Türkiye’de Doğurganlık, Göç ve Mekânsal Etkileşim: Seçicilik Hipotezi Kapsamında Bir Analiz

Göç bir yer değiştirme sürecidir ve toplumları sosyal, ekonomik ve yapısal olarak etkilemektedir. Bu çalışma, Türkiye’de göçün doğurganlık üzerindeki etkisini ölçmektedir. 2013 Türkiye Nüfus ve Sağlık Araştırmasından elde edilen veriler kullanılarak Robust Poisson modeline dayalı seçicilik hipotezi dikkate alınarak analizler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Değişkenler arasındaki ilişkiyi değerlendirirken sosyal normların ve komşuluk ilişkilerinin rolünü dikkate almamak bütüncül bir bakış açısına engel olmakta; dolayısıyla bu çalışmada mekansal etkileşim boyutu da dikkate alınmaktadır. Bulgular, kadınların doğurganlık davranışlarını önemli ölçüde etkileme eğiliminde olan değişkenlerin, kentten kıra göç eden kadınların doğurganlık davranışları üzerinde etkisinin olmadığını göstermektedir. Kırdan kente göç eden kadınların ve kentlerde yaşayan kadınların doğurganlık davranışları üzerinde yaş, eğitim, çalışma durumu ve hanehalkı refahı gibi değişkenler önemli bir etkiye sahipken, bu değişkenlerin kırsal kesimde doğurganlık üzerindeki etkisi çok daha yüksektir. Bu bağlamda çalışma, Türkiye’de göç ve doğurganlık arasındaki mekansal bir ilişkiyi ortaya koymakta ve dolayısıyla seçicilik hipotezini geçersiz kılmaktadır.

Fertility, Migration, and Spatial Interaction in Turkey: An Analysis under the Selectivity Hypothesis

Migration is a process of displacement, and it affects societies socially, economically, and structurally. This study gauges the impact of migration on fertility in Turkey. The evaluation is conducted in consideration of the selectivity hypothesis based on the Robust Poisson model. The data obtained from the 2013 Turkey Demographic and Health Survey were analyzed for this purpose. Not considering the role of social norms and one’s neighborhood relations while evaluating the relationship between variables prevents a holistic perspective; thus, the aspect of spatial interaction is taken into account in this study. The findings suggest that the variables that tend to significantly affect the fertility behaviors of women do not have an impact on the fertility behaviors of women having migrated from urban to rural areas. While variables such as age, education, employment status and household welfare have a significant effect on the fertility behaviors of women who migrated from rural areas to the cities as well as women residing in cities, the effect of these variables on fertility in rural areas is much higher. In this context, the study unveils a spatial relationship between migration and fertility in Turkey and, thus, invalidates the selectivity hypothesis.

___

Adsera, A., & Ferrer, A. (2011). Age at migration, language and fertility patterns among migrants to Canada. Discussion Paper Series(5552). google scholar

Akça, H. ve Ela, M. (2012). Türkiye’de eğitim, doğurganlık ve işsizlik ilişkisinin analizi. Maliye Dergisi, (163), 223-242. google scholar

AnseIin, L. (1988). Spatial econometrics: Methods and models. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. google scholar

Anselin, L., & Bera, A. K. (1998). Spatial dependence in linear regression models with an introduction to spatial econometrics. in Handbook of Applied Economic Statistics (pp. 237-289). New York: CRC Press. google scholar

Becker, G. S. (1960). An economic analysis of fertility. Demographic and economic change in developed countries. in Demographic and economic change in developed countries, Universities-Natıonal Bureau Committee for Economıc Research, (pp.209-240). ISBN: 0-87014-302-6: Columbıa Unıversıty Press. google scholar

Becker, G. S., & Lewis, H. G. (1973). Interaction between quantity and quality of children. Journal of PoliticalEconomy, 2(81), 279-288. google scholar

Becker, G. S., & Barro, R. J. (1988). A reformulation of the economic theory of fertility. The Quarterly Journal ofEconomics, 103(1), 1-25. google scholar

Darmofal, D. (2006). Spatial econometrics and political science. Annual Meeting of Southern Political Science Association. google scholar

De Tray, Dennis. N. (1973). Child quality and the demand for children. Journal of Political Economy, 81(2):70-95, Part 2: New Economic Approaches to Fertility, Published By: The University of Chicago Press. google scholar

Deliktaş, E., Usta, S., Bozkurt, S. ve Helvacı, B. (2008). Türkiye’de kentlerde doğurganlık hızını etkileyen faktörler: Path analizi yaklaşımı. Ege Akademik Bakış Dergisi, 2(8), 877-895. google scholar

Dreze, J., & Murthi, M. (2000). Fertility, education and development. Discussion Paper No. DEDPS 20. google scholar

Elhorst, J. P. (2014). Spatial econometrics: From cross-sectional data to spatial panels, ISBN: 978-3-642-40339-2, Springer, London. google scholar

Emirhan, P. N. (2015). Göreli yoksunluk ve bölgeler arası göçler: Türkiye örneği. Business and Economics Research Journal, 6(2), 79-89. google scholar

Engelhardt, H. & Prskawetzz, A. (2002). On the changing correlation between fertility and female employment over space and time. Working papers of the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, 1-38. google scholar

Farber, S. C., & Lee, B. S. (1984). Fertility adaptation of rural-to-urban migrant women: A method of estimation applied to Korean women. Demography, 21(3), 339-345. google scholar

Gerkman, L. (2010). Topics in spatial econometrics-With applications to house prices (Doctoral dissertation). Nr: 219, Helsingfors google scholar

Getis, A., & Ord, J. K. (2008). The analysis of spatial association by use of distance statistics. Advances in Spatial Science, 127-145. google scholar

Goldstein, S. (1973). Interrelations between migration and fertility in Thailand. Demography, 10(2), 225-241. google scholar

Goldstein, S., & Goldstein, A. (1981). The Impact of migration on fertility:an ‘own children’ analysis for Thailand. Population Studies: A Journal ofDemography, 35(2), 265-284. google scholar

Gumprecht, D. (2005). Spatial methods in econometrics: An application to R&D spillovers. Department of Statistics and Mathematics Wirtschaftsuniversitat Wien Research Report Series, Report 26, https://epub.wu.ac.at/290/1/document.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 04.12.2019). google scholar

Güneri, Ö. İ. ve Durmuş, B. (2020). Aşırı ya da eksik yayılım durumunda poisson ve negatif binom regresyon modellerinin karşılaştırılması. Uluslararası Doğu Anadolu Fen Mühendislik ve Tasarım Dergisi, 2(1), 48-66. google scholar

Hepple, L. W. (1998). Exact testing for spatial autocorrelation among regression residuals. Environment and Planning A(30), 85-108. google scholar

Hervitz, H. M. (1985). Selectivity, adaptation, or disruption? A comparison of alternative hypotheses on theeffects of migration on fertility: The case of Brazil. The International Migration Review, 19(2), 293-317. google scholar

Hiday, V. A. (1978). Migration, urbanization, and fertility in the Philippines. International Migration Review, 12(3), 370-385. google scholar

Jensen, E. R., & Ahlburg, D. A. (2004). Why does migration decrease fertility? Evidence from the Philippines. Population Studies, 58(2), 219-231. google scholar

Kahn, J. R. (1988). Immigrant selectivity and fertility adaptation in the United States. Social Forces, 67(1), 108-128. google scholar

Kalkınma Bakanlığı. (2013). Onuncu kalkınma planı (2014-2018). https://www.ahika.gov.tr/assets/upload/dosyalar/onuncu-kalkinma-plani.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 15.11.2020). google scholar

Kravdal, O., & Rindfuss, R. R. (2008). Changing relationships between education and fertility: A study of women and men born 1940 to 1964. American Sociological Review, 73(5), 854-873. google scholar

Kulu, H. (2005). Migration and Fertility: Competing Hypotheses Re-examined. European Journal ofPopulation, 21, 51-87. google scholar

Lee, B. S., & Farber, S. C. (1984). Fertility Adaptation by Rural-Urban Migrants in Developing Countries: The Case of Korea. Population Studies, 38 (1), 141-155. google scholar

Liang, Y., Yi, Y., & Sun, Q. (2013). The Impact of migration on fertility under China’s underlying restrictions: A comparative study between permanent and temporary migrants. Social Indicators Research, 1(116), 307-326. google scholar

Long, L. H. (1970). The Fertility of migrants to and within North America. The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 48(3), 297-316. google scholar

Long, J. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. google scholar

Macisco, J. J., Bouvier, F. L., & Renzi, M. J. (1969). Migration Status, education and fertility in Puerto Rico, 1960. The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 47(2), 167-186. google scholar

Miller, J. E., Trussell, J., Pebley, A. R., & Vaughan, B. (1992). Birth spacing and child mortality in Bangladesh and the Philippines. Demography, 29(2), 305-318. google scholar

Mineau, G. P., Bean, L. L., & Anderton, D. L. (1989). Migration and fertility: Behavioral change on the American frontier. Journal of Family History, 14(1), 43-61. google scholar

Owoo, N. S., Mensah, S. A., & Onuoha, E. (2015). The effect of neighbourhood mortality shocks on fertility preferences: A Spatial Econometric Approach. The European Journal of Health Economics: HEPAC, 16, 629-645. google scholar

Özgür, E. (2004). Türkiye>de toplam doğurganlık hızının mekansal dağılışı. Coğrafi Bilimler Dergisi, 2(2), 1-12. google scholar

Ribe, H., & Schultz, T. P. (1980). Migrant and native fertility in Colombia in 1973: Migrants Selected According to Their Reproductive Preferences?. Center Discussion Paper, No:355. google scholar

Rokicki, S., Montana, L., & Fink, G. (2014). Impact of migration on fertility and abortion: evidence from the household and welfare study of Accra. Demography, 51(6), 2229-2254. google scholar

Schultz, T. P. (2005). Fertility and ıncome. economic growth center, Yale University. google scholar

Schultz, T. P. (1997). Demand for children in low income countries. Handbook of Population and Family Economics, (1), 349-430. google scholar

Selim, S. (2004). Türkiye’de çocuk talebi ve kadınların işgücüne katılımının doğurganlık üzerindeki etkisi: Ekonometrik yaklaşım (Doktora Tezi). Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İzmir. google scholar

Tobler, W. R. (1979). Cellular geography. In: Gale S, Olsson G (eds) Philosophy in Geography. (pp. 379-386). google scholar

Tu W. (1997). Empirical bayes analysis of count data. University of Tennessee, Master Thesis. google scholar

Türkiye Nüfus ve Sağlık Araştırması. (2013). Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Nüfus Etütleri Enstitüsü TNSA Mikro Veri Seti. google scholar

White, M. J., Tagoe, E., Stiff, C., Adazul, K., & Smith, D. J. (2005). Urbanization and the fertility transition in Ghana. Population Research and Policy, (24), 59-83. google scholar

Willis, R. J. (1973). A new approach to the economic theory of fertility behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 81(2), 14-64. google scholar

Winkelmann, R., & Zimmermann, K. F. (1995). Recent developments in count data modelling: Theory and application. Journal of Economic Surveys, 9(1), 1-24. google scholar

Viton, P. A. (2010). Notes on spatial econometric models. City and Regional Planning 870.03. google scholar

Zeren, F. (2010). Mekansal etkileşim analizi. İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Ekonometri ve İstatistik Dergisi, (12), 18-39. google scholar