IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v161y2016icp1-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender inequality and the ‘East-West’ divide in contraception: An analysis at the individual, the couple, and the country level

Author

Listed:
  • Dereuddre, Rozemarijn
  • Van de Velde, Sarah
  • Bracke, Piet

Abstract

Despite generally low fertility rates in Europe, contraceptive behavior varies to a substantial extent. The dichotomy between Western, and Central and Eastern European countries is particularly relevant. Whereas the former are characterized by the widespread use of modern contraception, the latter show a high prevalence of traditional methods to control fertility. The current study aims to examine whether these differences can be attributed to differences in women’s individual status, and in gender inequality at the couple and the country level. We combine data from the Generations and Gender Survey (2004–2011) and the Demographic Health Survey (2005–2009), covering seventeen European countries, to perform multinomial multilevel analyses. The results confirm that higher educated and employed women, and women who have an equal occupational status relative to their partner are more likely to use modern reversible contraception instead of no, traditional, or permanent methods. Absolute and relative employment are also positively related to using female instead of male methods. Furthermore, it is shown that higher levels of country-level gender equality are associated with a higher likelihood of using modern reversible and female methods, but not sterilization. Particularly country levels of gender equality are linked to the East-West divide in type of contraceptive method used. Our findings underscore that women’s higher status is closely related to their use of effective, female contraception.

Suggested Citation

  • Dereuddre, Rozemarijn & Van de Velde, Sarah & Bracke, Piet, 2016. "Gender inequality and the ‘East-West’ divide in contraception: An analysis at the individual, the couple, and the country level," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 1-12.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:161:y:2016:i:c:p:1-12
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.05.030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953616302581
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.05.030?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yasamin Kusunoki & Dawn Upchurch, 2011. "Contraceptive Method Choice Among Youth in the United States: The Importance of Relationship Context," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 48(4), pages 1451-1472, November.
    2. Elizabeth Thomson, 1997. "Couple childbearing desires, intentions, and births," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 34(3), pages 343-354, August.
    3. Spinelli, A. & Talamanca, I.F. & Lauria, L., 2000. "Patterns of contraceptive use in 5 European countries," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 90(9), pages 1403-1408.
    4. Mieke C. W. Eeckhaut & Megan M. Sweeney, 2016. "The perplexing links between contraceptive sterilization and (dis)advantage in ten low-fertility countries," Population Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(1), pages 39-58, March.
    5. Rozemarijn Dereuddre & Bart Van de Putte & Piet Bracke, 2016. "Ready, Willing, and Able: Contraceptive Use Patterns Across Europe," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 32(4), pages 543-573, October.
    6. Alessandra Gribaldo & Maya D. Judd & David I. Kertzer, 2009. "An Imperfect Contraceptive Society: Fertility and Contraception in Italy," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 35(3), pages 551-584, September.
    7. Carlson, Per, 1998. "Self-perceived health in East and West Europe: another European health divide," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1355-1366, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rozemarijn Dereuddre & Bart Van de Putte & Piet Bracke, 2016. "Ready, Willing, and Able: Contraceptive Use Patterns Across Europe," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 32(4), pages 543-573, October.
    2. Zuzanna Brzozowska & Isabella Buber-Ennser & Bernhard Riederer, 2021. "Didn’t Plan One but got One: Unintended and sooner-than-intended Parents in the East and the West of Europe," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 37(3), pages 727-767, July.
    3. Bridget Brew & Abigail Weitzman & Kelly Musick & Yasamin Kusunoki, 2020. "Young women's joint relationship, sex, and contraceptive trajectories: Evidence from the United States," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 42(34), pages 933-984.
    4. Megan Sweeney & Teresa Castro Martín & Melinda Mills, 2015. "The reproductive context of cohabitation in comparative perspective," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 32(5), pages 147-182.
    5. Jenny Gierveld & Pearl A. Dykstra & Niels Schenk, 2012. "Living arrangements, intergenerational support types and older adult loneliness in Eastern and Western Europe," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 27(7), pages 167-200.
    6. Barbara S. Okun & Liat Raz‐Yurovich, 2019. "Housework, Gender Role Attitudes, and Couples' Fertility Intentions: Reconsidering Men's Roles in Gender Theories of Family Change," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 45(1), pages 169-196, March.
    7. Adsera, Alicia, 2005. "Differences in Desired and Actual Fertility: An Economic Analysis of the Spanish Case," IZA Discussion Papers 1584, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Anna Rotkirch & Heini Väisänen & Markus Jokela & Stuart Basten, 2011. "Baby longing and men’s reproductive motivation," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 9(1), pages 283-306.
    9. Ea Hoppe Blaabæk & Mads Meier Jæger & Joseph Molitoris, 2020. "Family Size and Educational Attainment: Cousins, Contexts, and Compensation," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 36(3), pages 575-600, July.
    10. Alessandro Rosina & Laura Cavalli & Maria Rita Testa, 2011. "Couples’ childbearing behaviour in Italy: which of the partners is leading it?," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 9(1), pages 157-178.
    11. Zsolt Spéder & Balázs Kapitány, 2009. "How are Time-Dependent Childbearing Intentions Realized? Realization, Postponement, Abandonment, Bringing Forward," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 25(4), pages 503-523, November.
    12. Yasamin Kusunoki & Jennifer S. Barber, 2020. "The Dynamics of Intimate Relationships and Contraceptive Use During Early Emerging Adulthood," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 57(6), pages 2003-2034, December.
    13. Rebecca Kippen & Bruce Chapman & Peng Yu, 2010. "What's love got to do with it? Homogamy and dyadic approaches to understanding marital instability," CEPR Discussion Papers 631, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Economics, Australian National University.
    14. Matthias Doepke & Anne Hannusch & Fabian Kindermann & Michèle Tertilt, 2022. "The Economics of Fertility: A New Era," NBER Working Papers 29948, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Karina Shreffler & Stacy Tiemeyer & Cassandra Dorius & Tiffany Spierling & Arthur Greil & Julia McQuillan, 2016. "Infertility and fertility intentions, desires, and outcomes among US women," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 35(39), pages 1149-1168.
    16. Alicia Adsera, 2006. "An Economic Analysis of the Gap Between Desired and Actual Fertility: The Case of Spain," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 75-95, March.
    17. Nicoletta Balbo & Francesco C. Billari & Melinda Mills, 2013. "Fertility in Advanced Societies: A Review of Research," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-38, February.
    18. Andreea-Oana IACOBUTA & Livia BACIU & Alina-Mariuca IONESCU & Gabriel Claudiu MURSA, 2015. "Socioeconomic Inequalities In Self-Perceived Health In Romania," Journal of Public Administration, Finance and Law, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, vol. 0(Special i), pages 209-224, September.
    19. Francesca Decimo, 2021. "The Transnational Making of Population: Migration, Marriage and Fertility Between Morocco and Italy," Journal of International Migration and Integration, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 289-310, March.
    20. Eiji Yamamura, 2011. "Differences in the effect of social capital on health status between workers and non-workers," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 58(4), pages 385-400, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:161:y:2016:i:c:p:1-12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.