Levels of recent union formation
We offer a comparison between the age profiles of risks of formation of marital and non-marital unions in Russia, Romania, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Italy. We show that there is considerable variability across these populations in the level and age pattern of union-entry risks, ranging (i) from the high and early risks in Russia to the slow and late entries in Italy, and (ii) from an emphasis on marriage in Russia, Poland, Italy, and particularly Romania, to the dominant role of cohabitation reported for Bulgaria. Some of this mostly re-iterates known features (like the patterns for Italy), but they are displayed with unusual clarity in the comparative framework, which also highlights unusual patterns like those for Bulgaria. We cannot see much commonality in union-entry risks among ex-communist countries.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Anna Matysiak, 2009.
"Is Poland really 'immune' to the spread of cohabitation?,"
Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 21(8), pages 215-234, August.
- Anna Matysiak, 2009. "Is Poland really 'immune' to the spread of cohabitation?," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2009-012, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
- Jan M. Hoem & Dora Kostova & Aiva Jasilioniene & Cornelia Muresan, 2009. "The structure of recent first-union formation in Romania," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2009-002, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
- Paola Di Giulio & Alessandro Rosina, 2007. "Intergenerational family ties and the diffusion of cohabitation in Italy," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 16(14), pages 441-468, May.
- Jan M. Hoem, 2008. "The reporting of statistical significance in scientific journals," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 18(15), pages 437-442, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dem:demres:v:22:y:2010:i:9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Editorial Office)
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.