The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

Demographic Investigation of the Declining
Fertility Process in Japan
Shigesato Takahashi

1. Overview of Japanese Fertility Trends
in Post-war Period

some fluctuations, to 1.34 in 1999, 36 percent below
the replacement level (Figure 1). This fall of fertility inrecent years can be viewed as the third stage of the
post-war fertility trend with below-replacement fertility.
In the next section, the demographic process inthe third stage of the fertility decline in Japan will be
examined in more detail.

It is possible to distinguish three stages of the
post-war fertility trend in Japan. The first stage of thefertility trend appeared just after the post-war baby
boom from 1947 to 1949. During the three years of thebaby boom, which was uniquely short, the number ofbirths reached about 2.7 million annually, and the total
fertility rate (TFR1) was around 4.4. After the baby
boom, the period total fertility rate marked a significant
decline in both the number of births and total fertility
rate, which reached 2.04 in 1957 (see Figure 1). It
means that the modern fertility transition from high to
low was completed by the late 1950s as the first stageof the fertility trend in Japan.
After the quick transition, TFR stayed aroundthe replacement level of fertility until the mid-1970s,
while the number of births gradually increased, corresponding to an increase in population among the
reproductive ages. During this second stage of thefertility trend, the only exception was appeared in
1966. In this year, the total fertility suddenly declined
to 1.58, the lowest ever recorded in Japanese vitalstatistics history, due to the year of Hinoe-uma (fiery
horse).2 However, in general, Japanese fertility stays at
the population replacement level though the second
stage of the fertility trend and it can be regarded as theperiod of post-demographic transition with relatively
stable fertility around the replacement level.
In the early 1970s, another baby boom was
experienced which was an echo of the post-war baby
boom. TFR recorded 2.14 in 1973. Following thissecond baby boom, the total fertility rate in Japan
started to decline again. Although it showed a temporary increase between 1982 and 1984, it continued todecrease even steeper afterward. In 1989, it became
1.57, below the lowest recorded level in 1966. After
that, it continued decreasing further until today, with

2. Fertility Decline Since the Middle of the
1970s
The decreases in the fertility rate since mid1970’s in Japan is a direct result of a sharp decline in
the marriage rates of those in childbearing ages, whichis due to the younger generation’s tendency to marrylate in life and to remain unmarried3. While 80.3
percent of females in their later 20’s, were married in
1970, the proportion married have decreased to 49.6
percent in 1995, and further to 45.4 percent in 2000.
The proportion of the divorced and widowed in a
population may contribute to the decrease in the
proportion married in general. However, because theproportion of never married in this 35 year periodsoared from 18.1 percent in 1970 to 52.4 percent in2000 (see Figure 2), we could say that a sharp increasein the proportion never married has mostly contributed
to the decrease in the proportion married mentioned
above. There are also changes in age at first marriage
behind the increase in proportion never married (seeFigure 3). In other words, since the mean age at firstmarriage for females increased substantially from 24.2
years of age in 1970 to 26.8 years in 1999, it is likelythat the increase in proportion of never married females
in their 20's can be attributed to the tendency offemales marrying at a later stage in their life.
Before discussing the demographic factors
associated with the recent trend of Japanese fertility, we

93The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)
Figure 5-1 shows the age-specific birth rate,would like to examine characteristics of the period total
fertility rate as the sum of age-specific birth rate.
According to the demographic definition, thetotal fertility rate (TFR) in time t can be written as
follows:f (a, t ) , in 1975 and in 1995. These age distributionsof fertility rate are the product of the marital fertility
rate, g ( a, t ) , and the proportion of currently married
for women, PM (a, t ) . From 1975 to 1995, the total…(1)

fertility rate declined sharply from 1.91 to 1.42. It isalso seen that some drastic change appeared on the
shape of age pattern of the fertility between these years.
The age pattern of fertility in 1975 showed a high peakat age 25, and a relatively lower rate among higher
ages. This picture of the change in age shape between
1975 and 1995 suggests that the delay of the age atchildbirth occurred with some loss of fertility in thisperiod.
What happened behind age-specific fertility rate
can be clarified by using the each components ofequation (3) applying to these years. In Figure 5-2 andFigure 5-3 the age-specific marital fertility rate and the
proportion of currently married women are shown forthe years separately.

where, B (a, t ) is the number of births from motheraged a in time t, and N F (a, t ) is the number offemales aged a in time t. If we assume that all birth are
given by only married women, equation (1) can beshown as follows:ω B(a, t )   N Fmar (a, t ) da …(2) ⋅ 
TFR (t ) = ∫  Fmar
F
N
a
t
N
a
t
(
,
)
(
,
)




α

where, N Fmar (a, t ) is the number of currently
married women aged a in time t.
Therefore, the first factor on the right hand sideof equation (2) means the marital fertility rate, g ( a, t )The age-specific marital fertility rare, g ( a, t ) ,, and the second factor is the proportion of marriedin 1975 shows the trapezoid shape with the flat roof
among high reproductive ages from 18 to 25. On theother hand, if we look at the age shape of the marital
fertility rate in 1995, it has drastically changed fertility
among younger ages, and has slightly changed amongages from 22 to 40. The increase in marital fertility rate
among younger ages can be explained by the change in
relationships between timing of marriage and pregnancy. While the marriage of the young generation
decreased, pregnancy becomes an important factor tofemale population, PM ( a, t ) . It clearly shows that the
total fertility rate is composed of two components: theproportion currently married and the marital fertility
rate. The equation (2) is rewritten by using g ( a, t )and PM (a, t ) as follows:ϖ

TFR (t ) = ∫ g (a, t ) ⋅ PM (a, t )da …(3)αpeople’s decision to get married. It may explain therise of the marital fertility rate among the younger ages
in 1995. The differences in marital fertility from age
22 to 40 appeared to be due to the age shift of thechildbirth timing, though the amount of the differences
are relatively small.
Both patterns of the proportion of currently

However, equation (3) can be adopted only forthe society with a very small proportion of childbirths
accounting out of wedlock.
In the case of Japan, the proportion of births
given outside of marriage remained small as comparedwith the Western developed countries. According to thevital statistics, the proportion of illegitimate births inJapan have stayed at around 1 percent from 1960 to1990, although it showed a clear upward trend sincelate 1980’s. However, it attained only 1.6 percent in
1999, far below two percent (see Figure 4). Therefore,
it is possible to analyze the effectiveness of the eachcomponent to the change of total fertility rate using theequation (3).

married for women, PM (a, t ) , in Figure5-3 show thelogistic-like curves. However, the shape of proportion
married in 1995 has shifted up along with the age axis.
Furthermore, the difference between 1975 and 1995 isvery large at 20s and 30s. In this connection, thedecrease of the proportion married at 20s and 30s is
considered to have strong influence on the decline of94

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)
total fertility rate in this period.
We can examine the actual magnitude of theeffect of decreases in proportion of currently marriedon the fertility rates in these periods. The decomposition method by Cho-Retherford (1973) was applied forthis analysis. In Table 1, the results of the decomposition analyses regarding the changes of TFRs in every
ten years starting from 1970. The changes in TFRs aredecomposed into changes caused by the differences inproportion married among females and those caused bychanges in marital fertility rates. Results of the decomposition classified according to age group are alsopresented in the table.
According to these results, the TFR from 1970
onward decreased in each period, and notably it isfound in the decomposition that the effects from thechanges (decreases) in proportion of currently married
were always higher than the effects from the changes inmarital fertility rates. In particular, the marital fertility
rates from 1980 onward moved in a direction toincrease the TFR. In other words, a tendency toward
fewer childbirths in this period resulted mainly fromthe increasing proportion of unmarried people especially in their 20’s, but not from the declining trends infertility rates of married couples.
According to the result, 0.24 in 0.39 which is awhole decline in total fertility rate between 1970 and1980 was brought by the change of proportion married,and 0.14 was brought to it by the change in marital
fertility. Between 1980 and 1990, the amount of 0.36 in
the decline in TFR is attributed to changes in the
proportion of currently married in various age groups
and amount of 0.16 is contributed to the rise conversely
by the changes in marital fertility. The same result wasalso observed about the decline of total fertility ratefrom 1990 to 1999.
The positive value of the latter can be interpreted that marital fertility rose over the period,
contributing to a rise in TFR. In other words, the entire
decline in TFR between these years can be attributed toa decline in the proportion of women of childbearing
age who are currently married; and, in addition, if itwere not for the increase in marital fertility, it would
make the decrease in TFR even lower.
Therefore, it is clear that the immediate demographic cause for fertility decline since the mid-1970s
is the dramatic drop in the proportion of womencurrently married of childbearing ages. The sharp dropin the proportion currently married among younger

generations was caused by the rise in the proportion ofnever married (see Figure 2). The proportion of nevermarried population for female rose from about 70
percent to 86 percent for women aged 20-24 and fromabout 20 percent to 52 percent for those aged 25-29
between 1975 and 1999. Such change in the marital
pattern is reflected also in a gradual increase in themean age at first marriage since the beginning of the
1970s up to now (see Figure 3). Compared with thesechanges in marriage behavior, there have been very few
changes in fertility behavior among married couples
according to various surveys on fertility. The average
number of births in the group of married couples who
have almost no possibility of bearing more children iscalled the completed fertility value. Table 2 compareschanges in this value for couples whose duration of
marriage is 15-19 years, and is based on the result of
National Fertility Surveys conducted by the National
Institute of Population and Social Security Research. It
is apparent from this table that the completed fertility
value, which had greatly decreased after the war,reached 2.2 persons in 1972, among the couples
married for 15-19 years (couples who got married inabout 1955, after the end of the baby boom). After
that, it has remained fairly stable at 2.2 persons per
couple. Since the current survey also shows 2.2
persons, this same value has continued since the1970’s.
In sum, the recent fertility decline in Japan was
mainly caused by the lengthening of never-married
period at younger ages, which was accompanied, inturn, by the delay of marriage, the first birth, thesecond birth and so on. However, it must be said that
this tentative conclusion is based on the analysis
relying on the period fertility measure as the “hypothetical” cohort measure. It is well known in demography that postponement of marriage and birth distorts
the period total fertility rate. Bongaats and Feeny(1998; 2000) clearly demonstrated such process using
their formula that allows the adjustment of the period
total fertility rate for this distortion. However, themethod developed by Bongaats and Feeny considers
only the timing of birth. Since the changes in marriage
formation strongly affected the Japanese birth rate, it
should be explained by the formula including thechange in prevalence of marriage and the change in thetiming of marriage.

95

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)
marriage formation.
The first scenario is that the cohort marital
behavior would not have changed since cohort born in
1955. Namely, in this scenario, birth cohorts born in1955 and after have same values for the proportion ofcurrently married for all ages.

3. Cohort Change in Marriage Formation
on Period Fertility
Since marriage and childbirth are viewed tooccur in the course of life time within a certain cohort,the trend of period fertility may be well analyzed byseeing the factor associated with the process of marriage formation along with cohort experiences. In thefollowing, we analyze the period fertility by somescenarios assuming the various cohort changes inmarriage formation. First, let's explain relationships
between period and cohort fertility rates from thedemographic points of view. Then we will discuss theresult of calculations.
The relationships between period and cohort
fertility can be shown as follows:

Let PFTR (t ) 1 represent the simulated period
total fertility rates at time t. Let gc(t-a,a) denote a
surface defined on the age-time place of the Lexis
diagram giving the cohort age-specific marital fertility
rates for women aged a at time t. Let PM1955(a) represent the age-specific proportion of currently married atage a for cohorts of women born in 1955. Then,
expected value of period total fertility rate isw

PFTR (t ) 1 = ∫ g c (t − a , a ) ⋅ PM c1995 ( a ) da
0…(4)
where,

Suppose that PM1955(a) is constant with respect
to t for all a. Under scenario 1, then the expected valueof period total fertility rate moves only corresponding
to the changes in the cohort marital fertility rates, gc(ta,a). If we compare with the observed period fertility,
PTFRobs(t), the difference between scenario 1 and theobserved can be attributed to the change in marriage.
The second scenario in this analysis is that theshape of the age pattern of cohort proportion of currently married has been moved along with the age axis
according to those observed for cohorts,4 however thelevel of proportion of never married at age 50 has been
fixed for all cohorts at the same level as in 1955 birthcohort. In other words, in Scenario 2 the originalschedule of age-specific proportion of currently
married only changes the timing, but the ultimate
prevalence of marriage at age 50 does not change
among cohorts. The formula of the period total fertility
rate for Scenario 2 is as follows:f p (t, a) is the age-specific fertility

rates for women aged a at time t, andis theage-specific fertility rates at age a for cohorts ofwomen born at time t-a. Therefore, we get the period
total fertility rate (

):

…(5)
We already showed that the period fertility isconstructed by two components, the marital fertility
rate and the proportion currently married, according toequation (3) in previous section. Therefore, we candecompose the cohort fertility rate,, asfollows:…(6)
Substituting this for the function in (5), we havethe period total fertility rate as the sum of product of
the two cohort functions.

w

PFTR(t ) 2 = ∫ g c (t − a, a) ⋅ PM cDM (t − a, a)da0

where gc(t-a,a) is the actually observed cohort
marital fertility rates, and PM cDM (t − a, a ) is the…(7)
Using equation (7), the expected period fertility
rates corresponding to various assumptions on courseof cohort marriage and marital fertility experience canbe examined. A comparison between the expected andthe observed period fertility provides some insight into
what have happened in the course of the recent fertility
decline. We constructed some scenarios for changes in

estimated proportion of currently married based on themathematical formula of the Boltzmann function.5 The
expected period total fertility rates based on Scenario 2
contain the effectiveness of the timing change inmarriage formation along with cohorts.
In the third scenario we assumed that the shapeof the age pattern of cohort proportion of married and96

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)
the prevalence of marriage at age 50 have beenchanged according to those observed for the cohorts.6
This scenario is the same as the previous one exceptthat the prevalence of marriage varies over timedepending on the real experiences of each cohort.
Formula for this scenario is

declines more slowly than the observed and comes tothe middle between the observed PTFR and PTFR
based on scenario 1. Accordingly, the postponement of
the marriage attached strongly to the PTFR and this“tempo” effect explains half of the total decline of theactual PTFR. In addition, when we introduce theincrease of the proportion never-married at age 50 tothe model as the scenario 3, the resulting PTFR performs very similar trend to the observed PTFR. These
results as a whole indicate that the latest fertility
decline was shaped by both quantum effect from thedecline of marriage prevalence and the temp effectfrom marriage postponement. In other words, the latest
declining trend of PTFR in Japan was mainly causedby the postponement of marriage and the increase of
those who spend their life as never-married.

w

PFTR (t ) 3 = ∫ g c (t − a, a ) ⋅ PM cDPM (t − a, a )da0

where gc(t-a,a) is the actually observed cohort
marital fertility rates as same as scenario 2, andPM cDPM (t − a , a ) is the estimated proportion

currently married, based on the mathematical formulaof the Boltzmann function7 controlling both age shift
and prevalence parameter. Therefore, the expectedperiod total fertility rates based on the third scenario
represent the joint effect of the changes in marriage
timing and in ultimate marriage prevalence along withcohorts.
For calculation, we used the vital statistics andthe census results. However, the proportion of womenby marital status in each age must be estimated due tothe distant of the census and to the delayed and incomplete marriage registration in the vital statistics. We
used the estimates by Ishikawa (2000).8
Figure 6 shows the results of various estimates
based on the three scenarios and the observed period
total fertility rate from 1970 to 1997. It can be seen thatthe recent fertility decline involved two different
dimensions, the decline in the cohort marital fertility
rates and change in the marriage formation.
From 1973 to around 1980, the decline of period
total fertility can be attributed to the decline of cohort
marital fertility rate. In contrast, from 1980 to 1984,
the result of calculations by scenario 1 shows a rising
trend, which indicates that during this period cohort
marital fertility actually increased, and the effect of themarriage delay become major in the period total
fertility rates.
From 1984 to 1997, the expected fertility rates
based on scenario 1 showed the tendency to become
stable. Because of the assumption with no change inmarriage behavior, the difference between observed
PTFR and expected PTFR was brought by the change
in marriage behavior including the postponement ofmarriage and an increase in time remaining unmarried.
When we take the effect of marriage postponement into
consideration as in scenario 2, the expected PTFR

4. Review and Prospect of Cohort First
Marriage Rate in Japan
How have these proportion of married at eachages changed over female cohorts? Is it a phenomenon
due to the change in the marriage timing or a phenomenon due to the rise in the proportion of never-marriedin cohort? How can we see the trend of the future
marriage? To answer these questions, it is important toknow how the pattern of marriage has changed so far.
Prior to examining the first-marriage rates
closely, we calculated the age-specific first-marriage
rate for each female cohort from 1935 onward. Because there is a delay in registration of the number offirst marriages obtained from vital statistics, we
account for this delay in registration when calculating
the age-specific first-marriage rates (Figure 7).
Then, based on the calculated first-marriage
rates for the cohorts, we estimated the mean age at firstmarriage and the proportion of never married at age 50
for each cohort. When making the estimates, we had toconsider the cohorts whose marriage behavior has notfinished. For example, the subjects born in 1960 are 35
years old as of 1995, and could undoubtedly marry
after that. For the first-marriage rate distribution for
those who are 35 years old or older for this kind ofbirth cohort, we estimated the age distribution for firstmarriages using the generalized log-gamma model.
The resultant relationship between average age at firstmarriage and proportion never married, for each cohortborn from 1935 to 1965, is shown in Figure 8.

97

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)
rates increase for older age groups. It is also likely thatthe proportion never married tends to increase, since alarge increase in average age of first marriage is notproduced on the grounds that a lot of first marriage
cases will not take place for older age groups if there
are less cases of restoration to grow first-marriage
rates.
The fertility in Japan decreased below the
replacement level since mid-1970's. The demographic
conclusions that are derived from this analysis is asfollows. First, it was clarified that the change inmarriage greatly influenced the decline of fertility atleast after 1980 via the decomposition analysis. However, there is a possibility that the change staying up on
the cohort is excessively measured from this analysis
because the rise of the birth rate in higher age groups
is the one that the postponed birth appeared. Therefore,
it is needless to say that it is a temporary conclusion,and the analysis by the cohort is necessary.
In the cohort analysis, effects from two different
kinds of change in marriage behavior are examined, theeffect of the marriage postponement, and that ofincrease in the proportion never married. On the other
hand, an increase in proportion single will cause
decrease in the fertility rate in permanent manner inJapan where extramarital births is extremely few.
Through the scenario analysis, it was shown that the
influence of an increase in proportion single was aslarge as those from the rise of the age at marriage. It is
not likely that the fertility rate of Japan will rise to thereplacement level in near future. However, if the rise of
proportion never married stops, and the postponementof marriage settles, some fertility recovery can be
expected so that the impact of prolonged belowreplacement fertility on the society anticipated in near
future may be reduced.

Incidentally, the proportion never married is theremainder of accumulated first-marriage rates in which
age-specific first-marriage rates are accumulated up to
age 50. The points marked by x in the Figure are themean age at first marriage and the proportion nevermarried for those who were born in 1935 to 1946.
Except for the two cohorts born in 1945 and 1946,
these cohorts are stable in terms of the fact that theytended to marry at an early age uniformly. For example, their mean age at first marriage is about 24, andtheir proportion never married is above 4%. The
bulleted points in the Figure are the cohorts born from1947 to 1960.
Although these cohorts started exhibiting
marriage behavior changes from the late 1960's,
gradual increases in mean age at first marriage andproportion never married are seen. Similar trends arealso presumed for cohorts born from 1961 to 1965.
Thus, we can understand that females born in 1935 orlater tend to continue increasing their age at firstmarriage and proportion never married, while we see acertain change in pattern from the baby-boom generation onward.
Therefore, we may come to the conclusion, fromthe trends in changes of mean age at first marriage andproportion never married for these birth cohorts, thatthe mean age at first marriage and proportion nevermarried for the cohort will be an extension of the trends
in changes that have been shown by past birth cohorts.

5. Remarks: Prospects of Marriage andPeriod Total Fertility
Although first-marriage rates by age for the
recent cohorts is an extension of changes in the past, it
is difficult to predict specifically to what extent the
average age at first marriage and proportion nevermarried will reach.
When we observed first-marriage rates by age
according to each cohort and calculated their growth
rates between the cohorts, we paid attention to the factthat the rate of increase in first-marriage rates shows astrongly positive growth tendency at later ages, while
negative growth rate is shown in the rate of increase in
first marriage by age for younger age groups.
There are more cases of restoration to grow in
first-marriage rates by age. That is to say, if the
proportion never married is at a low level, average age
at first marriage will increase because first-marriage

Notes
The TFR is defined as the average number of births awoman would have if she were to live through her reproductive years (age 15-49) and bear children at eachage at the rates observed in a particular year or period(Bongaarts and Feeney, 1998).
2This is a superstition that girls born in this year are likely
to have misfortune. About a quarter of normal annual
births were either shifted to other years or were lost in
this year. This unusual demographic phenomenon indicated that people had acquired highly efficient mea1

98

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

3

sures and skills of fertility control by that year.
These studies aimed to explain the decline of fertility
since middle of 1970’s from social and economic perspectives include Atoh (1994), Kaneko (1993), andTsuya(1994). In addition, it is thought that the explanation of the second demographic transition in a European society becomes reference in understanding therecent fertility decline in Japan. These studies include
Lesthaeghe (1983, 1998) and van de kaa (1987).

KOUSE KAGAKU KENKYU HOUKOKUSYO (inJapanese)
Kaneko, Ryuichi, 1993, “A projection system for futureage-specific fertility rates”, Jinko Mondai Kenkyu(Journal of Population Problems), Vol. 49, No. 1, pp.1738, Tokyo. (in Japanese)
Kaneko, Ryuichi, 1999, “Below-replacement fertility inJapan: trends, determinants and prospects”, United
Nations, Below Replacement Fertility, Population Bulletin of the United Nations, Special Issue Nos.40/41,
pp.266-291.
Lesthaeghe, R., 1983, “A century of demographic andcultural change in Western Europe: an exploration ofunderlying dimensions”, Population and Development
Review, 9/3, pp.411-434.
Lesthaeghe, R., 1998, “On theory development and applications to the study of family formation”, Population and Development Review, 24(1), pp.1-14.
National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, 1998, The Report on the Eleventh National
Fertility Survey, Vol. I.
National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, 1998, The Report on the Eleventh National
Fertility Survey, Vol. II
National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, 1997, Population Projections for Japan as of
September 1995, Research Series No.291.
Takahashi, Shigesato, R. Kaneko, A. Ishikawa, M.
Ikenoue, and F. Mita, 1999, “Population Projections
for Japan: Methods, Assumptions and Results, Review
of Population and Social Policy, No. 8, Tokyo: National Institute of Population and Social Security Research, pp.75-117.
Tsuya, Noriko O. 1994, “proximate determinants of fertility decline in postwar Japan”, The Population Problems research council, The Population and Society of
Postwar Japan, Tokyo: The Mainichi News Papers,
pp.97-132.
van de Kaa, 1987, D.J., “Europe’s second demographictransition”, Population Bulletin 42(1)United Nations, 1999, Below Replacement Fertility, Population Bulletin of the United Nations, Special Issue
Nos.40/41

These data are shown in Figures A1, A2 and A3.
Various functions were examined for the applicability ofthe distribution function that consisting of some parameters to the age schedule of proportion married, andthe Boltzmann function was adopted as the best function.
6
The estimated proportion married based on the third scenario is shown in Figure A4 for all cohorts.
4
5

We have utilized Boltzmann function to estimate the proportion currently married.
8
Ishikawa (2000) estimated age-specific proportions forthe never married population, currently married population, widowed population and divorced populationfor each year from 1958 to 1997.
7

References
Atoh, Makoto, 1994, “The recent fertility Decline in Japan: change in women’s role and status and their policy
implications”, The Population Problems research council, The population and Society of Postwar Japan, Tokyo: The Mainichi News Papers, pp.97-132.
Bongaarts, John and Feeney, Griffith, 1998, “On the quantum and tempo of fertility”, Population and Development Review, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp.271-91.
Bongaarts, John and Feeney, Griffith, 2000, “On the quantum and tempo of fertility:Reply”, Population andDevelopment Review, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp.560-564.
Cho, Lee-Jay and Robert D. Retherford, 1973, “Comparative Analysis of Recent Fertility Trends in East Asia”,
IUSSP International Population Conference, Liege,
Vol.2. pp.163-178.
Hirosima, Kiyosi, 1999, “Social Demography of nuptiality
and fertility”, in Yoriko Meguro and Hideki Watanabe
eds., Family Sociology, Sociology in Japan, Vol.2,
pp.21-57, University of Tokyo Press (in Japanese)
Ishikawa, Akira, 2000, “Structure of the reproduction system in Japan: measuring and estimation”, Inaba H.,
Research of the models for fertility and first marriage,(Shigesato Takahashi
IPSS)

99

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

100

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

101

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

102

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

103

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

104

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

105

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

106

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

107

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

108

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

109

Mean Age at First Marriage

110

24

25

26

27

4%

5%

6%

8%
Proportion Never-Married at Age 50

7%9%Figure 8. Trends of the Mean Age at First Marriage andProportion Never-Married at Age 50
Based on Birth Cohort

10%

1

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

111

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

112

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

113

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

114

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

115

The Japanese Journal of Population, Vol.2, No.1 (March 2004)

116