IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Fertility Differences between the Majority and Minority Nationality Groups in China

Listed author(s):
  • Dudley Poston


  • Chiung-Fang Chang
  • Hong Dan
Registered author(s):

    There is an extensive sociological and demographic literature about why racial and ethnic minority groups in the U.S. have different levels of fertility, usually higher, than the majority white group. The four major hypotheses are the subcultural hypothesis, the social characteristics hypothesis, the minority group status hypothesis, and the economic hypothesis. In this paper we focus on fertility patterns of the majority Han and the larger minority groups in China and examine the degree to which the above hypotheses may be useful in articulating the reasons why the fertility of the Han majority differs from that of the minorities. We first present a brief historical review of the genesis and development of the majority and minority nationalities in China. We next present short vignettes of each of the eight minority nationalities we will be examining. We then review the Western literature on fertility differentials between majority and minority nationalities, and summarize the theoretical expectations behind the four prominent hypotheses to be tested. Finally, we present the results of the analysis, and draw out the implications of our work. Copyright Springer 2006

    If 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.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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.

    Article provided by Springer & Southern Demographic Association (SDA) in its journal Population Research and Policy Review.

    Volume (Year): 25 (2006)
    Issue (Month): 1 (February)
    Pages: 67-101

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:kap:poprpr:v:25:y:2006:i:1:p:67-101
    DOI: 10.1007/s11113-006-0003-5
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:poprpr:v:25:y:2006:i:1:p:67-101. 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: (Sonal Shukla)

    or (Rebekah McClure)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.