c - usaid
c - usaid c - usaid
9 Si mi larly, C varies From one ago-group to another, partly c becausu the sterility correction factors ar e different and partly because the contraceptive prevalence rates, when plotted against ae, usually have the shupe of an inverted U-distribution. Furthermore, the contraceptive method-mix generally varies with age, and the average value of a is higher in those age-groups wn re steri li sation acceptors constitute a relatively higher proportion of contraceptive users. The third index C is difficult to measure in a tradi tional societies where induced abortion is believed to be negligible (which implies C to be close to one]. Bonga rts and Potter '1983) assumed C to be one for a Bangladesh for 1975. In that case, the same va lue (one] would apply to all the age-groups. However, to be realistic, we can assume that some ca e of induced abortion do take place, particularly in the younger age-groups, although they often remain unreported or under reported. The formula (2.4] gives overall vhluos of C which show -a a declining trend over time. Age-specific values can thus be assumed so ns to be consistent with the overall C_.
10 Regarding the fourth index C , Bongearts and Potter have explained why it can bo gonora lLy assumed to be age-invariant (at any given point of time, because over time it is slowly increasing . "Although postpartum infecundobi tity in reality rises sLightly with ago, the other components of birth intervals increasa also, so that tha fertility-inhibiting impact of postpartum infecundabi Lity changes very Little with age. It is, therefore, simpler and more convenient to use the same equation for' C in all age-g roups end to assume the duration of postpartum infacundahi lity to be ago invariant". /2 Tho aggregate ferti Lity model is based on an extension (over time) of the central equation (2.1) so as to include the base year (0) and the target year (t), and by considaring the following ratio: x C ( t) x C (t) -. - - - - x C I (t) x TF(t) TFR(t) C m (t) c - - - a - - - - - - - - - . (2.*6) TFR[O) C m (0) x C c (0) x C a (0) x C i (0) x TF(O) Si nce our mai n inte r st is in C , its effect can be isolated c by combining thc ratios of the other indices Into a single factor F( t), which moans that C (t) . C (t) . C (t) . TF (t) FCt ] ------ - --------------- ---. . . (2..[.7 C a [(O) . C ai (r) . C (Co) . TF (0] Assuming that all other terms ore known except u(t] which is CPR - 100 ., then -.. a simple re-arrangement of terms leads to the formula- 1 TFR~t) 1 uft) -- - .[ x-------------x (1-1.08B u[O} x e(O)} ]... [2.8] 1.08xe(t) TFR(O) F(t) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ /2 Bongaarts, J. and Potter, R. G., Fertility, Biology, and Behavior, An AnaLysis of the Prox.imate Determinants, Academic 1 1 Press, Now York, 1983, pp. 6- 7
- Page 2 and 3: ~Ty~AD!DhkI Re fe rffc ce LibL1 t-,
- Page 4 and 5: 1. INTRODUCTION A dynamic rcLations
- Page 6 and 7: 5 rate, and there is no possibi Lit
- Page 8 and 9: 5 course, the inputs have to be sui
- Page 10 and 11: 7 Age-group 15-29 20-24 25-29 30
- Page 14 and 15: 11 This formula enables us to estim
- Page 16 and 17: n tura LLy temptes t0 fIx a low CBR
- Page 18 and 19: 15 mathematical space, then alL vaL
- Page 20 and 21: F iq]u.- r-e .3 1: -FFi . . a,-, -I
- Page 22 and 23: 18 possib le, and theoretically pre
- Page 24 and 25: 20 Extensive studies made by Coole,
- Page 26 and 27: 22 f3 Re lative values of age-speci
- Page 28 and 29: 24 Step-1 Use CPS-1901 to derive
- Page 30 and 31: 0.84, va Lues for ago-groups be Ir.
- Page 32 and 33: aving taken 1981 as tho bae year, w
- Page 34 and 35: 30 1 C (0) C (0) C [0) C (0] TFR(t)
- Page 36 and 37: 32 As regards the inputs () , the o
- Page 38 and 39: 34 would not be fulfi lLed. We can
- Page 40 and 41: .36 desirable. However, it is usefu
- Page 42 and 43: 38 we hnve chosen a function of thi
- Page 44 and 45: 40 At thi s stago, a graphical desc
- Page 46 and 47: 141 which correspond to the ranges
- Page 48 and 49: 43 5. APPLICATIO1t TO BANGLADESH AN
- Page 50 and 51: 45 Corresponding to each pattern of
- Page 52 and 53: 47 for which the relevant formula i
- Page 54 and 55: J49 (f] Usa-effectiveness of cont r
- Page 56 and 57: 51 At this st ago it would be conve
- Page 58 and 59: 53 1986 1991 1996 2001 Total natura
- Page 60 and 61: 55 that a fulfi Lmant of the TFR ta
9<br />
Si mi larly, C varies From one ago-group to another, partly<br />
c<br />
becausu the sterility correction factors ar e different and<br />
partly because the contraceptive prevalence rates, when<br />
plotted against ae, usually have the shupe of an inverted<br />
U-distribution. Furthermore, the contraceptive method-mix<br />
generally varies with age, and the average value of a is<br />
higher in those age-groups wn re steri li sation acceptors<br />
constitute a relatively higher proportion of contraceptive<br />
users.<br />
The third index C is difficult to measure in<br />
a<br />
tradi tional<br />
societies where induced abortion is believed to<br />
be negligible (which implies C to be close to one].<br />
Bonga rts and Potter '1983) assumed C to be one for<br />
a<br />
Bangladesh for 1975. In that case, the same va lue (one]<br />
would apply to all the age-groups. However, to be<br />
realistic, we can assume that some ca e<br />
of induced abortion<br />
do take place, particularly in the younger age-groups,<br />
although they often remain unreported or under reported.<br />
The formula (2.4] gives overall vhluos of C which show -a<br />
a<br />
declining trend over time. Age-specific values can thus be<br />
assumed so ns to be consistent with the overall C_.
Change language