Neighbors and neighborhoods: effects on marriage timing

Abstract

Studies of neighborhoods can benefit from data and theoretical frameworks that allow them to examine the differences between neighborhoods and neighbors. Without this distinction, it is unclear if it is characteristics of the people or the place that are associated with individual outcomes. Using data from the Chitwan Valley Family Study, I explore the differences between neighbors and neighborhoods and their associations with marriage timing. I hypothesize three mechanisms whereby neighbors influence individuals: information sharing, social modeling, and sanctions and rewards among a close primary residential group. I explore three domains in which these mechanisms are likely to operate: education, media consumption, and attitudes. Results indicate that when neighbors have attitudes favoring later marriage and being single, marriage rates decrease, even when controlling for measures that describe the neighborhood’s access to important resources in the form of institutions and services. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006Marriage, Neighborhoods, Neighbors, Nepal, Social change,

Effect of Conflict on Age at Marriage and Age at First Birth in Rwanda

“…Attitude of the neighbors have also been found to influence marriage decisions. Yabiku (2006) has explored the role of neighbors and neighborhood in timing of marriage in south-central Nepal. These variables have not been given adequate attention in the literature due to lack of availability of data.…”

Further evidence of community education effects on fertility in sub-Saharan Africa

“…Such associations that are indicative of externality effects of education have also been reported in fertility studies from other regions (Hirschman and Young 2000) and in investigations of fertility desires (Moursund and Kravdal 2003;Baschieri 2007) or contraceptive use (Benefo 2006(Benefo , 2010DeRose, Wu, and Dodoo 2010;McNay et al 2003;Moursund and Kravdal 2003;Stephenson et al 2007;Stephenson, Beke, and Tshibangu 2008) in various developing countries, with a variety of additional factors included (more or less appropriately) in the models. There are also studies, however, where associations have not shown up (Gupta and Mahy 2003;Yabiku 2006). Similarly, community socioeconomic resources may affect individual health and mortality.…”

Changing Family Formation in Nepal: Marriage, Cohabitation and First Sexual Intercourse

“…10 Socializing with others may raise aspirations and change behaviors. 7,8,11 If it is true that individuals socialized in a more modern way have more freedom to choose their partners, we might expect to see change in the nature of relationships between couples. For example, people may modify their sexual behavior.…”

“…For example, a modern community may be more open to accepting individuals' freedom to choose their spouse. 11,22 Changes in family formation are also closely related to changes in family systems. Early marriage is typical in a society where the wedding serves as an alliance between families.…”