-ecology, regional, social, political and economic geography, regional development, cartography, geoinformatics, demography and geo-demography.

AUC Geographica also publishes articles that contribute to advances in geographic theory and methodology and address the questions of regional, socio-economic and population policy-making in Czechia.

Periodical twice yearly.
Release dates: June 30, December 31

All articles are licenced under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence (CC BY 4.0), have DOI and are indexed in CrossRef database.

AUC Geographica is covered by the following services: EBSCO, GeoBibline, SCOPUS, Ulrichsweb and Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).

The journal has been covered in the SCOPUS database since 1975 – today
https://www.scopus.com/source/sourceInfo.uri?sourceId=27100&origin=recordpage

The journal has been selected for coverage in Clarivate Analytics products and services. Beginning with V. 52 (1) 2017, this publication will be indexed and abstracted in Emerging Sources Citation Index.

The journal has been indexed by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education (MSHE) on the list of scientific journals recommended for authors to publish their articles. ICI World of Journals; Acta Universitatis Carolinae, Geographica.

Scopus Journal Metric

SJR (SCImago Journal Rank) (2020): 0.193
SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper) (2020): 0.842
CiteScore (2020): 1.00

The journal is archived in Portico.

AUC GEOGRAPHICA, Vol 57 No 1 (2022), 61–74

The role of cohorts in the understanding of the changes in fertility in Czechia since 1990

Jiřina Kocourková, Jitka Slabá, Anna Šťastná

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14712/23361980.2022.6
announced: 29. 06. 2022

abstract

This article presents a detailed analysis of the fertility changes in Czechia since 1990 using the cohort approach and contributes to the overall understanding of the fertility postponement process. Because the timing of childbearing since 1990 has changed significantly, particular attention is devoted to the differences in the timing of fertility between cohorts. Data from the Human Fertility Database was analyzed via both standard (based on age-specific fertility rates) and advanced methods (postponement and recuperation indicators, parity progression ratio). Four groups of cohorts with specific fertility patterns were identified: 1965–1970, 1971–1976, 1977–1982, and 1983–1990. These groups were impacted by the political, economic and social transformation of the 1990s, the financial crisis of 2008–2012 and other socio-economic changes during the study period in different ways. While the 1965–1970 cohort was associated with the rapid occurrence of postponement, it still reflected the early fertility pattern. The 1971–1976 cohort was associated with the most intensive degree of postponement, the 1977–1982 cohort can be linked to the onset of the deceleration of the postponement process, and the 1983–1990 cohort appears to be the first to stabilize their fertility at later ages.

keywords: fertility patterns; Czechia; cohort analysis; postponement and recuperation; parity progression ratio

references (44)

1. Bartošová, M., Pakosta, P., Fučík, P. (2012): Dlouhodobý vývoj v časování porodů a sňatků: obstojí individualizační teorie ve světle demografických dat? Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review 48(2), 315-341. CrossRef

2. Beaujouan, É. (2020): Latest-Late Fertility? Decline and Resurgence of Late Parenthood Across the Low-Fertility Countries. Population and Development Review 46(2), 219-247. CrossRef

3. Billingsley, S. (2010): The post-communist fertility puzzle. Population Research and Policy Review 29(2), 193-231. CrossRef

4. Czech Statistical Office (2014): Úroveň vzdělání obyvatelstva podle výsledků Sčítání lidu. Lidé a Společnost 30, https://www.czso.cz/documents/10180/20536250/17023214.pdf/7545a15a-8565-458b-b4e3-e8bf43255b12?version=1.1.

5. Frejka, T., Calot, G. (2001): Cohort reproductive patterns in low fertility countries. Population and Development Review 27(1), 103-132. CrossRef

6. Frejka, T. (2011): The Role of contemporary childbearing postponement and recuperation in shaping period fertility trends. Comparative Population Studies 36(4), 927-958. CrossRef

7. Human Fertility Database (2020): Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research (Germany) and Vienna Institute of Demography (Austria). Available at www.humanfertility.org (data downloaded on 17. 01. 2022).

8. Jahoda, R., Kofroň, P. (2007): Domácnosti a sociální dávky v letech 2000 až 2005. [Households and social benefits between 2000 and 2005]. Praha: VUPSV výzkumné centrum Brno. 1-184.

9. Kocourková, J. (2009): The Current "Baby Boom" in the Czech Republic and Family Policy. Czech Demography 3, 10-21, https://www.czso.cz/documents/10180/23196876/kocourkova2011.pdf/1437d003-40cc-49b4-8ef0-7697e02c5c8d?version=1.0.

10. Kocourková, J., Fait, T. (2009): Can increased use of ART retrieve the Czech Republic from the low fertility trap? Neuroendocrinology Letters 30(6), 739-748, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20038934.

11. Kocourková, J., Fait, T. (2011): Changes in contraceptive practice and the transition of reproduction pattern in the Czech population. The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care 16(3), 161-172. CrossRef

12. Kocourková, J., Šťastná, A., Černíková, A. (2019): Vliv ekonomické krize na úroveň plodnosti ve státech Evropské unie. Politická ekonomie 67(1), 82-104. CrossRef

13. Kocourková J., Šťastná A. (2021): The realization of fertility intentions in the context of childbearing postponement: comparison of transitional and post-transitional populations. Journal of Biosocial Science 53, 82-97. CrossRef

14. Kohler, H.-P., Billari, F. C., Ortega, J. A. (2002): The emergence of lowest-low fertility in Europe during the 1990s. Population and Development Review 28(4), 641-80. CrossRef

15. Křesťanová, J. (2016): Analýza vývoje plodnosti na území České republiky po roce 1950 do současnosti za využití dekompozičních metod. Demografie 58(2), 142-58, https://www.czso.cz/documents/10180/33199357/clanek+3_krestanova.pdf/41543a79-f963-453b-80be-02fd4f6b238f?version=1.0.

16. Křeštanová, J., Kurkin, R. (2020): Populační vývoj v České republice v roce 2019 (Population development in the Czech Republic in 2019). Demografie 62(3), 159-181. https://www.czso.cz/documents/10180/123310412/13005320q3_159-181.pdf/21eae15b-0e30-4991-8240-ecb2fc91736e?version=1.1.

17. Kurkin, R., Šprocha, B., Šídlo, L., Kocourková, J. (2017): Ferility factors in Czechia according to the results of the 2011 census. AUC Geographica 52(2), 137-148. CrossRef

18. Lesthaeghe, R. (2010): The unfolding story of the second demographic transition. Population and Development Review 36(2), 211-51. CrossRef

19. Morávková, H., Kreidl, M. (2017): Partnerské dráhy prvorodiček bez partnera ve společné domácnosti. Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review 53(4), 565-591. CrossRef

20. Neels, K., Murphy, M., Nı́ Bhrolcháin, M., Beaujouan, É. (2017): Rising educational participation and the trend to later childbearing. Population and Development Review 43(4), 667-693. CrossRef

21. Nı́ Bhrolcháin, M., Beaujouan, É. (2012): Fertility postponement is largely due to rising educational enrolment. Population Studies 66(3), 311-327. CrossRef

22. Polesná, H., Kocourková, J. (2016): Je druhý demografický přechod stále relevantní koncept pro evropské státy? Geografie 121(3), 390-418, https://geografie.cz/media/pdf/geo_2016121030390.pdf. CrossRef

23. Rabušic, L. (2001): Value Change and Demographic Behaviour in the Czech Republic. Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review 9(1), 99-122. CrossRef

24. Rabušic, L., Chromková Manea, B. (2013): Velikost rodiny - postoje, normy a realita. Demografie 55(3), 208-219, https://is.muni.cz/repo/1123093/Demogradfie-3-2013.pdf.

25. Riffe, T., Boe, C., Goldstein, J., Hilton, J., Holzman, S. (2020): Read Human Mortality Database and Human Fertility Database Data from the Web, https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/HMDHFDplus/index.html.

26. Ryder, N. B. (1965): The Cohort as a Concept in the Study of Social Change. American Sociological Review 30(6), 843-861, https://www.jstor.org/stable/2090964. CrossRef

27. Rychtaříková, J. (2000): Demographic transition or demographic shock in recent population development in the Czech Republic? Acta Universitatis Carolinae Geographica 35(1), 89-102. CrossRef

28. R Studio Team (2020): RStudio: Integrated development environment for R. Boston, MA: RStudio, PBC, http://www.rstudio.com/.

29. Schmidt, L. (2010): Should men and women be encouraged to start childbearing at a younger age? Expert Review of Obstetrics & Gynecology 5(2), 145-147. CrossRef

30. Sivková, O., Hulı́ková Tesárková, K. (2012): Dekompozice změn průměrného věku matky při narození dítěte v České republice od roku 1950. Demografie 54(3), 264-279, https://www.czso.cz/documents/10180/20555359/e-180312q3.pdf/62e9767a-5a61-40f3-baae-c0528427c1d7?version=1.0.

31. Slabá, J. (2020): Nezaměstnanost ženy jako příčina deklarovaného odkladu založení rodiny? Sociológia 52(2), 132-151. CrossRef

32. Sobotka, T. (2017): Post-transitional fertility: the role of childbearing postponement in fuelling the shift to low and unstable fertility levels. Journal of Biosocial Science 49, S20-S45. CrossRef

33. Sobotka, T., Šťastná, A., Zeman, K., Hamplová, D., Kantorová, V. (2008): A rapid transformation of fertility and family behaviour after the collapse of state socialism. Demographic Research 19(14), 403-454. CrossRef

34. Sobotka, T., Beaujouan, É. (2014): Two is best? The persistence of a two-child family ideal in Europe. Population and Development Review 40(3), 391-419. CrossRef

35. Sobotka, T., Zeman, K., Lesthaeghe, R., Frejka, T. (2011): Postponement and Recuperation in Cohort Fertility: Austria, Germany and Switzerland in a European Context. Comparative Population Studies 36(2-3), 417-452. CrossRef

36. Šprocha, B. (2014): Odkladanie a rekuperácie plodnosti v Českej republike a na Slovensku. Demografie 56(3), 219-233, https://www.czso.cz/documents/10180/20555387/13005314q3.pdf/d2fc4c66-582f-406e-81dd-59f4924f6a4b?version=1.0.

37. Šprocha, B., Bačík, V. (2020): Odkladanie rodenia detí a neskorá plodnosť v európskom priestore (Postponement of the childbirth and the late fertility in the European area). Demografie 62(3), 123-141, http://www.humannageografia.sk/clanky/demografie_sprocha_bacik_2020.pdf.

38. Šťastná, A., Slabá, J., Koucourková, J. (2017): Plánovánı́, načasování a důvody odkladu narození prvního dítěte v České republice. Demografie 59(3), 207-223, https://www.czso.cz/documents/10180/46203816/stastna.pdf/0cf15559-1e0a-4b47-a7d6-e8faeb236404?version=1.0.

39. Šťastná, A., Slabá, J., Kocourková, J. (2019): Druhé dítě - důvody neplánovaného odkladu a časování jeho narození. Demografie, 61(2), 77-92, https://www.czso.cz/documents/10180/91917740/13005319q2_77.pdf/b0972342-7094-4feb-bf85-f0acb04e1f30?version=1.0.

40. Šťastná, A. (2007): Druhé dítě v rodině - preference a hodnotové orientace českých žen. Sociologický časopis 43(4), 721-745, https://sreview.soc.cas.cz/pdfs/csr/2007/04/04.pdf. CrossRef

41. Šťastná, A., Kocourková, J., Šprocha, B. (2020): Parental Leave Policies and Second Births: A Comparison of Czechia and Slovakia. Population Research and Policy Review 39, 415-437. CrossRef

42. Wunsch, G., Russo, F., Mouchart M. (2021): Time and causality in the social sciences. Time & Society. First published online: September 17, 2021. CrossRef

43. <bez popisu> CrossRef

44. Žofková, M., Stroukal, D. (2014): Odhad mzdové srážky za mateřství v České republice. Politická ekonomie 62(5), 683-700. CrossRef

Creative Commons License
The role of cohorts in the understanding of the changes in fertility in Czechia since 1990 is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

210 x 297 mm
published: 2 x per year
print price: 200 czk
ISSN: 0300-5402
E-ISSN: 2336-1980

Download