Search

This paper has two principal aims: (1) to analyze and measure how the demographic variables-mortality, fertility, and immigration- affect the cost of education; (2) to evaluate what possibilities developing countries, such as those of Latin America, have for a rapid educational improvement. The paper relates demographic and educational variables of three different populations: Sweden, 1840-1965; the United States, 1850-1960; and Latin America, 1930-2000. Three educational variables are also cone sidered: (a) school attendance rates by sex and age; (b) distribution of students of same age by grade; and (c) cost of student by grade. Demographic changes in countries such as Sweden and the United States were favorable for the development of education. For the future, unless an increase of fertility occurs, mortality and fertility changes will not have a significant effect on the cost of education in these countries. In current less developed countries the demographic changes during the past were less favorable to educational development. A future reduction of fertility will significantly help them to achieve a higher educational level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A study by historical comparison of the fertility trends related to mortality levels is made between Latin America and Europe. The purpose of such study is to show why Latin America did not repeat the European mortality-fertility pattern during 1930-1960. Differences between the two areas are established, and an explanation is given about the particular Latin America mortality-fertility model. The effects of such a Latin America trend are pointed out, principally in relation to population growth, city growth and labor force. Hypothetical Latin American populations are calculated under the assumption that the area has repeated the European pattern. A comparison between these hypothetical populations with the actual ones shows how different the situation of the area has actually been. Nevertheless, an analysis of the necessary fertility changes in order to reproduce the European model shows that it was impossible for Latin America to repeat the European mortality-fertility experience during 1930-1960. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Four generalizations are made. 1/ Despite the varying interpretations made by the respective authors, previous studies indicate that urban growth in Latin America is caused by both rural-urban migration and a positive rate of urban natural increase. Thus to ascribe Latin American urban growth to a single prime causal factor is a misleading oversimplification. 2/ Net in-migration apparently plays a larger role in determining the rate of growth of large metropolitan centers than is the case with smaller urban areas. 3/ A significant portion of urban growth in a given intercensal period may be attributed to the growth of localities previously too small to be classified as "urban". 4/ Urban natural increase is the weighted sum of the natural increase of in-migrants (after their arrival) and urban natives. Improper recognition of this last point may lead to an overstatement of the relative importance of urban natural increase as a component of urban growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In approaching population data from underdeveloped countries, three biases are operationally useful: rate of growth is more important than size; population figures refer to the past; and the reliability of figures in suspect. Post-enumeration surveys have become a feature of the best work. In dealing with inadequate data, the following tools of analysis are put forward: age distribution by application of the quasi-stable population theory, and the population growth estimation experiment (the Chandra-Deming formula) as first applied in Pakistan. Age distributions can also be applied to urban migration, seasonality in vital events and life-cycle stages. The author concludes with some remarks about the denominator. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]