Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:31:04.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

XIII—Differential Fertility in Scotland, 1911–1931

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2012

Enid Charles
Enid Charles
Affiliation:
Leverhulme Research Fellow.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The study of differential fertility in Great Britain in relation to the continued decline in fertility has been hampered by lack of adequate birth registration. Though the defect has now been partially remedied by The Population (Statistics) Bill, the study of past changes is still difficult. In a previous memoir (Charles and Moshinsky, 1938) the writer gave an analysis of regional fertility differences in England and Wales from 1911 to 1931. Gross reproduction rates were used as measures of fertility. In the present communication the same method is applied to changes in fertility in Scotland.

Type
Research Article
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 59 , Issue 2 , 1938 , pp. 371 - 383
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1938

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References to Literature

Beveridge, W. H., 1925. “The Decline of Fertility in European Races,” Economica. Census of Scotland, 1931, vol. ii.Google Scholar
Charles, Enid, 1935. “The Effect of Present Trends in Fertility and Mortality upon the Future Population of England and Wales,” London and Cambridge Economic Service. Special Memorandum, No. 40.Google Scholar
Charles, Enid, and Moshinsky, Pearl, 1938. “Differential Fertility in England and Wales,” Political Arithmetic, ed. by Lancelot Hogben.Google Scholar
Fawcett, , 1932. “Distribution of the Urban Population in Great Britain, 1931,” Geogr. Journ., vol. lxxix.Google Scholar