人口研究 ›› 2015, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (2): 32-47.

• 论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

中国近期生育率的再估计

陈卫1,张玲玲2   

  1. 中国人民大学人口与发展研究中心、中国人民大学社会与人口学院,北京 100872
  • 出版日期:2015-03-29 发布日期:2015-08-04
  • 作者简介:1 中国人民大学人口与发展研究中心教授;2 中国人民大学社会与人口学院博士研究生
  • 基金资助:

    教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目“中国第六次人口普查资料分析研究”(13JJD840005)

A Reassessment of China’s Recent Fertility

Chen Wei1, Zhang Lingling2   

  1. Center for Population and Development Studies,  School of Sociology and Population Studies, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872
  • Online:2015-03-29 Published:2015-08-04
  • About author:1 Professor, Center for Population and Development Studies, Renmin University of China; 2 PhD Student, School of Sociology and Population Studies, Renmin University of China

摘要: 本文利用国家统计局的人口普查和人口变动抽样调查数据,在假设2010年普查漏报率与1990年普查漏报率相同的条件下,再次估计了2005年以来中国的生育率。普查同队列人口的比较计算表明,1990年0-5岁人口漏报率高达7.7%。以此漏报率调整了2010年0-5岁人口,进而推算相应年份的出生人口和生育率。同时,又通过总和生育率与出生率之间的关系,利用国家统计局公布的出生率,间接估计了2005年以来的生育率。这两种方法得到的估计结果虽有差异,但可以认为存在一致性,也进一步证实了以往一些研究使用不同数据和方法进行估计得到的结果。估计结果表明,中国近期的生育水平不会低于1.5,很有可能在1.6左右的水平上。文章亦对研究假设和可能存在的缺陷进行了讨论。

关键词: 总和生育率, 漏报率, 出生率, 人口普查

Abstract: Using data from China’s population censuses and sampling surveys, this paper provides a reassessment of China’s fertility since 2005 under the assumption that the 2010 census has  similarly high data quality as the 1990 census. Cohort analysis suggests that population aged 0-5 in the 1990 census is underreported by 7.7%, and population aged 0-5 in the 2010 census is thus adjusted with this rate, which are further translated into annual births and fertility rate over 2005-2010. This paper also provides an estimation of fertility over 2005-2013 using the relationship between total fertility rate and crude birth rate which are based on data from censuses and sampling surveys plus the crude birth rates published by the National Bureau of Statistics. While differences exist in the results from the two type of estimation, they are largely consistent. China’s recent fertility stands at a level that is unlikely below 1.5, and most probably around 1.6. The paper concludes with a discussion of the assumption used in this research and some plausible limitations of the research.

Keywords: Total Fertility Rate, Under-reporting Rate, Crude Birth Rate, Population Census