reproduction-rate 2.1 - why not 2.0?

Anthropology, Economics, History, Sociology etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

reproduction-rate 2.1 - why not 2.0?

#1  Postby letter » Feb 01, 2013 10:54 am

Hi there,

How come the reproduction-rate of a population is 2.1 so this population will remain constant in numbers? Why is it not 2.0? 2.1 would mean the population will grow, while 2.0 means it will remain constant. Could someone explain it to me why it's 2.1? Thanks in advance.

Regards
letter
letter
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 2

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: reproduction-rate 2.1 - why not 2.0?

#2  Postby Precambrian Rabbi » Feb 01, 2013 11:00 am

I am sure there are more expert people than me here that could give you a more comprehensive answer but my guess would be that the additional 0.1 covers offspring who die without themselves having offspring.
Last edited by Precambrian Rabbi on Feb 01, 2013 11:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
"...religion may attract good people but it doesn't produce them. And it draws in a lot of hateful nutjobs too..." AronRa
User avatar
Precambrian Rabbi
 
Posts: 1591
Male

Country: Greenandpleasantland
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: reproduction-rate 2.1 - why not 2.0?

#3  Postby Pulsar » Feb 01, 2013 11:01 am

From wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate#Replacement_rates

Replacement fertility is the total fertility rate at which newborn girls would have an average of exactly one daughter over their lifetimes. That is, women have just enough female babies to replace themselves (or, equivalently, adults have just enough total babies to replace themselves).

If there were no mortality in the female population until the end of the childbearing years (generally taken as 44 or 49, though some exceptions exist) then the replacement level of TFR would be very close to 2.0 (actually slightly higher because of the excess of boy over girl births in human populations). The replacement fertility rate is roughly 2.1 births per woman for most industrialized countries (2.075 in the UK for example), but ranges from 2.5 to 3.3 in developing countries because of higher mortality rates.[4] Taken globally, the total fertility rate at replacement is 2.33 children per woman. At this rate, global population growth would trend towards zero.
"The longer I live the more I see that I am never wrong about anything, and that all the pains that I have so humbly taken to verify my notions have only wasted my time." - George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
Pulsar
 
Posts: 4618
Age: 43
Male

Country: Belgium
Belgium (be)
Print view this post

Re: reproduction-rate 2.1 - why not 2.0?

#4  Postby Microfarad » Feb 11, 2013 10:10 am

I am not going to reproduce myself. So, someone other will have to do it for me.

However, why 2.1 and not, for example, 2.073 or 2.114? Does exactly the 4,76% of population die without offspring?
Warning: the content of the post above may content inaccuracies, nonsense or insults to human intelligence. Read at your own risk.
User avatar
Microfarad
 
Posts: 1405
Age: 25
Male

Country: Italy
Italy (it)
Print view this post


Return to Social Sciences & Humanities

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest