Family, Firms, and Fertility: A Study of Social Interaction Effects

Abstract

Research has indicated that fertility spreads through social networks and attributed this phenomenon to social interaction effects. It remains unclear, however, whether the findings of previous studies reflect the direct influence of network partners or contextual and selection factors, such as shared environment and common background characteristics. The present study uses instrumental variables to improve the identification of social interaction effects on fertility. Using data from the System of social statistical data sets (SSD) of Statistics Netherlands, we identify two networks—the network of colleagues at the workplace and the network of siblings in the family—to examine the influence of network partners on individual fertility decisions. Discrete-time event-history models with random effects provide evidence for social interaction effects, showing that colleagues’ and siblings’ fertility have direct consequences for an individual’s fertility. Moreover, colleague effects are concentrated in female-female interactions, and women are more strongly influenced by their siblings, regardless of siblings’ gender. These results are the first to demonstrate spillover effects across network boundaries, suggesting that fertility effects accumulate through social ties not only within but also across different domains of interaction.

Peer Effects and Fertility Preferences in China: Evidence From the China Labor-Force Dynamics Survey

“…Madhavan and Adams (2003), for instance, show that in Mali, not only are network effects on fertility much more pronounced for women aged 30 or older than for younger women, but the effects of social networks on contraceptive use are markedly different for these two groups. Such an association with fertility changes is also documented for Western nations, including Germany (Bernardi, Keim, & Klärner, 2014;, the Netherlands (Buyukkececi, Leopold, van Gaalen, & Engelhardt, 2020), Norway (Lyngstad & Prskawetz, 2010) and the US (Balboa & Barban, 2014;Fletcher & Yakusheva, 2016;Yakusheva & Fletcher, 2015). In the US, for instance, a 10 percentage point increase in peer pregnancies is linked to a 2-5 percentage point greater likelihood of an individual becoming pregnant (Fletcher & Yakusheva, 2016).…”

The casual effect of fertility: The multiple problems with instrumental variables for the number of children in families

“…It is therefore not self-evident why we should interpret the estimated effect as any more causal than that from a standard OLS. (This critique also goes for, for example, Buyukkececi et al 2020. )…”

Does Re-Partnering Behavior Spread Among Former Spouses?

“…Studies focusing on other family formation patterns include de Vuijst et al (2017) and McDermott et al (2013) where the influence of siblings and peers on divorce behavior are examined, respectively. In another study, Buyukkececi and Leopold (2020) investigated how siblings' fertility, marital, and divorce behavior are related to each other by not limiting social interactions to the same behavioral domain (e.g., fertility-fertility or divorce-divorce associations). Most of these studies found significant associations between network partners' family formation behavior.…”

“…To elicit these effects at the microlevel, studies have focused on networks such as siblings, friends, and colleagues and examined whether the transition to parenthood (Balbo & Barban, 2014 ; Buyukkececi et al, 2020 ; Lyngstad & Prskawetz, 2010 ), marriage (Buyukkececi & Leopold, 2020 ), and divorce (de Vuijst et al, 2017 ) spread among these network partners. Social interaction effects might similarly be relevant in explaining the emergence of new living arrangements such as re-partnering following a divorce or breakup.…”