Page 91 - IJPS-8-1

International Journal of
Population Studies Fertility by parity in China

child rule often came with a timing/spacing requirement, China’s fertility will increase under the new policy. After
stipulating a minimum of age at second births or/and 4 or the implementation of selective two-child policy in 2013,
6 years between the first and second birth. While from the some researchers argued that the policy was ineffective
beginning of the 21 century, restrictions on the timing/ based on the fact that far fewer couples than expected
st
spacing have been gradually lifted. By the end of 2013, 18 have applied for permission to have a second child. Other
provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities) had researchers argued that the effect of the policy has been
abolished controls on the interval between births (Zhang, largely in line with the expectation based on the substantial
et al., 2016). increase in births after the implementation of selective
In Phase 4, from 2014 to the present, both the control of two-child policy. They suggested that the reason for the low
parity two and the birth interval restrictions were gradually proportion of eligible couples who submit the application
removed. At the end of 2013, the Chinese government to have a second child was that the decision to have a
implemented selective two-child policy, allowing couples second child takes time and the application did not happen
where either wife or husband is a singleton to have the second in a short time (Zhai, et al., 2021). The implementation of
child (Basten & Jiang, 2014). In 2015, the fertility policy was universal two-child policy led to a rapid shift in scholarly
further adjusted to universal two-child policy, allowing all attention to the new policy. The increases in the newborn
couples to have two children (Zeng & Hesketh, 2016). The and fertility rate in 2016, particularly for the second births,
Chinese government is now encouraging the birth of children suggest that there has been a positive effect of the universal
with its new “three-child” policy accompanied by supportive two-child policy in the short term (Shi, et al., 2018; Song,
measures, launched in 2021. The 2021 amendment provides 2017; Yuan & Gao, 2017). While they may be based on
general principles; the details of how these new family different population projections resulting from the use of
planning measures are to be implemented are left, as with different data sources and assumptions, studies suggest
the previous ones, to the discretion of respective provincial that the universal two-child policy will affect fertility rates
governments (Attané, 2022). and thus slow population aging, but with only a moderate
and temporary effect (Wang & Ge, 2016; Zeng & Hesketh,
1.2. Debate on effects of fertility policy in China 2016; Zhang, et al., 2019). However, after the accumulative
Debates about the effects of fertility policy on China’s effect runs out, the number of births and fertility has fallen
fertility have come with the evaluation of fertility policy sharply since 2018. The downward trend in number of
and have been ongoing for many years. As one of the most births and fertility was not effectively reversed even by the
controversial policies in history, debate has raged over the implementation of the three-child policy in 2021. Recent
positive and negative effects of the one-child policy. The studies have consistently found that a large proportion of
importance of the one-child policy for fertility transition couples do not want to have a second child even they are
is controversial (Zhang & Cao, 2006). China’s family allowed to (Feng, 2018; Jin, et al., 2016). The latest survey
planning policy has been claimed to have been effective, data from the National Bureau of Statistics show that
based on the evidence of the various estimates at different China’s fertility intention is only 1.8, which is significantly
times of hundreds of millions of averted births and the lower than the replacement level and lower than that of
decline in the fertility rate (Goodkind, 1992, 2017; Yang, developed low-fertility countries (Yu, et al., 2021).
et al., 2000; Zhao, 1991). However, these assertations have 1.3. Current study
been contested with claims that the “later, longer, fewer”
policy of 1973 played a critical role in driving down the Fertility trends in China, and in particular the trends by
fertility rate, and that the role of the one-child policy and different birth orders, are closely related to the fertility policy.
its descendants from 1980 on was much less significant In this paper, we, therefore, investigate the interrelation
(Gietel-Basten, et al., 2019), and others argue in particular between period/cohort level as well as patterns of fertility
that the importance of the family planning program on since 1949 and fertility policy from the parity perspective.
fertility transition should not be overstated, especially Despite a large body of studies assessing the levels of and
from the 1990s (Zhao & Chen, 2011). trends in overall fertility, there has been limited research
Since the policy relaxation with the selective two-child on fertility by parity, especially after the 1980s. Based on
policy in 2013 and the universal two-child policy in 2015, reliable data sources and different fertility measures, the
a debate has been under way on the need to review the research on China’s fertility levels in the 1970s and 1980s
effectiveness of the relaxation of fertility policy. Under has provided valuable information for our understanding
the two-child policy, the focus of academic and policy of fertility and the policy effects in these two decades.
debate has been on whether the adjustments to fertility However, different beliefs about the credibility/quality of
policy have significantly affected fertility, and how much population survey data since the 1990s have led to a wide

Volume 8 Issue 1 (2022) 85 https://doi.org/10.36922/ijps.v8i1.348