Abstract
Background
The most important elements to determine the rate of population growth is fertility. Fertility is the main element to affect the welfare of mother. The survival of a child can be affected by high fertility and shorter birth intervals.
Methods
For this study, the linear mixed model was used to determine factors affecting fertility status of women in Ethiopia. The 2011 Ethiopian demographic and health survey data was used for this study.
Results
From the result, materials used for roof, wall and floor were found to have a significant relation to fertility level of women in the last five years. Moreover, family size and births in the last five years were found to have a significant relationship.
Conclusion
Significant variation in fertility level was observed among rural and urban residents of Ethiopia. To reduce the gap of fertility between rural and urban population, it is important to modernize different factors. These factors could be access to education, media, and providing employment opportunities in the modern economic sector. Besides this, it is important to develop and maintain the access of family planning services.
Keywords: EDHS, fertility, LMM, VC
Introduction
To examine changes of a population over time, fertility is the most important factor in population dynamics. It contributes for the change and structure of the population In sub-Saharan countries, fertility rate is high compared to the rest of the world1–3. In Ethiopia the situation is similar, i.e., there is high fertility and rapid population growth rate.The country's population in 2013 was estimated to be more than 80 million4. According to the 2011 Ethiopian demographic and health survey, the total fertility rate at national level was 4.8 children per woman5. This value indicates that much effort should be made to attain the targets set in the national population policy of Ethiopia by 2015. For high fertility rate, the main reasons might be early age at first marriage, desire for more children and extremely low contraceptive use. There are some of the major reasons behind such high fertility rate6,7.
Because agriculture is the major economic sector in Ethiopia, most families want to have large number of children. This is because, they are considered as an economic asset rather than liabilities. For most of rural areas, the children assist their parents in farming activities, i.e., the economic importance of children are over lifetime. Similar to many countries in sub-Saharan Africa, having many children is considered as an advantage and gift of God in a number of Ethiopian rural communities8,9.
Through years, the Ethiopian government developed several strategies to reduce fertility levels since 1993. The plan of the government is to reduce total fertility rate from the then 7.7 children per woman to 4.0 by 2015. Therefore, it is important to identify socio-economic, demographic and geographic factors which could contribute for the level of fertility in Ethiopia10.
Materials and methods
Data Source
The Ethiopian demographic and health survey (DHS) is conducted within five years of period (2000, 2005 and 2011). This survey is administered at the household level. For this study, the 2011 Ethiopian demographic and health survey was used. The survey consist 624 selected enumeration areas. Complete household listing was carried out in each of the 624 EAs. For the survey, sample of 17,817 households was selected. To estimate at the national level, all data of the survey were weighted. Therefore, interviews were conducted with 9, 096 15–49 aged women and 6,033 15–59 aged men. Therefore, the 2011 EDHS sample was designed to provide estimates for the health and demographic variables of interest for Ethiopia as a whole; urban and rural area of Ethiopia and 11 geographical areas4,5,11.
Variable of interest
Response variables:- The outcome of interest is the births in last five years. This information is obtained by asking the mother how many live births she had in the past five years.
Independent variables:- The independent predictor variables consisted of baseline socio- economic, demographic and geographic variables, which were collected from each household. The socio-economic variables were the following: main source of drinking water; time taken to collect water; toilet facilities; main construction material of the rooms' walls, main construction material of the room's roof and main construction material of the room's floor and type of fuel for cooking geographic variables were region and type of place of residence, and demographic variables were age of respondents, religion, literacy, family size, total children ever born and age of respondents at 1st birth.
Statistical methods
For this study, the linear mixed model was used. This method first developed for applications in animal genetics and breading research12–14. The linear mixed model consists of fixed and random effects. A fixed effect refers to the levels of the factors used in the experiment. The random effect is used if the levels in the study are randomly selected and the interest in the effect of the population of the levels of a factor or factors.15.
Therefore, the general linear mixed model (LMM) for the response can be written
where
β is a p x1 vector of fixed effects;
yi is an n x1 vector of observed responses;
xi is an n x p design matrix associated with β;
ui is a qix1 vector of independent random effects with a N (O,Iqi σ i2) distribution;
zi is an n x qi design matrix associated with ui, where ui is a qix1 vector of independent random variables with a N (O, σ i2) distribution, i =1,2,…,k,
εi is an nx1 vector of random errors from a N (O,Inσ2e), and ui and εi are mutually independent.
The random effects vectors ui are assumed to be independent and normally distributed with mean vector 0 and variance — covariance G, i.e. ui = [u1' |u2'|…uk']∼N(O,G), where G is a block diagonal with the ith block σi2Iqi, and the error vectors εi are assumed to be independent and normally distributed with mean vector 0 and variance — covariance matrix Ri, i.e. εi∼ N(O,Ri), for i = 1, 2, …, k. Here, G and Ri are q x q (where, q= q1 + q2 + … + qk) and n x n matrices respectively. Under the assumption of normality and independence for and , the marginal distribution of the response is normal with mean Xβ and variance — covariance matrix νi where νi=σe2 In+ZGZ'=σe2In+∑in = 1σ2 ziz′i16,17. Estimation of σe2 and the σi2 is done using either the analysis of variance (ANOVA) method, or the maximum likelihood and the restricted/residual maximum likelihood methods under the assumption of normality and independence for ui and εi. The methods are described in the next section. Further literature for linear mixed model can be found in different books13,14,16–24.
Result
For this study, the effect of socio-economic, demographic and geographic factors on fertility status of women was investigated. To obtain the required result, linear mixed model approach was used. The result is presented in Table 1. The null model likelihood ratio test (LRT) for the analysis is given by Chi-square value 28.08 (P-value < 0.0001). This is highly significant for this model, indicating that the compound symmetry (CS) covariance matrix is preferred to the diagonal matrix of the ordinary least squares null model. From the result it was observed that all socio-economic, demographic and geographic factors were found to have significant effect on the fertility status of the mother for the last five years except time to reach water source. The results for the random effects that the effect of cluster was significant (p-value = 0.03). Therefore, the estimated value 0.06 was found to be significant.
Table 1.
Effect | Estimate | t Value | P-value | Lower | Upper |
Intercept | 0.599 | 18.57 | <.0001 | 0.536 | 0.662 |
Region (Ref. Tigray) | |||||
Affar | −0.012 | −1.13 | 0.2568 | −0.032 | 0.008 |
Amhara | −0.038 | −5.21 | <.0001 | −0.052 | −0.024 |
Oromiya | −0.029 | −3.87 | 0.0001 | −0.043 | −0.014 |
Somali | 0.109 | 9.93 | <.0001 | 0.087 | 0.130 |
Benishangul-Gumuz | −0.055 | −6.73 | <.0001 | −0.071 | −0.039 |
SNNP | −0.027 | −3.16 | 0.0016 | −0.043 | −0.010 |
Harari | −0.071 | −7.86 | <.0001 | −0.089 | −0.054 |
Gambela | −0.016 | −11.40 | <.0001 | −0.088 | −0.012 |
Addis Ababa | −0.083 | −8.25 | <.0001 | −0.103 | −0.063 |
Dire Dawa | 0.006 | 0.63 | 0.5262 | −0.012 | 0.024 |
Place of residence (Ref. Urban) | |||||
Rural | 0.049 | 7.88 | <.0001 | 0.038 | 0.062 |
Religion (Ref Traditional) | |||||
Catholic | −0.118 | −5.62 | <.0001 | −0.159 | −0.077 |
Muslim | 0.017 | 1.05 | 0.2927 | −0.014 | 0.048 |
Orthodox | −0.047 | −2.92 | 0.0035 | −0.078 | −0.015 |
Protestant | −0.019 | −1.21 | 0.2271 | −0.049 | 0.012 |
Educational level (Ref. Higher education) | |||||
Secondary | 0.028 | 4.74 | <.0001 | 0.033 | 0.079 |
No education | 0.073 | 8.41 | <.0001 | 0.056 | 0.090 |
Primary | 0.056 | 3.29 | 0.0010 | 0.011 | 0.044 |
Main source of drinking water (Ref. Unprotected) | |||||
Protected water | −0.026 | −5.88 | <.0001 | −0.034 | −0.017 |
Tap Water | −0.034 | −7.08 | <.0001 | −0.044 | −0.025 |
Toilet facility (Ref. Pit latrine) | |||||
Flush toilet | −0.027 | −3.00 | 0.0027 | −0.044 | −0.009 |
No facility | 0.039 | 0.88 | 0.3794 | −0.049 | 0.129 |
Type of cooking fuel (Ref. Wood charcoal) | |||||
Electricity | 0.028 | 1.87 | 0.0615 | −0.001 | 0.058 |
Gas/LPG | −0.043 | −4.20 | <.0001 | −0.063 | −0.023 |
No food to cook | 0.234 | 4.71 | <.0001 | 0.137 | 0.331 |
Main floor material (Ref. wood and related material) | |||||
Carpet | −0.048 | −2.23 | 0.0254 | −0.091 | −0.006 |
Cement | −0.068 | −3.41 | 0.0007 | −0.107 | −0.029 |
Natural floor | −0.032 | −1.67 | 0.0944 | −0.070 | 0.006 |
Main roof material (Ref. Thatch/plastic/wood) | |||||
Finished roofing | −0.025 | −5.89 | <.0001 | −0.033 | −0.017 |
No roof | 0.079 | 7.27 | <.0001 | 0.058 | 0.100 |
Main wall material (Ref. No walls) | |||||
Cane/Wood etc. | 0.110 | 9.23 | <.0001 | 0.087 | 0.134 |
Finished walls | 0.161 | 12.10 | <.0001 | 0.135 | 0.188 |
Family size | −0.004 | −3.71 | 0.0002 | −0.006 | −0.002 |
Age of respondents at first sex | 0.015 | 31.49 | <.0001 | 0.014 | 0.016 |
Current age of respondents | −0.021 | −71.20 | <.0001 | −0.021 | −0.020 |
Time to collect water | 0.0041 | 1.79 | 0.0742 | −1.11E-6 | 0.0024 |
The usual model error assumptions for these models were checked using the residual plots in Figures 1. From the figures, the first plot is of the predicted values against studentized residuals. These plots show that the studentized residuals vary between -1 and 1. The next two plots are a histogram and q-q plot of studentized residuals, and intended to show the normality of the studentized residuals. These plots show that the usual assumptions of the linear mixed model were not seriously violated by the data.
Table 1 shows that fertility status of a woman is different among the eleven administrative regions. As the result indicates, the highest fertility is found in Somali region (10.9%) followed by Dire Dawa administrative region (0.6%) compared to Tigray region. The lowest fertility rate was observed in Addis Ababa administrative region (−0.83), followed by Harari, Benishangul-Gumuz, Amhara, Oromiya, SNNP, Gambela and Afar regions compared to Tigray region. Similarly, women who live in rural area have 4.9% higher fertility compared to women who live in urban areas.
The association between fertility in the last five years and religion shows that muslim women have 1.7% higher fertility compared to women with traditional beliefs. But, women who are Catholic (−0.118) have lowest fertility followed by Orthodox (−0.047) and Protestant (−0.019) compared to traditional religion. On the other hand, women who have no education have higher fertility (7%) followed by primary (5%) and secondary (2%) compared to women who attended higher education.
From the result, it was found that main source of water and births in the last five years were found to have significant relation. As the result indicates, women who use tap water have lowest fertility (−0.034) followed by protected water (−0.026) compared to women who use unprotected water. Women who have no food to cook (23.4%) have more children compared to women who use wood/charcoal for cooking. Similarly, women who used electricity for cooking (2.8%) have more children compared to women who use wood/charcoal for cooking.
Regarding materials used for roof, wall and floor, from the result it was found that births in the last five years were found to have significant relation to material used for wall, roof and floor. This result is presented in Table 1. Furthermore, from the result it were found that family size and births in the last five years found to have significant relationship. Therefore, as family size in the household increases, births for last five years decrease by 0.4%. But, as age of respondents at first sex increases, births in the last five years increase by 1.5%. In contrary, for one year increase in the current age of respondent, the birth in the last five years decreases by 2.1%.
Discussion
The most important challenge is how to manage with ageing and possible population declines in most countries. In addition to this, it is important to assist programmes to reduce the rate fertility in countries where population growth continues to be high. Therefore, to maintain the fertility status of Ethiopia, it is important to increase age at first marriage. This can be achieved by enhancing women's status through providing them with better employment and educational opportunities27,28. Besides this it is important to expand family planning services and information, communication and education to limit family size of the country. Because of this, the government is implementing the population program so that fertility would decline over time. At national level, fertility has shown a declining trend. But, fertility is still high to some regions. Therefore, from the result, it was observed that there are clear regional differences in fertility levels and trends in Ethiopia.
From the result it was observed that some of the regions like Addis Ababa have very low fertility which is below replacement level of fertility. But, other regions like Oromiya, Somali, and SNNP regions have high total fertility rates. For this high fertility, there might be cultural and traditional barriers to effectively utilize modern birth control methods. Other factors could be low status of women and gender inequality including poor health service coverage. For some regions, it was difficult to implement programs that would contribute to fertility transition in each region. Besides regions, high fertility was observed in rural areas than urban areas.
Religion also has influence on the status of fertility since Muslim respondents have more children as compared to others. Moreover, women who are less educated have more kids. Based on the economic status of the woman, women who have better facilities tend to have lower fertility. This implies that in areas where traditional social and economic systems continue, the level of fertility is still high. Therefore, for essential change in fertility level, it is important to breakdown the traditional social system. In addition to this, it is important to have transformation of the economy. These changes have to be implemented from changes in the family system, i.e., the persistence of agrarian economy that favours large family size. These families maintained high fertility levels.
Conclusion
Therefore, from the result, significant variation in fertility level was observed among rural and urban residents of Ethiopia. To reduce the gap of fertility between rural and urban population, it is important to modernizedifferent factors. These factors could be access to education, media, and providing employment opportunities in the modern economic sector. Besides this, it is important to develop and maintain the access of family planning services.
References
- 1.Caldwell JC, Caldwell P. The CulturalContext of High Fertility in sub-Saharan Africa Population and Development Review. 1987;16(3):409–437. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Hinde A, Mturi A. Recent Trends in Tanzanian Fertility. Population Studies. 2000;54(2):177–191. doi: 10.1080/713779080. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Romaniuk A. Increase in Natural Fertility during the Early Stages of Modernization: Evidence from an African Case Study, Zaire. Population Studies. 1980;34(2):293–310. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.CSA, author. Central Statistics Agency of Ethiopia and ORC Macro: Ethiopia demographic and health survey 2011. Addis Ababa and Calverton, MD: Central Statistics Agency and ORC Macro; 2012. [Google Scholar]
- 5.CSA, author. Central Statistics Agency of Ethiopia and ORC Macro: Ethiopia demographic and health survey 2005. Addis Ababa and Calverton, MD: Central Statistics Agency and ORC Macro; 2006. [ http://www.measuredhs. com/pubs/pdf/FR179/FR179.pdf]. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Assefa H. An Overview of the Determinants of High Fertility in Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Development Research. 1992;14(2):1–30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Gibson M, Labour M R. Saving Technology and Fertility Increase in Rural Africa. Current Anthropology. 2002;43:213–222. doi: 10.1086/342428. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Desta K, Seyoum G. Family System in Ethiopia. In: Gebreselassie Seyoum, Ezra Markos, DTRC and ICDR , editors. Hand Book on Population and for Secondary School Teachers in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: Family line Education; 1998. [Google Scholar]
- 9.Bairagi R. Effect of Sex Preference on Contraceptive Use, Abortion and Fertility in Matlab, Bangladesh. International Family Planning perspectives. 2001;27(3):137–143. [Google Scholar]
- 10.National Population Office, author. National Population Policy of Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: 1993. [Google Scholar]
- 11.CSA, author. Central Statistics Agency of Ethiopia and ORC Macro: Ethiopia demographic and health survey 2000. Addis Ababa and Calverton, MD: Central Statistics Agency and ORC Macro; 2000. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Henderson CR. Estimation of variance and covariance components. Biometrics. 1953;9:226–252. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Henderson CR, et al. Estimation of environmental and genetic trends from records subject to culling. Biometrica. 1959;15:192–218. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Henderson CR, et al. The estimation of the environmental and genetic trends from records subject to culling. Biometrics. 1959;15:192–218. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Davis CS. Statistical Methods for the Analysis of Repearted Measurements. New York: Springer; 2002. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Zewotir T, Galpin JS. Influence diagnostics for linear mixed models. Journal of Data Science. 2005;3:153–177. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Zewotir T, Galpin JS. Evaluation of linear mixed model case deletion diagnostic tools by Monte Carlo simulation. Communication in Statistics — Simulation and Computation. 2006;35:645–682. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Bijleveld CCJH, kamp LJTVd. Longitudinal Data Analysis. London: SAGE; 1998. [Google Scholar]
- 19.Demidenko E. Mixed Models: Theory and Applications. New Jersey: Wiley-Interscience; 2004. [Google Scholar]
- 20.Demidenko E, Stukel TA. Influence analysis for linear mixed-effects models. Statistics in Medicine. 2005;24(6):893–909. doi: 10.1002/sim.1974. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Fitzmaurice LN M, Fitzmaurice WJ H. Applied Longitudinal Analysis. New Jersey: John Wiley; 2004. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Hockihg RR, Green JW, Bremer RH. Variance components estimation with model-based diagnositics. Technomestrics. 1989;31:227–239. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Wasserman John Neter W, Kutner MH. Applied Linear Statistical Models. 3rd ed. IRWIN.; 1974. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Liang KY, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika. 1986;73:13–22. [Google Scholar]
- 25.Searle SR, Casella G, McCulloch CE. Variance components. New York: Wiley; 1992. [Google Scholar]
- 26.Verbeke G, Molenberghs G. Linear Mixed Models for Longitudinal Data. New York: Springer; 2000. [Google Scholar]
- 27.Chesnais J-C. Comment: A March Toward Population Recession. Population and Development Review (New Yor) 2001;(Supplement):255–259. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Guengant J-P, John M. Impact of the proximate determinants on the future course of fertility in sub-Saharan Africa; Workshop on “Prospects for Fertility Decline in High Fertility Countries; July 9–11, 2001; Population Division, United Nations, New York. 2001. [Google Scholar]