Changes in mortality and life expectancy: Some methodological issues
AbstractMeasuring and explaining the effects of mortality changes on life expectancy has been discussed for the past three decades. Different approaches have been proposed using discrete or continuous methods. Two basic ideas underlie these approaches. The first compares two different mortality schedules and quantifies the contribution of each age group to the increase in life expectancy. The second analyzes how the progress in the mortality schedule translates into progress in life expectancy. This paper discusses and compares the approaches proposed by the United Nations (1982), Arriaga (1984), Pollard (1982, 1988), and Vaupel (1986), identifying their problems, advantages, and the types of situations where each one can best be applied.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Mathematical Population Studies.
Volume (Year): 9 (2001)
Issue (Month): 3-4 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/GMPS20
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- David E. Bloom & David Canning & Günther Fink, 2009.
"Disease and Development Revisited,"
NBER Working Papers
15137, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- David E. Bloom & David Canning & Gunther Fink, 2009. "Disease and Development Revisited," PGDA Working Papers, Program on the Global Demography of Aging 4409, Program on the Global Demography of Aging.
- Bloom, David E. & Canning, David & Fink, Günther, 2013. "Disease and Development Revisited," IZA Discussion Papers 7391, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.