| Title |
Unemployment, Nonstandard Employment, and Fertility: Insights From Japan’s “Lost 20 Years”
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Demography, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13524-017-0614-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James M. Raymo, Akihisa Shibata |
| Abstract |
In this study, we examine relationships of unemployment and nonstandard employment with fertility. We focus on Japan, a country characterized by a prolonged economic downturn, significant increases in both unemployment and nonstandard employment, a strong link between marriage and childbearing, and pronounced gender differences in economic roles and opportunities. Analyses of retrospective employment, marriage, and fertility data for the period 1990-2006 indicate that changing employment circumstances for men are associated with lower levels of marriage, while changes in women's employment are associated with higher levels of marital fertility. The latter association outweighs the former, and results of counterfactual standardization analyses indicate that Japan's total fertility rate would have been 10 % to 20 % lower than the observed rate after 1995 if aggregate- and individual-level employment conditions had remained unchanged from the 1980s. We discuss the implications of these results in light of ongoing policy efforts to promote family formation and research on temporal and regional variation in men's and women's roles within the family. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 87 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 11% |
| Unknown | 25 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 36 | 41% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 10 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Linguistics | 2 | 2% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Unknown | 27 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 January 2022.
All research outputs
#14,812,964
of 24,826,104 outputs
Outputs from Demography
#1,841
of 2,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,590
of 328,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Demography
#19
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,826,104 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,011 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.2. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,332 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.