Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-767nl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T21:27:03.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Understanding the sex inequality in childlessness: an approach using Swedish register data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 December 2021

Margarita Chudnovskaya Open the ORCID record for Margarita Chudnovskaya [Opens in a new window]  and
Peter Ueda
Margarita Chudnovskaya*
Affiliation:
Institute of Social Research (SOFI), Stockholm University, Sweden
Peter Ueda
Affiliation:
Karolinska University, Stockholm, Sweden
*
*Corresponding author. Email: margarita.chudnovskaya@sofi.su.se
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In most countries, men are more likely to be childless than women. Understanding how this inequality arises is important given the significance of parenthood for individuals’ lives. The objective of this study was to explore how three prominent explanations for sex inequalities in childlessness relate to the Sex Gap in Childlessness (SGC) in Sweden. The three explanations examined were sex ratio imbalance (more men than women), mismeasurement of fatherhood (inequalities in registration) and partnership differences (inequality in multi-partner fertility). Administrative register data for cohorts born in 1945–1974 were used. The population was restricted to men and women who were born in Sweden or arrived prior to the age of 15, and all registered childbearing partnerships were examined. To explore the possible significance of the three explanations, counter-factual standardization was used. Of the three explanations examined, the population sex ratio had the largest positive impact on the SGC, while multi-partner fertility had a negative impact. The results show that inequalities in the sex ratio can explain about 20–34% of the SGC depending on cohort. Inequalities in registration of fathers explain about 9–24% of the SGC depending on cohort. Finally, results show that women are slightly more likely to have multiple partners, and that this behaviour has a substantial minimizing effect on the SGC (minimizing it by 6–65%). To the authors’ knowledge this was the first paper to estimate the scope of the impacts of these three mechanisms on the SGC. Differences in multi-partner fertility have in many instances been used as an explanation for men’s higher childlessness. This study shows that women have slightly more childbearing partners than men, and that this actually leads to a smaller SGC in the studied population.

Keywords

ChildlessnessMulti-partner fertilitySex ratios
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 55 , Issue 1 , January 2023 , pp. 99 - 115
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akers, DS (1967) On measuring the marriage squeeze. Demography 4(2), 907–924.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alich, D (2007) Differences Between Male and Female Fertility in Russia: An Evaluation of Basic Pattern and Data Quality using the First Wave of the Russian GGS (No. WP-2007-015). Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.Google Scholar
Anzo, S (1985) Measurement of the marriage squeeze and its application. Journal of Population Studies 8, 1–10.Google Scholar
Bellani, D, Esping-Andersen, G and Nedoluzhko, L (2017) Never partnered: a multilevel analysis of lifelong singlehood. Demographic Research 37, 53–100.Google Scholar
Berrington, A (2017) Childlessness in the UK. In Kreyenfeld, M and Konietzka, D (eds) Childlessness in Europe: Contexts, Causes, and Consequences. Springer, Cham, pp. 57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Betzig, L (2012) Means, variances, and ranges in reproductive success: comparative evidence. Evolution and Human Behavior 33(4), 309–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackstone, A and Stewart, MD (2012) Choosing to be childfree: research on the decision not to parent. Sociology Compass 6(9), 718–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brainerd, E (2017) The lasting effect of sex ratio imbalance on marriage and family: evidence from World War II in Russia. Review of Economics and Statistics 99(2), 229–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CIA (2020) The World Factbook 2020. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Craig, L and Mullan, K (2010) Parenthood, gender and work-family time in the United States, Australia, Italy, France, and Denmark. Journal of Marriage and Family 72(5), 1344–1361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culley, L, Hudson, N and Lohan, M (2013) Where are all the men? The marginalization of men in social scientific research on infertility. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 27(3), 225–235.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dermott, E (2014) Intimate Fatherhood: A Sociological Analysis. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dribe, M and Stanfors, M (2009) Does parenthood strengthen a traditional household division of labor? Evidence from Sweden. Journal of Marriage and Family 71(1), 33–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dupanloup, I, Pereira, L, Bertorelle, G, Calafell, F, Prata, MJ, Amorim, A and Barbujani, G (2003) A recent shift from polygyny to monogamy in humans is suggested by the analysis of worldwide Y-chromosome diversity. Journal of Molecular Evolution 57(1), 85–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eggebeen, DJ and Knoester, C (2001) Does fatherhood matter for men? Journal of Marriage and Family 63(2), 381–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esteve, A and Cabré, A (2004) Marriage squeeze and changes in family formation: historical comparative evidence in Spain, France, and United States in the XXth century. Papers de Demografia. Centre d’Estudis Demogràfics 244, 1–22.Google Scholar
Expressen (2018) ‘What Are We Going To Do With All The Lonely Men?’ [Vad ska vi göra med alla ensamma män?]. Expressen Editorial. URL: https://www.expressen.se/ledare/-de-sloa-snubbarna-ar-ett-samhallsproblem/ (accessed 1st November 2021).Google Scholar
Furstenberg, FF (1988) Good dads–bad dads: the two faces of fatherhood. In Cherlin, AJ (ed.) The Changing American Family and Public Policy. Urban Institute Press, Washington, DC, pp. 193–218.Google Scholar
Green, ME and Biddlecom, AE (2000) Absent and problematic men: demographic accounts of male reproductive roles. Population and Development Review 26(1), 81–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J, Boyd, R and Richerson, PJ (2012) The puzzle of monogamous marriage. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 367(1589), 657–669.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jalovaara, M and Fasang, AE (2015) Are there gender differences in family trajectories by education in Finland? Demographic Research 33, 1241–1256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jalovaara, M, Neyer, G, Andersson, G, Dahlberg, J, Dommermuth, L, Fallesen, P and Lappegård, T (2019) Education, gender, and cohort fertility in the Nordic countries. European Journal of Population 35(3), 563–586.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
James, WH (1987) The human sex ratio. Part 1: A review of the literature. Human Biology 59(5), 721–752.Google ScholarPubMed
Jensen, AM and Lie, M (2016) Barnløshet blant menn: Alle vil ha barn, men færre får. reproduksjon og likestilling i dagens norge. In Ravn, MN, Kristensen, GK and Sørensen, SØ (eds) Reproduksjon, kjønn og likestilling i dagens Norge. Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
Jokela, M, Rotkirch, A, Rickard, IJ, Pettay, J and Lummaa, V (2010) Serial monogamy increases reproductive success in men but not in women. Behavioral Ecology 21(5), 906–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karmin, M, Saag, L, Vicente, M, Sayres, MAW, Järve, M, Talas, UG, Rootsi, S et al. (2015) A recent bottleneck of Y chromosome diversity coincides with a global change in culture. Genome Research 25(4), 459–466.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keizer, R, Dykstra, PA and Poortman, AR (2010) Life outcomes of childless men and fathers. European Sociological Review 26(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knoester, C and Eggebeen, DJ (2006) The effects of the transition to parenthood and subsequent children on men’s well-being and social participation. Journal of Family Issues 27(11), 1532–1560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolk, M (2015) Age differences in unions: continuity and divergence among Swedish couples between 1932 and 2007. European Journal of Population 31(4), 365–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koslowski, AS (2011) Working fathers in Europe: earning and caring. European Sociological Review 27(2), 230–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kravdal, Ø and Rindfuss, RR (2008) Changing relationships between education and fertility: a study of women and men born 1940 to 1964. American Sociological Review 73(5), 854–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreyenfeld, M and Konietzka, D (2017) Childlessness in Europe: Contexts, Causes, and Consequences. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kronqvist, P (2016) A surplus of men can create problems’ [Överskott av män kan skapa problem]. Expressen. Opinion Piece. URL: https://www.expressen.se/ledare/patrik-kronqvist/overskott-av-man-kan-skapa-problem/ (accessed 1st November 2021).Google Scholar
Lainiala, L and Miettinen, A (2013) Childlessness and the skewed regional sex ratios in Finland. Finnish Yearbook of Population Research 48, 51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lappegård, T, Rønsen, M and Skrede, K (2011) Fatherhood and fertility. Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research & Practice about Men as Fathers 9(1), 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lappegård, T and Rønsen, M (2013) Socioeconomic differences in multipartner fertility among Norwegian men. Demography 50(3), 1135–1153.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lersch, PM, Jacob, M and Hank, K (2017) Parenthood, gender, and personal wealth. European Sociological Review 33(3), 410–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ludvigsson, JF, Almqvist, C, Bonamy, AKE, Ljung, R, Michaëlsson, K, Neovius, M et al. (2016) Registers of the Swedish total population and their use in medical research. European Journal of Epidemiology 31(2), 125–136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marsiglio, W (1993) Contemporary scholarship on fatherhood: culture, identity, and conduct. Journal of Family Issues 14(4), 484–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miettinen, A, Rotkirch, A, Szalma, I, Donno, A and Tanturri, ML (2015) Increasing childlessness in Europe: time trends and country differences. Families and Societies Working Paper Series 3. Google Scholar
Monti, A, Drefahl, S, Mussino, E and Härkönen, J (2019) Over-coverage in population registers leads to bias in demographic estimates. Population Studies 74(3), 451–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Omni (2020) Society has a Responsibility for the Lonely Tinder-man [Samhälle har ett ansvar för ensamma Tindermän]. Opinion piece. URL: https://omni.se/samhallet-har-ett-ansvar-for-ensamma-tinderman/a/jd1WQb (accessed 1st November 2021).Google Scholar
Parr, N (2010) Childlessness among men in Australia. Population Research and Policy Review 29(3), 319–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priskorn, L, Holmboe, SA, Jacobsen, R, Jensen, TK, Lassen, TH and Skakkebaek, NE (2012) Increasing trends in childlessness in recent birth cohorts – a registry-based study of the total Danish male population born from 1945 to 1980. International Journal of Andrology 35(3), 449–455.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saarela, J and Skirbekk, V (2020) Childlessness and union histories: evidence from Finnish population register data. Journal of Biosocial Science 52(1), 78–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Statistiska Centralbyrån [Statistics Sweden] (2020) No children – differences in childlessness between women and men in various groups [Utan barn – Skillnader i barnlöshet mellan kvinnor och män i olika grupper]. Demografiska Rapporter 2020(1).Google Scholar
Statistics Norway (2014) Stadig flere menn i Norge er barnløse. Samfunnsspeilet, 2/2014. URL: https://www.ssb.no/befolkning/artikler-og-publikasjoner/stadig-flere-menn-i-norge-er-barnlose (accessed 1st November 2021).Google Scholar
Statistics Sweden (2020) Women and Men in Sweden 2020 [På tal om kvinnor och män]. ISBN: ISBN:978-91-618-1665-1.Google Scholar
Swedish Public Radio [Sveriges Radio] 2 (2020) FOI: Sverige kan vara incel-tätast i världen [FOI: Sweden may be the most incel-dense in the world]. URL: https://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=83&artikel=7422737 (accessed 1st November 2021).Google Scholar
Thomson, E (2014) Family complexity in Europe. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 654(1), 245–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, E, Lappegård, T, Carlson, M, Evans, A and Gray, E (2014) Childbearing across partnerships in Australia, the United States, Norway, and Sweden. Demography 51(2), 485–508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tolentino, J (2018) ‘Rage of the Incels.’ New Yorker Magazine. URL: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-rage-of-the-incels (accessed 1st November 2021)Google Scholar
Trivers, RL and Campbell, B (1972) Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man. Transaction Publishers, New Jersey, USA.Google Scholar
Umberson, D, Pudrovska, T and Reczek, C (2010) Parenthood, childlessness, and well-being: a life course perspective. Journal of Marriage and Family 72(3), 612–629.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Västerbottens-Kuriren (2018) Warning for Loneliness Among Men [Varning för ensamhet bland män]. Editorial. URL: https://www.vk.se/2018-07-11/varning-for-ensamhet-bland-man (accessed 1st November 2021).Google Scholar