is cohabitation an alternative to marriage in russia? · the nature of cohabitation in russia photo...
TRANSCRIPT
Is cohabitation an alternative to marriage in Russia?
Alyona ArtamonovaBachelor student of the Higher School of Economics (HSE), Faculty ofSocial Sciences, School of Sociology, member of the Research andeducational group for Fertility, Family formation and dissolution ofHSE
Ekaterina MitrofanovaMaster of Sociology, postgraduate student, Junior Research Fellow ofthe Higher School of Economics (HSE), Research Fellow of the RussianPresidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration,member of the Research and educational group for Fertility, Familyformation and dissolution of HSE
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
www.hse.ru
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
The structure of presentation
photo
photo
photo
Theoretical pre-conditions
The research goal
Data description
Data cleaning
Data restrictions
Main results
References
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
Theoretical pre-conditions
photo
photo
photo
Non-marital unions is a substitute for the institution of legal marriage (Gerber 2009)
Before becoming a substitute, a cohabitation had to go a long evolutional way away
from a ‘deviant’ relationship to a legal ‘alternative’ to marriage, or a selection process
to filter weak unions (Mills 2004)
Russia, much in contrast to Western European countries, was characterized by an
early and universal marriage (Avdeev and Monnier, 2000; Puur et al., n.d.; Scherbov
and van Vianen, 2004; Zakharov, 2008). The age at the first marriage started to
decrease (Philipov and Jasilioniene, 2008) and decreased between 1960 and 1993
The average ages of marriage have been rising since then because of the broad and
long-term changes in norms and values that many other countries faced between the
mid-1960s and the end of the 1980s (the late Second Demographic Transition coming
to Russia (Zakharov, 2008))
Cohabitation as a symbol of a new freedom of thinking and behaving comes to
represent a legitimate alternative to marriage rather than just a trial marriage or the
first step to marital union (Gerber, 2009).
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
The research goal
photo
photo
photo
The Hypothesis
Cohabitation is not an independent social institution in Russia but the perception of
cohabitations is changing from Soviet generations to modern ones
• The average ages of entry to the first matrimonial unions change from generation to
generation: the age of the first cohabitation decreases while the age of the first marriage
increases
• The probability to start the first cohabitation is higher and the risk to have a marriage is
lower for modern generations than for Soviet ones
• Cohabitation turns into the first marriage more often than finishes as an independent
institution
• The proportion of people for whom the first cohabitation does not turn into a marriage
increases for the representatives of the generations born after the 1960s
The major goal of this research is to find out whether the cohabitation is an independent social institution or just the first
step on the path to marriage
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
Data description
photo
photo
photo
The questionnaire distinguishes two types of unions: marriages and
cohabitations. Marriages are legally registered unions and cohabitations
are not registered ones
The panel data of the Russian part of Generations and Gender
Survey (GGS-panel: 2004, 2007, and 2011)
5451 cases: generations born between the 1930 and the 1986
Male32%
Female68%
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
The amount of cohabitations and dissolutions
before and after the data cleaning
photo
photo
photo
An order of unions Before the cleaning After the cleaning
Cohabitation
1 5138 2151
2 1130 482
3 175 90
4 26 15
5 6 4
Dissolutions
1 2375 1085
2 527 244
3 86 41
4 11 8
5 3 3
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
The data
restrictions
photo
photo
photo
1. The percentage of respondents of
the panel who have a unionThe most typical model of matrimonial
behavior of Russians is to have only one
union of both types or one type we will
pay the most of attention to the first unions
2. The numbers and shares of unions
started under the age of 25, 30, 35
years
An order
of unions
Under the age of 25 Under the age of 30 Under the age of 35
Number of unions Share of unions Number of unions Share of unions Number of unions Share of unions
Cohabitations
1 1395 65% 1708 79% 1859 86%
2 387 80% 450 93% 471 98%
3 79 88% 88 98% 89 99%
4 15 100% 15 100% 15 100%
5 4 100% 4 100% 4 100%
Marriages
1 3944 83% 4517 95% 4737 100%
2 515 92% 549 98% 560 100%
3 28 100% 28 100% 28 100%
4 1 100% 1 100% 1 100%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Cohabitations Marriages
38,1%
84,0%
8,5%9,9%
1,6%0,5%0,3% 0,0%0,1% 0,0%
1st union 2nd union 3d union 4th union 5th union
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
The share of the first matrimonial events in the
total number of people of the same gender and
generation
photo
photo
photo
Without restrictions With restrictions
Cohabitations
1930-1939 1940-1949 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1986
16% 17%21%
30%
43%
35%
17%22%
26%
32%
48% 47%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
1930-1939 1940-1949 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1986
20% 20%24%
33%
45%
35%
20%25%
30%35%
50%47%
Male
Female
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1930-1939 1940-1949 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1986
96% 97%91% 88%
76%
29%
84% 88% 89% 88%82%
48%
1930-1939 1940-1949 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1986
78%83%
79% 81%72%
29%
72%77% 75%
81% 79%
48%
Marriages
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
The average ages of the first unions in the
perspective of gender and generations
photo
photo
photo
Categories 1st cohabitation 1st marriage
Gender
male 22.66 23.15
female 21.24 21.12
Generations
1930-1939 22.45 22.63
1940-1949 22.32 22.00
1950-1959 22.16 21.85
1960-1969 21.97 21.67
1970-1979 21.20 21.01
1980-1986 20.10 21.11
Total 21.67 21.76
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
The age of the first unions in the
perspective of gender
photo
photo
photo
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
First cohabitation Males First cohabitation Females
First marriage Males First marriage Females
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
The age of the first unions in the
perspective of generations
photo
photo
photo
Cohabitation
Marriage
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
1930-1939 1940-1949 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1986
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
Hazard curves for the first unions
(stratification by gender)
photo
photo
photo
The probability to start the first union after reaching 15 years
Cu
mu
lati
ve h
azard
fu
ncti
on
Cu
mu
lati
ve h
azard
fu
ncti
on
Gender
male
female
months from 15 years to start the first
cohabitation
months from 15 years to start the first
marriage
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
Hazard curves for the first unions
(stratification by generations)
photo
photo
photo
The probability to start the first marriage after reaching 15 years
Cu
mu
lati
ve
ha
zard
fu
nct
ion
Generations
Cu
mu
lati
ve
ha
zard
fu
nct
ion
1920-29
1930-39
1940-49
1950-59
1960-69
1970-79
1980-89
months from 15 years to start the first
cohabitation
months from 15 years to start the first
marriage
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
The ways of the first cohabitations
development
photo
photo
photo
1st cohabitation(2089)
Has been finished(1900)
Disruption(216)
1st marriage(93)
1st marriage (861)
Disruption(728)
Has not been finished (189)
2
A cohabitation is an independent
social institution
A cohabitation is only the first step
on the path to a marriage
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
The nature of cohabitation in Russia
photo
photo
photo
The patterns of matrimonial
behavior proved that cohabitation
is a “trial marriage”
The patterns of matrimonial
behavior proved that cohabitation
is an independent social
institution
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
1930-1939 1940-1949 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1986
28%26% 27%
29%32%
11%
26% 27%
32% 32%37%
21%
Male Female
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
1930-1939 1940-1949 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1986
1% 1%
3%4%
8% 8%
4%5% 5% 5%
9%
15%
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
Main results
photo
photo
photo
There is an increase in cohabitations and decrease in marriages for modern generations in comparison with the Soviet ones.
Males start their both events later than females and in a different order: their marriages are occurring 6 months later than their first cohabitations.
Women have a higher probability to experience the first union than men.
Young people are starting cohabitations with higher probability than previous generations, but the youth is not in a hurry to register their relationships.
83% of the first finished cohabitations were just a “trial marriage” while only 16% had the characteristics of an independent social institution
The proportion of Russians for whom cohabitation does not grow into a marriage rises for the representatives of the generations born from the 1970s to the 1980s
Cohabitations are becoming widespread among young people and slowly but surely becoming more distant from marriages
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
References
photo
photo
photo
1. Avdeev, A., Monnier, A., 2000. Marriage in Russia: A Complex Phenomenon Poorly Understood.
Popul. Engl. Sel. 12, 7–49.
2. Gerber, T.P., Berman, D., 2010. Entry to Marriage and Cohabitation in Russia, 1985–2000: Trends,
Correlates, and Implications for the Second Demographic Transition: La mise en couple en Russie,
1985–2000: tendances, facteurs associés et implications par rapport à la seconde transition
démographique. Eur. J. Popul. Rev. Eur. Démographie 26, 3–31.
3. Mills, M., 2004. Stability and change: the structuration of partnership histories in Canada, the
Netherlands, and the Russian Federation. Eur. J. Popul. Eur. Démographie 20, 141–175.
4. Mitrofanova, E.S., 2013. Demographic behavior of Russians: family and fertility patterns across
generations. Macrotheme Rev. 2, 71–80.
5. Philipov, D., Jasilioniene, A., 2008. Union formation and fertility in Bulgaria and Russia: A life table
description of recent trends. Demogr. Res. 19, 2057–2114.
6. Scherbov, S., van Vianen, H., 2004. Marriage in Russia: a reconstruction. Demogr. Res. 10, 27–60
7. Vikat, A., Spéder, Z., Beets, G., Billari, F.C., Bühler, C., Désesquelles, A., Fokkema, T., Hoem, J.M.,
MacDonald, A., Neyer, G., 2008. Generations and Gender Survey (GGS): Towards a better
understanding of relationships and processes in the life course. Demogr. Res. 17, 389–440.
8. Vishnevsky, A.G., 1998. Demographic Changes in Russia - Past and Future. Yearb. Popul. Res. Finl.
XXXV, 39–75.
9. Vishnevsky, A.G., 2009. A new stage of Russian demographic development. Russ. Facing Demogr.
Chall. Natl. Hum. Dev. Rep. Russ. Fed. 18–25.
10. Zakharov, S., 2008. Russian Federation: From the first to second demographic transition. Demogr.
Res. 19, 2008. 907–972.
20, Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, Russia, 101000
Tel.: +7 (495) 628-8829, Fax: +7 (495) 628-7931
www.hse.ru
Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014
The structure of presentation
photo
photo
photo
Theoretical pre-conditions
The research goal
Data description
Data cleaning
Data restrictions
Main results
• The average ages of the first unions
• The age of the first unions in the perspective of gender
• The age of the first unions in the perspective of generations
• Hazard curves for the first unions
• The ways of the first cohabitations development
• The nature of cohabitation in Russia
References