DHS ANALYTICAL

STUDIES 75

TYPOLOGIES AND TRAJECTORIES: 

A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF MEN’S 

REPRODUCTIVE LIFE COURSE

September 2020

This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by

Jeffrey Edmeades, Kerry L. D. MacQuarrie, and Julia Fleuret.

DHS Analytical Studies No. 75 

Typologies and Trajectories: A Descriptive Study of Men’s 

Reproductive Life Course 

Jeffrey Edmeades1

Kerry L. D. MacQuarrie2,3

Julia Fleuret2,4

ICF 

Rockville, Maryland, USA 

September 2020 

1

 Demografix 

2

 The DHS Program 

3

 Avenir Health 

4

 ICF 

Corresponding author: Jeffrey Edmeades, Demografix, 1805 N Madison Street, Arlington, VA, 22205, 

USA; phone +1 202-256-2015; email: jeffedmeades@gmail.com. 
Acknowledgments: The authors extend their appreciation to Shiza Farid (Avenir Health) for thoughtful 

comments on an earlier draft of this study. We are also grateful to Erica Nybro (The DHS Program and 

Johns Hopkins University) for her feedback on the report and ideas for visual displays of the data.

Editor: Diane Stoy 

Document Production: Chris Gramer 

This study was conducted with support from the United States Agency for International Development 

(USAID) through The DHS Program (#720-OAA-18C-00083). The views expressed are those of the 

authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. 

The DHS Program assists countries worldwide in the collection and use of data to monitor and evaluate 

population, health, and nutrition programs. Additional information about The DHS Program can be 

obtained from ICF, 530 Gaither Road, Suite 500, Rockville, MD 20850 USA; telephone: +1 301-407-

6500, fax: +1 301-407-6501, email: info@DHSprogram.com, Internet: www.DHSprogram.com. 

Recommended citation: 

Edmeades, Jeffrey, Kerry L. D. MacQuarrie, and Julia Fleuret. 2020. Typologies and Trajectories: A 

Descriptive Study of Men’s Reproductive Life Course. DHS Analytical Studies No. 75 Rockville, 

Maryland, USA: ICF.
iii 

CONTENTS 

TABLES ........................................................................................................................................................ v 

FIGURES .................................................................................................................................................... vii 

PREFACE .................................................................................................................................................... ix 

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................. xi 

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................................... xiii 

1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................... 1 

1.1 Life Course Theory .............................................................................................................. 1 

1.2 Family Formation, Masculinity, and the Life Course ........................................................... 2 

2 METHODS ....................................................................................................................................... 5 

2.1 Research Questions............................................................................................................ 5 

2.2 Data ..................................................................................................................................... 5 

2.2.1 Country selection ................................................................................................... 5 

2.2.2 Sample selection .................................................................................................... 6 

2.3 Measures and Analytical Strategy ...................................................................................... 7 

2.3.1 Family formation events ......................................................................................... 7 

2.3.2 Economic variables ................................................................................................ 8 

2.3.3 Social variables ...................................................................................................... 8

2.3.4 Fertility-related variables ........................................................................................ 9 

3 RESULTS ...................................................................................................................................... 11 

3.1 Patterns of Key Family Formation Events for Men ........................................................... 11 

3.1.1 Differences between rural and urban men in family formation patterns .............. 14 

3.1.2 Developing family formation typologies for men .................................................. 15 

3.1.3 Typology classification and differences by residence type .................................. 17 

3.2 The Social Timetable of Men’s Family Formation ............................................................. 17 

3.3 Trajectories through Family Formation Events ................................................................. 20 

3.3.1 Common features of family formation trajectories ............................................... 21 

3.3.2 Family formation trajectories in West Africa ........................................................ 23 

3.3.3 Family formation trajectories in East Africa ......................................................... 24 

3.3.4 Family formation trajectories in South Asia ......................................................... 25 

3.4 Association of Marriage-Birth Trajectories with Social, Economic, and Fertilityrelated Outcomes .............................................................................................................. 26 

3.4.1 Overview of outcomes ......................................................................................... 27 

3.4.2 Men’s trajectories and economic outcomes ......................................................... 28 

3.4.3 Men’s trajectories and social outcomes ............................................................... 33 

3.4.4 Men’s trajectories and fertility-related outcomes ................................................. 35 

4 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ............................................................................................... 41 

4.1 Patterns of Family Formation for Men ............................................................................... 41 

4.2 Family Formation Trajectories .......................................................................................... 42

4.3 Relationship between Marriage-Birth of First Child Trajectories, and Social, 

Economic, and Fertility-related Outcomes ........................................................................ 42 

4.4 Limitations ......................................................................................................................... 43 

4.5 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 43 
iv 

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................ 45 

APPENDIX TABLES .................................................................................................................................. 49 
v 

TABLES 

Table 1 Analytic sample size, men age 30-34 ........................................................................ 6 

Table 2 Time in years between median ages at first sex, first marriage, and birth of 

first child among men age 30-34 by residence and typology .................................. 12 

Table 3 Ordering of family formation life course events and typology among men age 

30-34 ........................................................................................................................ 13 

Table 4 Overview of relationship between various economic, social, and fertilityrelated outcomes and marriage-birth trajectories among men age 30-34 ............... 28 

Table 5 House ownership by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 ................... 29 

Table 6 Land ownership by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 ...................... 29 

Table 7 Household wealth by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 ................... 31 

Table 8 Decision-making about large household purchases by marriage-birth 

trajectory among currently married men age 30-34 ................................................. 32 

Table 9 Attitude toward wife-beating by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-

34 ............................................................................................................................. 33 

Table 10 Educational attainment by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 ........... 34 

Table 11 Attitude toward contraceptive decision-making by marriage-birth trajectory 

among men age 30-34 ............................................................................................. 35 

Table 12 Use of modern contraception by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-

34 in the past (12/3) months .................................................................................... 36 

Table 13 Living children by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 ........................ 37 

Table 14 Fertility desires by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 ....................... 39 

Appendix Table A1 Median ages at family formation events (age at first sex, age at first marriage, 

and age at birth of first child) among men age 15-44, according to current age ..... 49 

Appendix Table A2 Median ages at family formation events (age at first sex, age at first marriage, 

and age at birth of first child) among urban men age 15-44, according to 

current age ............................................................................................................... 50 

Appendix Table A3 Median ages at family formation events (age at first sex, age at first marriage, 

and age at birth of first child) among rural men age 15-44, according to 

current age ............................................................................................................... 51 

Appendix Table A4 Percentage of men age 30-34 experiencing earlier-than-typical, typical, or 

later-than-typical timing of first sex, first marriage, and birth of first child, 

according to residence ............................................................................................. 52 

Appendix Table A5 Ordering of family formation events among men age 30-34, according to 

residence ................................................................................................................. 53 

vii 

FIGURES 

Figure 1 Median ages at first sex, first marriage, and birth of first child among men age 

30-34 ........................................................................................................................ 11 

Figure 2 Median ages at first sex, first marriage, and birth of first child among men age 

30-34 by residence* ................................................................................................. 14 

Figure 3 Percent distribution of men age 30-34 experiencing earlier-than-typical, 

typical, or later-than-typical timing of first sex, first marriage, and birth of first 

child among Typology 1 countries ........................................................................... 18 

Figure 4 Percent distribution of men age 30-34 experiencing earlier-than-typical, 

typical, or later-than-typical timing of first sex, first marriage, and birth of first 

child among Typology 2 countries ........................................................................... 19 

Figure 5 Percent distribution of men age 30-34 experiencing earlier-than-typical, 

typical, or later-than-typical timing of first sex, first marriage, and birth of first 

child among Typology 3 countries ........................................................................... 20 

Figure 6 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Benin ................................... 21 

Figure 7 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Mali ...................................... 22 

Figure 8 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Nigeria ................................. 23 

Figure 9 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Ethiopia ............................... 24 

Figure 10 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Rwanda ............................... 24 

Figure 11 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Uganda ................................ 25 

Figure 12 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, India .................................... 26 

Figure 13 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Nepal ................................... 26 

ix 

PREFACE 

The Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) Program is one of the principal sources of international data 

on fertility, family planning, maternal and child health, nutrition, mortality, environmental health, 

HIV/AIDS, malaria, and health services. 

One of the objectives of The DHS Program is to analyze DHS data and provide findings that will be 

useful to policymakers and program managers in low- and middle-income countries. The DHS Analytical 

Studies serve this objective by providing in-depth research on a wide range of topics, typically including 

several countries and applying multivariate statistical tools and models. These reports also illustrate 

research methods and applications of DHS data that can build the capacity of other researchers. 

The topics in this series are selected by The DHS Program in consultation with the U.S. Agency for 

International Development. 

It is hoped that the DHS Analytical Studies will be useful to researchers, policymakers, and survey 

specialists, particularly those engaged in work in low- and middle-income countries. 

Sunita Kishor 

Director, The DHS Program 

xi 

ABSTRACT 

There is little research on the implications of family formation patterns for individual outcomes and life 

course trajectories of men. This study uses the conceptual framework of life course theory to examine 

patterns of family formation for men age 30-34 in eight countries (Benin, Mali, Nigeria, Ethiopia, 

Rwanda, Uganda, India, and Nepal) and explore how these may influence economic, social, and fertilityrelated outcomes later in life. We examine three key research questions: (1) What are the patterns of key 

family formation events for men and how do these compare across countries; (2) What are trajectories of 

men’s family formation events, specifically from sex-to-marriage-to-birth, and how are patterns of timing 

for each of these events related to each other; and (3) What are the consequences of experiencing 

particular family formation trajectories? The analyses in this study are primarily descriptive, focusing on 

three key family formation events: first sex, first marriage, and birth of first child. We first calculate the 

median ages at each event for men age 30-34 for each country both at the national level and for rural and 

urban areas. We then use the median age as a marker of what represents the ‘typical’ age at which these 

events take place to categorize men into three groups based on the relative timing of each event: earlierthan-typical, at typical timing, and later-than-typical. Based on this, we develop specific trajectories for 

the family formation process and compare these across countries using Sankey diagrams. Finally, we 

examine the association of selected first marriage-to-birth of first child trajectories with key economic, 

social and fertility-related outcomes. 

The results show that while there are important differences between the countries in their family 

formation patterns, mainly around the timing of events and the prevalence of premarital sexual activity 

and childbearing, three typologies of family formation are clearly identified. These broadly apply to both 

urban and rural areas, suggesting common drivers for family formation that are generally regionally 

based. The Sankey diagrams illustrate that there is considerable diversity in family formation in each 

country, but that the most common involves trajectories that were entirely or mostly typical in timing, 

with considerable continuity of timing between events. 

In all settings, the patterns suggest that marriage or long-term cohabitation is a particularly significant 

family formation milestone, along with childbearing, especially in countries where premarital sexual 

activity is less common. The analysis of the relationship between first-marriage-to-birth of first child 

trajectories suggests that nontypically timed trajectories, particularly those that are earlier-than-typical, 

are associated with poorer outcomes for men. 

These results suggest that life course theory is well suited to the exploration of family formation patterns 

for men and provides strong foundation for further analyses. They also suggest that, as is the case for 

women, men’s lives are shaped in important ways by their family formation experiences. More research is 

needed that focuses on better understanding the full implications of different life course trajectories for 

men’s lives, which will allow for the development of more effective program and policy interventions. 

Key words: life course, family formation, men, trajectories, first sex, first marriage, birth of first child.

xiii 

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

DHS Demographic and Health Survey 

EB earlier than typical birth 

EM earlier than typical marriage 

IUD intrauterine device 

LAM lactational amenorrhea method 

LB later than typical birth 

LCT life course theory 

LM later than typical marriage 

SDM standard days method 

TB typically timed birth 

TM typically timed marriage 

1 

1 BACKGROUND 

The process of forming families has tremendous significance for both individuals and societies. Families 

are the social, emotional, and economic foundation within which most people live their lives, and at the 

aggregate level shape the demographic, social, and economic direction of social groups and nations. The 

timing and sequencing of key life events that are linked to reproduction, including sexual debut, union 

formation and/or marriage, and the initiation of childbearing, have long been the core features of our 

understanding of processes of demographic and social change. 

Most research on the implications of family formation patterns on individual outcomes has focused on the 

life course trajectories of women. Much less is known about how men’s lives are shaped by key life 

events such as marriage or childbearing, the consequences these have for men and others. As a result, the 

field’s knowledge of the full implications of even basic demographic outcomes such as early marriage or 

childbearing, both of which are associated with adverse outcomes for women, remains incomplete for 

men. 

This study addresses this gap by examining the patterns of family formation for men in eight countries, 

the connections among different components of the family formation process, and the association of 

different family formation trajectories with a range of economic, social, and fertility-related outcomes. 

Our approach is based on the conceptual framework of life course theory (Elder Jr, Johnson, and Crosnoe 

2007), which views individual behavior at any given point as the result of a complex interaction between 

individual and institutional factors across time. This framework is ideal for examining the questions 

raised in this study, as described below. 

1.1 Life Course Theory 

Life course theory (LCT) seeks to understand and explain human behavior through the examination of the 

social pathways of human lives, the broader socioeconomic context of lives, and the social and personal 

meaning that society gives to the passage of biological time (Elder Jr, Johnson, and Crosnoe 2007; 

Hagestad 1991; Neugarten 1996; Roy 2014). The LCT is one of the few theoretical approaches that 

comprehensively address the experiences of individuals within contexts of significant societal change, 

understanding that individuals live in multiple social contexts that change over people’s lives, and that 

human development is shaped by the interaction of chronological age, period effects such as a rapidly 

changing social norms, and factors unique to an individual’s cohort (Elder Jr 2001; Elder Jr, Johnson, and 

Crosnoe 2007; Hagestad 1991; Hareven 1977b, 1977a; Roy 2014). 

In contrast to other frameworks that focus on the immediate situation of individuals during limited 

portions of the life span, the LCT focuses on the entirety of individual lives and the social processes that 

create, recognize, and share expectations for particular behaviors at specific stages of life (Elder Jr, 

Johnson, and Crosnoe 2007; Hagestad 1990). For example, LCT can explore how certain childhood 

conditions influence health outcomes in adults. In this study, individual family formation events are not 

viewed as isolated events, but rather as a series of linked events that are each influenced by the particular 

social, economic and cultural context of the time and the individual’s social reference group. For example, 

the individual context for decisions about initiating sexual relations during adolescence may be very 
2 

different from the individual context for decisions about marriage or childbearing. The importance and 

meaning of specific events for individuals depends on when they take place during a person’s life course, 

particularly when events occur earlier in the life course. For example, fathering a child has very different 

social, economic, and demographic implications for an adolescent boy than for an older man. Although 

LCT suggests that individual behavior at any given point in time is influenced by personal history, the 

individual is not necessarily beholden to such influence. Individuals are engaged in a lifelong process of 

development and learning and have individual agency that allows them to actively shape the trajectory of 

their life course (Elder Jr, Johnson, and Crosnoe 2007; Hagestad 1990). 

Within the LCT framework, life course trajectories are composed of a series of time-ordered, sequential 

life course stages that individuals are expected to move through as they age. While these stages are 

partially defined by biological factors, such as menarche or the physical changes associated with aging, 

they are defined primarily through the social meaning and expectations for behavior that are attached to 

them. The beginning and ending points of life course stages are marked by transition points that indicate 

the end of one stage, such as adolescence or youth, and the beginning of another, such as adulthood. 

Transitions can be marked by single events or, more often, a grouping of transition events, such as 

completing education, entering full-time employment, and moving away from the parental home. When 

these transitions alter the trajectory of the life course in a fundamental way, they are termed ‘turning 

points’—one example might be an unintended pregnancy at a very early age, which could trigger the 

termination of formal education and entry into full-time employment, both of which have long-term 

consequences for well-being. 

Context-specific social norms define the appropriate timing and sequencing of life course stages, along 

with expectations for the behavior within them. These norms are loosely linked to chronological age, 

which acts as one of several markers that can be used to determine if an individual is progressing through 

life course stages according to social expectations. This provides structure for both individuals and 

groups, and acts as a ‘social timetable’ that specifies the appropriate ages and conditions, such as being 

married before initiating childbearing, for transitions in and out of life course stages (Neugarten 1996). 

This timetable provides the framework for whether transitions into specific life course stages are 

considered on-time or off-time, or either early or late relative to social expectations. Both early and late 

transitions can lead to formal or informal social sanctions that create social boundaries for social behavior. 

These work to ensure that the majority of life trajectories in a society take place within common ‘social 

pathways’ that are shared across groups. Failing to remain within those boundaries can have significant 

consequences for individuals and groups, including adverse mental health outcomes (Harley and 

Mortimer 2000). 

1.2 Family Formation, Masculinity, and the Life Course 

The process of family formation is a critical component of the life course for both men and women. 

Family formation is a key marker of transitions between different life stages and social statuses, with 

families typically the environment within which the majority of life course events take place. Formation 

of stable unions in which childbearing is socially sanctioned and the subsequent initiation of childbearing 

are core markers of the transition from adolescence or youth to adulthood and the achievement of adult 

status in most contexts. 
3 

Although the process of family formation varies significantly across different cultural contexts, we focus 

on three key events that form the basis of virtually all family formation processes. The first is the 

initiation of sexual intercourse, which is often a key marker of an individual’s entry into longer-term 

committed relationships. The second is marriage or long-term cohabitational relationships in which 

childbearing is socially sanctioned and expected. The third is the initiation of childbearing, which can 

consolidate the social status of marital relationships. These three events do not capture the full process of 

family formation, which may include the achievement of particular fertility goals, the dissolution and reformation of marital or cohabitational relationships, or the development of a broader network of kinship 

relationships that are part of the social definition of families. However, these three events do capture 

critical components of the process of forming families—the development of longer-term sexual 

relationships, entry into socially recognized and sanctioned unions where reproduction may take place, 

and the initiation of childbearing. 

Given the importance of the family as a social institution, social norms that regulate the appropriate 

timing, sequencing, and preconditions for family formation are typically strong and associated with 

significant social sanctions for those who deviate from the established social pathway. These norms are 

typically heavily gendered and strongly linked to social definitions of masculinity and femininity, which 

serve to define and establish standards and expectations for male and female behavior. As a result, men 

and women may pass through the same general life course stages, but are subject to different expectations 

about behavior that can result in significant differences in both behavior and consequences for 

nonconformity. For example, the sexual double standard in most societies often imposes significantly 

more control over female sexuality than male sexuality, especially during adolescence, and is a key driver 

of child marriage and other adverse outcomes (Greene et al. 2018). 

Although social definitions for masculinity differ across cultural contexts and over time, core expectations 

for men’s behavior directly influence family formation. These include beginning sexual activity and 

forming unions (predominantly heterosexual in most contexts), fathering children, playing the role of 

‘head’ of the familial unit, and acting as the primary economic provider and main protector of the family 

(Heilman, Barker, and Harrison 2017). Reflecting the importance placed on family formation in most 

societies, failure to conform to the social timetable for family formation or to meet expectations within 

specific life course stages often carries very significant consequences for both men and others in their 

lives. Because of the link between masculinity and male identity, failure to complete life course 

transitions can be a direct threat to social and self-perceptions of masculine identity (Ragonese, Shand, 

and Barker 2019; Stergiou-Kita et al. 2015). For example, men’s inability to perform the role of primary 

breadwinner is associated with increased intimate partner violence (Krishnan et al. 2010), which might 

reflect a desire by men to reassert their masculinity through violence (Heilman, Barker, and Harrison 

2017). 

These norms and expectations structure the life course for men in similar ways in many different contexts. 

In recent work that examined male needs and vulnerabilities across the life course, the Institute for 

Reproductive Health proposed three broad life course stages that are applicable in most contexts: 

(1) infancy and childhood, which begins at birth and ends with the transition to adolescence/youth, often 

at the onset of puberty; (2) adolescence/youth, which is divided into younger and older adolescence and 

ends with the transition to adulthood; (3) adulthood, which is divided into younger, middle, and older 

adulthood and ends at the end of life. 
4 

Of these stages, older adolescence, younger adulthood, and middle adulthood are linked most closely to 

the family formation process. Older adolescence is the life course stage in which boys first engage in 

romantic relationships, initiate sexual activity, and model behavior that sets the stage for later 

relationships. While varying across cultural contexts, the transition from older adolescence to young 

adulthood is generally associated with expectations of greater independence, such as moving out of the 

family home, establishing independent income through full-time employment, and entering into longerterm romantic relationships. As activities associated with adolescence or youth, such as being in school or 

engaging in risky behavior, become less tolerated, men are typically increasingly expected to perform the 

roles of protector and provider for their immediate family. Marriage or the establishment of long-term 

cohabitational relationships within which childbearing may take place is a key component of this 

transition, although the process through which this takes place can vary across settings. Finally, as men 

meet the expectations of young adulthood, they enter middle adulthood, during which social expectations 

typically focus on consolidating the gains made during young adulthood. This includes developing clear 

employment goals and careers, having and raising children, remaining in unions, and assuming increased 

responsibility within familial and community settings. 

In this study, we focus on these three life course stages (older adolescence, younger adulthood, and 

middle adulthood), the family formation processes that play a critical role in defining them, and the 

implications of conforming or failing to conform to social expectations. As is the case for women, 

understanding the implications of different family formation patterns for men is critically important for 

better understanding of social and demographic processes, and for developing more effective program and 

policy responses that can effectively address and intervene to prevent adverse outcomes. 
5 

2 METHODS 

2.1 Research Questions 

This study will describe men’s reproductive life course in eight low-income countries using DHS data. 

Specifically, this study has three primary research questions that guide the analysis: 

1. What are the patterns—in terms of timing and sequencing—of key family formation events for 

men and how do they compare across the study countries? The key events examined are first 

sexual intercourse, first heterosexual marriage or cohabitational relationship, and the birth of the 

first child. 

a. How closely to the normative timing and sequencing of these events are men’s actual 

experiences? What proportion of men experience these events at their typical timing 

(relative to other men in that context) and either earlier or later than is typical? 

b. Can we identify typologies into which countries can be classified, based on the patterns 

we observe on both the timing and sequencing of family formation events, and how 

closely do men adhere to the normative behavioral patterns? 

2. What are men’s sex-to-marriage-to-birth trajectories? How related are men’s patterns of timing 

for each family formation event? Is the timing of men’s first family formation event associated 

with the timing of subsequent events? 

a. How much switching do we see across timing categories? For example, do men who 

experience first sex or first marriage earlier-than-typical then experience the birth of their 

first child earlier-than-typical, at a typical age, or later-than-typical? 

3. What are the consequences of experiencing certain marriage-to-birth trajectories? Are some 

trajectories associated, either positively or negatively, with key economic, social, and fertilityrelated outcomes for men? 

This study is primarily descriptive, including the treatment of the latter research question. We use a chisquare test of independence to determine if any association between a particular trajectory and outcome is 

statistically meaningful. We are particularly interested in the experience of “off-time” trajectories, as 

compared to typically timed trajectories. 

2.2 Data 

2.2.1 Country selection 

The first DHS surveys that included men were completed in 1987 under DHS-1 in Burundi and Mali, 

with the number of surveys including interviews with men increasing steadily since that time. The DHS 

has interviewed men in approximately 9 of 10 DHS surveys conducted since DHS-7 (approximately 

2014). Men’s data are representative at the national level, urban and rural areas, and at least one 

subnational regional level. Men’s samples are typically smaller than those of women, because smaller 

sample sizes are needed to achieve representation for the key indicators collected from men; typically 

men are eligible for interview in one out of every two or three selected households. 
6 

We selected a total of eight countries for this study. We aimed to select two or three countries for each of 

three regions: West Africa, East Africa, and South Asia. To be eligible for selection, a country needed to 

have a recent survey (since 2014) including interviews with men, with a sample size sufficiently large 

enough to allow for detailed analyses, all variables of interest, and a sample of all men. For example, we 

briefly considered the 2017-18 Pakistan DHS, but the survey was ineligible because it sampled evermarried men rather than all men and thus excluded men whose life course trajectories did not include 

marriage. 

The final country selection included the following surveys: 2017-18 Benin DHS, 2018 Mali DHS, 2018 

Nigeria DHS, 2016 Ethiopia DHS, 2014-15 Rwanda DHS, 2016 Uganda DHS, 2015-16 India DHS 

(NFHS-4), and the 2016 Nepal DHS. The eligible men’s response rate in these surveys ranged from 

85.5% in Ethiopia to 99.5% in Rwanda. Details on sampling strategies and survey implementation can be 

found in the survey final reports (Central Statistical Agency - CSA/Ethiopia and ICF 2017; Institut 

National de la Statistique - INSTAT, Cellule de Planification et de Statistique Secteur SantéDéveloppement, and ICF 2019; Institut National de la Statistique et de l’Analyse Économique and ICF 

2019; International Institute for Population Sciences - IIPS/India and ICF 2017; Ministry of Health - 

MOH/Nepal, New ERA/Nepal, and ICF 2017; National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda et al. 2016; 

National Population Commission - NPC and ICF 2019; Uganda Bureau of Statistics - UBOS and ICF 

2018). 

2.2.2 Sample selection 

The sample sizes in these surveys range from 4,063 men age 15-49 in Nepal to 112,122 men age 15-54 in 

India. We limit our analysis to men age 30-34. This is the youngest age group in which at least 50% of 

men in all study countries have experienced each of the family formation events examined in this study, 

which permitted calculation of median ages for these events. While this is the most recent cohort to have 

experienced these events, one limitation is that we are only capturing historical experience. 

Current/younger cohorts who have not yet completed all family formation events may have experiences 

that differ from those in the age group we observe. Our final analytic sample sizes of men age 30-34 

range from 532 in Nepal to 14,640 in India, as shown in Table 1. 

Table 1 Analytic sample size, men age 30-34 

Country Survey Urban Rural N 

Benin 2017-18 Benin DHS 402 481 883 

Mali 2018 Mali DHS 224 407 631 

Nigeria 2018 Nigeria DHS 736 1,015 1,751 

Ethiopia 2016 Ethiopia DHS 513 1,072 1,585 

Rwanda 2014-15 Rwanda DHS 259 673 932 

Uganda 2016 Uganda DHS 169 568 737 

India 2015-16 India NFHS 4,690 9,950 14,640 

Nepal 2016 Nepal DHS 342 190 532 
7 

2.3 Measures and Analytical Strategy 

2.3.1 Family formation events 

We examine three key family formation events in this study: first sex, first marriage, and birth of first 

child.1

 To examine the patterns in the family formation process across the eight countries, we calculate the 

median age at each event (the age at which 50% of the sample have experienced the event) for men age 

30-34 for each country nationally and separately for urban and rural areas. 

To assess typologies of family formation events across study countries, we next examine the usual 

sequence of events and duration of time between median ages of each of these events—from first sex to 

first marriage, from first marriage to birth of first child, and the overall duration of progression from first 

to last event (again, nationally and in urban and rural areas). 

Within each country, we present the distribution of ages at each event. For each event, we calculate the 

difference in years between when each individual man experienced the event and the median age at which 

his peers in the 30-34 age group experienced the event, by subtracting the median age from the reported 

age that he experienced the event. For example, a man who reports that he first had sex at age 19.5 in a 

setting where the median age at first sex was 18 would differ from the median by 1.5 years. We establish 

the ‘typical’ timing of each event as within one-half standard deviation from the mean difference from the 

median age for that event. Men who experienced the event younger than one-half standard deviation less 

the median age are classified as ‘earlier-than-typical’, while men who are one-half standard deviation 

older than the median when they experienced the event are classified as ‘later-than-typical’. Men who 

have not yet experienced the event are also classified as later-than-typical. 

Using this classification, we display men’s trajectories through these three family formation events by 

using Sankey diagrams. The Sankey diagrams show the distribution of the sample by whose experience of 

each event (first sex, for example) is earlier-than-typical, typical, or later-than-typical. The diagrams also 

show the magnitude of the flow from timing of first sex through the timing of first marriage to the timing 

of the birth of first child. 

To address our third research question, we focus more specifically on the trajectories for marrying and 

fathering a child, because these represent the core of the family formation process. We assess the 

distribution of different ‘on-time’ and ‘off-time’ trajectories across several economic, social, and fertilityrelated variables, testing the strength of the relationship between trajectory types and outcomes using a 

chi-square test of independence. These variables are operationalized as follows. 

1

 DHS questionnaires do not ask about the sex/gender of the first sexual partner and generally assume that all 

relationships are heterosexual; to do otherwise, in countries where same-sex relationships are illegal and met with 

opprobrium, would create risk for both respondents and fieldworkers. There is a possibility that respondents who are 

not heterosexual or whose sexual experiences are not entirely with partners of the opposite sex will provide 

information on those nonheterosexual relationships/encounters as though they were heterosexual, or just not disclose 

those relationships/encounters altogether. As a result, this study is limited to conceptualizing the family formation 

process only within the context of heterosexual relationships. 
8 

2.3.2 Economic variables 

Year-round employment is recategorized as a dichotomous variable based on men’s responses to the 

questions, “Have you done any work in the last 12 months?” and “Do you usually work throughout the 

year, or do you work seasonally, or only once in a while?” with those who hadn’t worked in the past 12 

months or either seasonally or once in a while coded as 0 and those who had employment throughout the 

year as 1. 

House and land ownership are dichotomous measures from the questions, “Do you own this or any 

other house either alone or jointly with someone else?” and “Do you own any agricultural or 

nonagricultural land either alone or jointly with someone else?” For both measures, sole and joint 

ownership are combined and contrasted with no ownership. 

Household wealth quintile is a standard variable included in DHS datasets. A wealth index is calculated 

by using confirmatory factor analysis on an inventory of assets and housing materials, and then 

categorized into quintiles at the household level (Rutstein and Johnson 2004). 

We developed three categorical decision-making variables, which describe how decisions are made about 

how men’s earnings are spent, men’s own health care, and large household purchases. For each decision, 

categories were man alone, jointly with wife or wife alone, and someone else/other. These three variables 

are available only for currently married men. 

2.3.3 Social variables 

Current marital status is a recoded categorical variable with three categories: currently married, living 

together as if married, and never married/formerly married. 

Multiple sexual partners is a dichotomous variable that captures if men have had multiple sexual 

partners in past 12 months recoded from the question, “In total, with how many different people have you 

had sexual intercourse in the last 12 months?” 

Attitudes toward gender-based violence is a dichotomous variable that indicates if the man agrees that 

it is justified for a man to beat his wife in at least one of five specific scenarios or disagrees that wifebeating is justified in all of them. The five scenarios are: 

 If she argues with him 

 If she goes out without telling him 

 If she neglects the children 

 If she refuses to have sex with him 

• If she burns the food? 

Educational attainment is a three-category variable that captures the highest level of education men 

have completed and is categorized as less than primary, less than secondary, and secondary or higher. 
9 

2.3.4 Fertility-related variables 

Contraceptive attitudes were captured in two dichotomous variables based on men’s responses that 

indicate agreement or disagreement with the following two attitudinal statements: 

1. “Contraception is a woman’s concern and a man should not have to worry about it.” 

2. “Women who use contraception may become promiscuous.” 

Contraceptive method used at last sex is a three-category variable (none, traditional/folk, modern) 

based on responses to the questions, “The last time you had sex, did you or your partner use any method 

other than a condom to avoid or prevent a pregnancy?” “The last time you had sex did you or your partner 

use any method to avoid or prevent a pregnancy?” and “What method did you or your partner use?” We 

also recode this variable into a second, dichotomous variable that indicates if men used a modern method 

of contraception at last sex. Modern methods include male and female sterilization, injectables, 

intrauterine devices (IUDs), contraceptive pills, implants, female and male condoms, emergency 

contraception, standard days method (SDM),2

 and lactational amenorrhea method (LAM). 

This approach to capturing contraceptive use among men differs from that among women, who are asked, 

“Are you or your partner currently using something or doing something to delay or prevent pregnancy?” 

This may produce different estimates of contraceptive prevalence (ICF International 2015; MacQuarrie et 

al. 2015). In addition, this variable is calculated only for the subset of men who have been sexually active 

in the past 3 months and is unavailable for men who have never had sex or who have not had sex recently. 

Number of living children is a recoded categorical variable with the following four options: none, 1-2 

children, 3-5 children, and 6 or more children. 

Fertility desires is a four-category variable recoded from a pair of questions: “Now I have some 

questions about the future. Would you like to have another child, or would you prefer not to have any 

more children?” and “How long would you like to wait from now before the birth of another child?” 

Categories are wants no more, wants within 2 years, wants after 2 years (those who were unsure about 

timing or were undecided about wanting more children were also included in this category), and can’t 

have any more. This variable is calculated only for currently married men. 

For each of these outcome variables, we present the distribution of each variable across life course 

trajectories, focusing on the latter two family formation events: first marriage and birth of first child. We 

present the p-value results of a chi-square statistic, which indicates if the distribution of the outcome 

varies with trajectory type. We interpret a p-value of ≤0.05 as an indication that the association is 

statistically significant. 

All data analyses are conducted in Stata SE version 15. All data are weighted to account for sampling 

probability and nonresponse. The svy suite of commands is used to adjust confidence intervals and 

standard errors to account for the clustered sampling strategy of DHS surveys. 

2

 SDM is not considered a modern method in Nepal. 

11 

3 RESULTS 

The presentation of the results in this section follows the ordering of the research questions guiding this 

study closely, beginning with broad patterns of family formation for men in the eight selected countries, 

moving to a closer examination of men’s family formation trajectories, and then examining the economic, 

social, and fertility-related consequences of experiencing particular marriage-to-birth trajectories. 

Together these results provide a detailed picture of the connection of family formation events in men’s 

lives, areas of similarity and differences between countries, and the potential influence of these patterns 

on future life course stages. Given the importance of social factors in defining and imposing expectations 

for life course stages and trajectories, we focus especially on those men whose trajectories are off-time, 

either in terms of timing or the sequencing of family formation events. 

3.1 Patterns of Key Family Formation Events for Men 

Figure 1 and Table 2 present data on the patterns of key family formation events for men. Table 2 also 

indicates in which ‘typology’ of family formation each country is included, which we discuss in greater 

detail below. Figure 1 presents the median ages at which men age 30-34 experienced first sexual 

intercourse, first marriage or cohabitation, and the birth of their first child for each of the eight countries. 

The median ages of these events by age group are found in Appendix Table A1. As shown in Figure 1, 

there is significant diversity in the family formation process across countries. This is particularly clear in 

the median ages at which events take place and the compactness of the typical family formation process 

in each country. 

Figure 1 Median ages at first sex, first marriage, and birth of first child among men age 30-34 

25.7

26.2

28.0

25.8

26.3

24.5

27.0

24.2

24.7

25.9

26.5

23.7

25.5

23.3

24.7

21.7

18.4

20.9

21.8

21.1

22.6

18.5

24.6

20.5

15

20

25

30

Benin Mali Nigeria Ethiopia Rwanda Uganda India Nepal

West Africa East Africa South Asia

Age (years)

Birth of first child

First marriage

First sex
12 

In Benin, for example, the family formation process begins at earlier ages than other countries, with a 

median age at first sexual intercourse of 18.4, and extends over a longer period of time, with a difference 

of 7.24 years between the median age of first sex and the birth of his first child (see Table 2 for 

differences in median ages for each event). In contrast, the median age at first sexual intercourse for men 

in India was much later (24.6 years) and the family formation process much more compact, with a 

difference of 2.39 years. Similar variation was evident for both the median age at first marriage and birth 

of first child, although the differences between countries are generally smaller than for first sexual 

intercourse. The median age at first marriage was lowest in Nepal (21.7 years) and highest in Nigeria 

(26.5 years), while the median age at which men experienced the birth of their first child was lowest in 

Benin (25.7 years) and Ethiopia (25.8 years). 

Table 2 Time in years between median ages at first sex, first marriage, and birth of first child 

among men age 30-34 by typology

 

First sex to 

first marriage 

First marriage 

to birth of 

first child Overall span N Typology 

Benin 6.29 0.95 7.24 883 Type 1 

Mali 4.96 0.38 5.34 631 Type 1 

Nigeria 4.70 1.52 6.22 1,751 Type 1 

Ethiopia 2.60 2.12 4.72 1,585 Type 2 

Rwanda 2.94 0.80 3.74 932 Type 2 

Uganda 4.78 1.21 5.99 737 Type 1 

India 0.06 2.33 2.39 14,640 Type 3 

Nepal 1.17 2.51 3.68 532 Type 3 

Typology legend

Type 1: Longer progression to family formation with extended gap between median 

ages at first sex and marriage, followed by short gap to first birth, premarital 

sex, and childbearing relatively common. 

Type 2: Moderate progression to family formation with moderate gap between median 

ages at first sex and marriage, followed by longer gap to first birth, premarital 

sex moderately common, and premarital childbearing relatively rare. 

Type 3: Short progression to family formation with short gap between median ages at 

first sex and marriage, followed by moderate gap to first birth, premarital sex 

relatively less common, and premarital childbearing very rare. 

With the notable exceptions of India and Nepal, the majority of the diversity in both the timing and degree 

of compactness of the family formation process is due to variation in the median age at first sexual 

intercourse and the difference between this and the median age at first marriage. In India and Nepal, the 

median ages at first sex and first marriage are very close, which suggests very low levels of premarital 

sexual activity. Other countries have much larger differences between the median ages at first sex and first 

marriage, particularly Benin (6.29 years), Mali (4.96 years), Uganda (4.78 years), and Nigeria (4.70 

years), which suggests higher levels of premarital sexual activity. In contrast, there is less variation in the 

median ages at first marriage and birth of first child across the eight countries, and generally a much 

shorter gap between these events, which ranges from 0.38 years in Mali to 2.51 in Nepal. 

Despite the diversity in the timing of family formation events, there are some important commonalities 

across the countries. First, there is a clear ordering of family formation events, with the median age at first 

sex being younger than first marriage, which is younger than the median age at the birth of first child. The 

only exception to this is India, where the median ages at first sex and first marriage are essentially the 

same, differing by only 0.1 years. Second, as noted above, the difference in the median ages for first 

marriage and childbearing is small relative to the difference between first sexual intercourse and first 

marriage, with India and Nepal the only exceptions. Together with the ordering of family formation 
13 

events, this suggests a strong preference for having children in the context of marriage, even in contexts 

where premarital sexual activity may be common. 

This is supported by the data presented in Table 3, which shows the proportions of men in each country 

reporting having had first sexual intercourse earlier than marriage and the proportions reporting having 

married before the birth of their first child. These data, disaggregated by rural and urban residence, are 

presented in Appendix Table A4. Men in those countries with a more significant gap between the median 

age at first sexual intercourse and first marriage are more likely to report having had premarital sexual 

activity than those with a smaller gap. For example, 85.4% of men in Benin, where the difference 

between the median age at first sex and first marriage is the largest (6.29 years) among the eight 

countries, reported sexual activity before marriage. In contrast, less than a quarter (21.5%) of men in 

India, where the median ages at first sexual intercourse and marriage were extremely close (0.1 years), 

reported premarital sexual activity. This pattern also held for countries with moderate gaps between first 

sex and first marriage, such as Ethiopia and Rwanda, where only slightly over half (50.8% and 51.0% 

respectively) of men reported premarital sexual activity. 

Table 3 Ordering of family formation life course events and typology among men age 30-34 

 

First sex 

before first 

marriage N 

First marriage 

before birth 

of first child N 

Benin No 14.6 128 19.1 256 

Yes 85.4 746 80.9 566 

Total 874 822 

Mali No 27.0 160 20.7 205 

Yes 73.0 433 79.3 371 

Total 593 576 

Nigeria No 35.3 585 9.9 329 

Yes 64.7 1,073 90.1 1,129 

Total 1,658 1,458 

Ethiopia No 49.2 748 8.5 279 

Yes 50.8 773 91.5 1,169 

Total 1,521 1,448 

Rwanda No 49.0 427 13.5 190 

Yes 51.0 445 86.5 634 

Total 872 824 

Uganda No 24.1 172 23.2 253 

Yes 75.9 542 76.8 434 

Total 714 687 

India No 78.5 9,959 4.5 1,643 

 Yes 21.5 2,734 95.5 11,105 

 Total 12,693 12,748 

Nepal No 69.9 367 1.5 37 

 Yes 30.1 158 98.5 481 

 Total 525 518 

Note: The calculation of the percentage experiencing first sex before first marriage excludes 

those who have never had sex or been married. The calculation of the percentage experiencing 

first marriage before first birth excludes those who have never been married or fathered a child. 

Typology legend 

Type 1: Longer progression to family formation with extended gap between median 

ages at first sex and marriage, followed by short gap to first birth, premarital 

sex, and childbearing relatively common. 

Type 2: Moderate progression to family formation with moderate gap between median 

ages at first sex and marriage, followed by longer gap to first birth, premarital 

sex moderately common, and premarital childbearing relatively rare. 

Type 3: Short progression to family formation with short gap between median ages at 

first sex and marriage, followed by moderate gap to first birth, premarital sex 

relatively less common, and premarital childbearing very rare. 
14 

A similar pattern is observed for premarital childbearing, where those countries with larger gaps between 

the median ages at first sexual intercourse and marriage also generally have higher proportions of men 

who report not being married or cohabiting before the birth of their first child. One-fifth (20.7%) of men 

in Mali, for example, where the gap between first sexual activity and marriage is 4.96 years, reported a 

premarital birth. In contrast, premarital childbearing was extremely rare in India and Nepal, both of which 

have smaller differences between the median ages at first sexual activity and marriage (0.1 and 1.2 years 

respectively). Nigeria is an exception to this pattern with relatively high levels of premarital sexual 

activity (64.7% of men) combined with relatively low levels of premarital childbearing (9.9%). 

3.1.1 Differences between rural and urban men in family formation patterns 

The patterns described above provide a broad overview of the family formation patterns for men age 30-

34 in each country. However, these patterns potentially mask some significant differences between rural 

and urban areas, which typically have quite different family formation patterns. This is significant for a 

number of reasons, but particularly because of the importance the life course places on social norms in 

terms of defining life course stages and pathways. These norms are likely to be quite different in rural 

than in urban areas because life course stages and definitions of ‘on-time’ or ‘off-time’ also differ. 

Figure 2 Median ages at first sex, first marriage, and birth of first child among men age 30-34 by 

residence 

Figure 2 presents the median ages for first sexual intercourse, first marriage, and birth of first child, while 

the difference in years between the different family formation events is presented in the lower two panels 

of Table 4. Detailed data on median ages for rural and urban men by age group are presented in Appendix 

Tables A2 and A3. A number of the differences between rural and urban areas are common across most of 

the countries. First, the family formation process in rural areas typically takes place at younger ages than 
15 

in urban areas. This is especially evident when examining the median ages at first marriage and birth of 

first child, which are substantially higher in urban areas in every country. The pattern is less evident for 

age at first sex, where there is very little difference between rural and urban areas for three of the eight 

countries (Benin, Rwanda, and Uganda), a higher median age in rural areas in one country (Nigeria), and 

a higher median age in urban areas in four countries (Mali, Ethiopia, India, and Nepal). As shown in Table 

4, the overall span of the family formation process is longer in urban areas in every country, although this 

again can largely be attributed to the differences between the median ages at first sexual intercourse and 

first marriage. Overall, there are important differences in terms of the timing of different family formation 

events between rural and urban areas, although the general pattern of family formation in the ordering of 

events and the difference in years between the median ages at first marriage and birth of first child is very 

similar in most countries. 

Table 4 Time in years between median ages at first sex, first marriage, and birth of first child 

among men age 30-34 by residence and typology 

 

First sex to 

first marriage 

First marriage 

to birth of 

first child Overall span N Typology 

URBAN MEN 

Benin 7.16 1.29 8.45 402 Type 1 

Mali 6.38 0.53 6.91 224 Type 1 

Nigeria 5.89 1.82 7.71 736 Type 1 

Ethiopia 5.35 2.33 7.68 513 Type 2 

Rwanda 5.13 0.03 5.16 259 Type 2 

Uganda 6.83 0.97 7.80 169 Type 1 

India 0.44 2.16 2.60 4,690 Type 3 

Nepal 1.37 2.27 3.64 342 Type 3 

RURAL MEN 

Benin 5.62 1.00 6.62 481 Type 1 

Mali 4.13 0.65 4.78 407 Type 1 

Nigeria 3.45 1.26 4.71 1,015 Type 1 

Ethiopia 1.87 2.06 3.93 1,072 Type 2 

Rwanda 2.51 0.96 3.47 673 Type 2 

Uganda 4.06 1.08 5.14 568 Type 1 

India 0.06 2.41 2.47 9,950 Type 3 

Nepal 0.65 2.92 3.57 190 Type 3 

Typology legend

Type 1: Longer progression to family formation with extended gap between median 

ages at first sex and marriage, followed by short gap to first birth, premarital 

sex, and childbearing relatively common. 

Type 2: Moderate progression to family formation with moderate gap between median 

ages at first sex and marriage, followed by longer gap to first birth, premarital 

sex moderately common, and premarital childbearing relatively rare. 

Type 3: Short progression to family formation with short gap between median ages at 

first sex and marriage, followed by moderate gap to first birth, premarital sex 

relatively less common, and premarital childbearing very rare. 

3.1.2 Developing family formation typologies for men 

To better understand the potential linkages between different family formation events, we explored 

whether the data suggest different ‘typologies’ of family formation that allow grouping of countries. This 

followed a similar approach used by Stevanovich-Fenn et al. (2015) for young women. Based on the 

distribution of the median ages at first sexual intercourse, marriage, and birth of first child, we identified 

three distinct typologies: 
16 

• Typology 1: Characterized by a longer family formation process with extended gap between 

median ages at first sexual intercourse and marriage, followed by a relatively short gap to first 

birth. This suggests that premarital sex and childbearing are relatively common in these countries. 

• Typology 2: Characterized by moderately long family formation process with a moderate gap 

between median ages at first sex and marriage, followed by longer gap to first birth. This suggests 

that premarital sex was moderately common, although less so than Typology 1, and that 

premarital childbearing is relatively rare in these countries. 

• Typology 3: Characterized by a shorter family formation process with short gap between median 

ages at first sex and marriage, followed by moderate gap to first birth. This suggests that 

premarital sex is relatively less common and premarital childbearing is very rare in these 

countries. 

The categorization of each country into one of the three typologies is illustrated in Tables 2, 3 and 4, with 

those shaded green categorized as Typology 1, those shaded blue Typology 2, and those shaded grey 

Typology 3. 

The countries in Typology 1 (Benin, Mali, Nigeria, and Uganda) are characterized by a number of 

common features. The average difference between the median ages at first sex and first marriage for these 

countries is 5.18 years, with a much shorter gap (1.02 years) between first marriage and birth of first child 

(not shown in tables). With the large gap between first sex and marriage, countries in Typology 1 have the 

longest overall time span between first sex and the birth of a child, averaging 6.2 years. With the 

exception of Nigeria, around three-quarters of men reported having sexual intercourse before marriage, 

and roughly one-fifth report having fathered a child before marriage. While lower than other countries 

included in Typology 1, Nigeria has substantially higher proportions reporting premarital sexual activity 

(64.7%) and fathering a child before marriage (9.9%) relative to countries in other typologies. 

The countries in Typology 2 (Ethiopia and Rwanda) have substantially shorter overall spans of family 

formation than those in Typology 1, averaging 4.23 years between the median age at first sex and first 

marriage. The gap between first sexual intercourse and first marriage is also substantially shorter (an 

average of 2.77 years) than in Typology 1. However, the gap between the median age at first marriage and 

first birth differs between these two countries, with Ethiopia having a relatively large gap of 2.12 years 

and Rwanda a much shorter gap of 0.80 years. In comparison to countries in Typology 1, men in 

Typology 2 are also much less likely to have had sex before marriage (49.2% and 51.0% for Ethiopia and 

Rwanda, respectively) or having had a birth before marriage (8.5% and 13.5% respectively). 

The countries in Typology 3 (India and Nepal) have the shortest overall span between the median age at 

first sexual intercourse and birth of first child (an average of 3.04 years), because of a much shorter period 

between first sexual intercourse and first marriage (0.06 years for India and 1.17 years for Nepal). The 

gap between the median age at first marriage and birth of first child, however, is longer on average (2.42 

years) than either of the other typologies. The proportion of men reporting having had sexual intercourse 

before marriage is much lower than in either Typology 1 or 2 (21.5% and 30.1% for India and Nepal, 

respectively), as is fathering a child before marriage, which is very rare in both countries (4.5% and 1.5%, 

respectively). 
17 

These typologies generally follow regional patterns, with West African countries (Benin, Mali, and 

Nigeria) classified as Typology 1, East African countries (Ethiopia and Rwanda, but not Uganda) as 

Typology 2, and South Asian countries (India and Nepal) as Typology 3. This may be a reflection of the 

relatively small number of countries included in this study, or other factors that shape family formation 

patterns across geographic regions, including norms such as those related to gender, that influence family 

formation. 

3.1.3 Typology classification and differences by residence type 

As described above, differences between rural and urban areas in terms of family formation behavior can 

provide insights into how dominant particular family formation norms are throughout a country and the 

degree to which national trends are driven by either rural or urban trends. If there are significant 

differences between urban and rural areas, this may lead to a misclassification of countries into 

typologies, and it may be that urban and rural areas fit quite different typologies. 

Table 4 presents these differences for each of the family formation events examined here, with the 

typologies identified by color scheme. In each of the typologies, the median age at first marriage in rural 

areas is earlier than that in urban areas, although the degree varies by typology. On average, men in urban 

areas have larger differences than those in rural areas—for Typology 1, this difference is 2.3 years, while 

in Typology 2 the average difference is 3.1 years, and in Typology 3, 0.6 years. The differences between 

the median age at first marriage and birth of the first child is much smaller in all three typologies, 

although it is less consistently longer for men in urban areas. For countries in Typology 1, the difference 

is 0.2 years longer for men in urban areas, while in Typology 2 and 3, it is rural men who have the larger 

difference on average (0.3 and 0.5, respectively). Overall, these findings suggest that while there are 

important differences between urban and rural areas, particularly in terms of timing of events, the 

typologies established at the national level characterize both residence types well. 

3.2 The Social Timetable of Men’s Family Formation 

Figures 3-5 present the proportions of men experiencing each of the key family formation events at ages 

that are typical, earlier-than-typical, or later-than-typical relative to the median ages at which those events 

take place in their country. These data, disaggregated by rural and urban residence, are found in Appendix 

Table A3. For each event, these figures demonstrate the proportion of men who are on-time or off-time 

relative to their peers. The figures are organized by typologies, with Figure 3 presenting the distributions 

for Typology 1 countries (Benin, Mali, Nigeria, and Uganda), Figure 4 for Typology 2 countries (Ethiopia 

and Rwanda), and Figure 5 the distributions for Typology 3 countries (India and Nepal). 
18 

Figure 3 Percent distribution of men age 30-34 experiencing earlier-than-typical, typical, or later-thantypical timing of first sex, first marriage, and birth of first child among Typology 1 countries 

There are no clear differences between the typologies in terms of the distribution of the proportions of 

men who are on-time or off-time for each of the different family formation events. This is not surprising, 

as this measure is based on the distribution within each country individually, meaning that the proportions 

of individuals who are considered to be “on-” or “off-time” within individual countries may be similar 

even though the ages at which individual events take place are quite different between countries. 
19 

Figure 4 Percent distribution of men age 30-34 experiencing earlier-than-typical, typical, or later-thantypical timing of first sex, first marriage, and birth of first child among Typology 2 countries 

When comparing the different family formation events, however, there are some clear patterns that are 

consistent across countries. In each country, a higher proportion of men are considered to be on-time for 

the initiation of sexual activity than for either marriage or childbearing. For example, in Nigeria, 62.5% of 

men were classified as on-time for first sexual intercourse, compared to 34.5% and 27.1% for first 

marriage and the birth of first child, respectively (data not shown). A majority of men in each country are 

classified as on-time for the initiation of first sexual intercourse, with ranges from 50.3% in Benin to 

82.8% in Mali. In contrast, the proportion of men classified as on-time for first marriage ranges between 

30.3% in Rwanda to 37.9% in Benin, and the proportion for the birth of the first child between 27.1% and 

39.0%. With slight variations across countries, the proportions considered to be on- or off-time for first 

marriage and birth of first child are similar in all countries, with the proportions being earlier or laterthan-typical approximately the same. 
20 

Figure 5 Percent distribution of men age 30-34 experiencing earlier-than-typical, typical, or later-thantypical timing of first sex, first marriage, and birth of first child among Typology 3 countries 

These results suggest that there is generally greater diversity in the ages at first marriage and initiation of 

childbearing than there is for sexual activity, and that sexual activity may be different from the other 

family formation events in some way. How these events are linked together, particularly in terms of 

timing, is less clear from these figures. We examine this in greater detail in the following section. 

3.3 Trajectories through Family Formation Events 

Life course trajectories are inherently complex, even when examining a relatively narrow range of life 

experiences such as the family formation process. To capture this complexity and visually represent the 

family formation trajectories of men in each of the eight countries in this study, we use Sankey diagrams. 

Sankey diagrams are particularly useful for applications such as this because they provide a visual 

representation both of the diversity of different combinations of family formation trajectories and how 

common these are in a given population. 

In this case, the Sankey diagrams are designed to capture the trajectories of men in terms of timing of first 

sex, first marriage, and birth of first child. Each of these is represented by a column that is divided into 

three categories indicating whether the man experienced the event earlier-than-typical (colored green), at 

typical timing (colored blue), or later-than-typical (colored salmon), allowing for 27 possible trajectories 

When read vertically, each column replicates the results of the stacked bar charts in Figures 3-5. For 

example, in the first Sankey diagram for Benin (Figure 6), 32% of men experienced first sexual 

intercourse earlier-than-typical, 50% at typical timing, and 18% later-than-typical. The width of each of 

the bars in each column provides a visual representation of the proportions of men in each category. 
21 

The flows between each of the columns show the proportions of men experiencing individual pieces of 

their family formation trajectory. Each flow retains the color of the first category it came from – that is, 

the green flows all relate to men who had sexual intercourse at an earlier-than-typical age, even if they 

married or had a child at typical or later-than-typical ages. As with the columns, the width of the flows 

indicates the proportion of men who experienced that trajectory. Again, using Benin (Figure 6) as an 

example, of the 50% of men who had first sexual intercourse at a typical age: 

• 15% had first marriage at an earlier-than-typical age and 11% had the birth of a first child at an 

earlier-than-typical age. 

• 21% experienced first marriage at a typical age and 15% then went on to have the birth of a first 

child at a typical age. 

• 15% had first marriage at a later-than-typical age and over two-thirds of those men (or 11% of all 

men) experienced the birth of their first child at a later-than-typical age. 

3.3.1 Common features of family formation trajectories 

The eight Sankey diagrams reveal diversity in the patterns of family formation trajectories across 

countries. There were no particular patterns found by region or typology, but there are several features 

common to all study countries. 

First, the most common trajectory in every country includes at least one family formation event that takes 

place at ages that are typical for that country. This is usually the trajectory in which all three family 

formation events are typically timed (as in Benin (Figure 6), Rwanda (Figure 10), and Nepal (Figure 13)), 

or typically timed first sex followed by earlier-than-typical first marriage and birth of first child (as in 

Nigeria (Figure 8), Ethiopia (Figure 9), and Uganda (Figure 11)). A trajectory with typically timed first 

sex followed by later-than-typical first marriage and birth of first child is most common in two countries, 

Mali (Figure 7) and India (Figure 12). 

Figure 6 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Benin 
22 

Second, the Sankey diagrams reveal considerable path dependence, with the timing of each event being 

closely tied to timing of the subsequent event. For example, most men who begin their trajectory early 

also experience the next family formation event early. This dependence is especially evident for the 

trajectory segment between first marriage and birth of the first child. Path dependence appears to be 

greater here than in the trajectory segment between first sex and first marriage. For example, Figure 8 

shows that 32% of men in Nigeria marry earlier-than-typical, with at least 26% having the birth of their 

first child earlier than is typical. Compare this to the 22% of men whose sexual debut is earlier-thantypical, more than half of whom (14%) experience typical or later timing of marriage. 

Path dependency is also evident for those trajectories with later-than-typical events. Across all countries, 

it is particularly unlikely for men experiencing one family formation event later-than-typical to 

experience the next events with early or typical timing. Mali (Figure 7) and Ethiopia (Figure 9) are good 

examples. Even in Nepal, the country with the most sizable late trajectories, few men experience a 

typically timed or earlier-than-typical event (Figure 13). 

Third, one possible exception in terms of path dependency is among men whose trajectory begins with 

typical timing of first sex. These men experience a variety of trajectories. While a plurality of men 

experience typically timed first sex and go on to experience typically timed marriage, this is almost never 

a majority.3

 In Rwanda (Figure 10), the typically timed first sex to earlier-than-typical first marriage 

trajectory segment (30% of all men) even exceeds the size of the trajectory segment from typically timed 

first sex to typically timed first marriage (27% of all men). In India (Figure 12), the typically timed first 

sex to later-than-typical first marriage trajectory segment (32% of all men) exceeds the typically timed 

first sexual intercourse to typically timed first marriage flow (30% of all men). 

Figure 7 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Mali 

Fourth, when men experience both sex and marriage earlier-than-typical, it is especially unlikely that they 

will go on to experience the birth of their first child later-than-typical. This trajectory does not appear at in 

Rwanda and is very rare elsewhere. This is not the case when first sex, alone, is experienced earlier-than3

 Nepal is the exception (Figure 13). 
23 

typical. For example, 6% of Nigerian men have an earlier-later-later than typical trajectory through the 

three family formation events (Figure 8). 

While all countries have these patterns in common, each country has distinctive details that are unique to 

that country. Some of these distinguishing features are described in the following section, for each 

country, grouped by region. 

3.3.2 Family formation trajectories in West Africa 

All the study countries in West Africa (plus Uganda) exhibit the Typology 1 pattern of family formation, 

in which there is a longer progression to family formation with an extended gap between median ages at 

first sexual intercourse and marriage, followed by a short gap from first marriage to birth of the first child, 

and in which premarital sex and childbearing are relatively common. The Sankey diagram positions 

events according to their typical sequence in this typology (sexual intercourse, then marriage, then birth), 

although it should be noted that some men, particularly (but not only) those who experience birth of their 

first child earlier-than-typical actually do so before marriage, do not follow this sequencing. 

Figure 8 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Nigeria 

Benin (Figure 6) is the country with the largest proportion of men starting their trajectories with earlierthan-typical first sex. Almost equal proportions of these men go on to marry in each timing category. Of 

those starting with earlier-than-typical timing of first sex, the most common single trajectory is one with 

all family formation events occurring early (9%). The largest single trajectory is one from typically timed 

first sex (50% of all men) through typically timed first marriage (21%) to typically timed birth of first 

child (15%). Similar proportions of men have typically timed first sex, earlier-than-typical marriage and 

birth trajectory as have a typical first sex, late-than-typical marriage, and birth trajectory (11%). 

Mali (Figure 7) has a higher proportion of men (83%) starting their trajectories from typically timed first 

sex than any other country. From this origin, three trajectories are of similar magnitude: later-than-typical 

marriage and birth (19%), earlier-than-typical marriage and birth (18%), and typically timed marriage and 

birth (16%). Mali also has one of the larger earlier marriage to typically timed birth trajectory segments 

(9%) of the study countries. 
24 

As shown in Figure 8, Nigerian men for whom sexual debut occurs earlier-than-typical are evenly 

distributed across all three trajectories, showing little connection between timing of sex and marriage. 

Almost all men who marry earlier also experience the birth of their first child earlier. The same pattern is 

evident among men who marry later. However, births occur at a variety of timings for men who marry at a 

typical age. 

Figure 9 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Ethiopia 

3.3.3 Family formation trajectories in East Africa 

Although Uganda follows the behavioral patterns of countries in Typology 1, the other two countries in 

this region, Ethiopia and Rwanda, exhibit behaviors that fall into their own typology (Typology 2), in 

which there is a moderate progression to family formation with a moderate gap between median ages at 

first sex and marriage, followed by a longer gap to first birth. Premarital sex is moderately common, 

although premarital childbearing is relatively rare. 

Figure 10 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Rwanda 
25 

The most common single trajectory for Ethiopian men is one in which first sex is typically timed, 

followed by earlier-than-typical marriage and birth of first child (20%) (Figure 9). Ethiopia also shows 

how unlikely it is for men who experience sex later-than-typical to experience either earlier or typically 

timed marriage or birth—of the 12% of men who experience sex later-than-typical, 92% (or 11% of all 

men) are classified as having both later marriages and births. This likely includes men who have not yet 

experienced any of the three events (by definition later-than-typical for this age group). 

The most common single trajectories in Rwanda (Figure 10) are where men experience typical timing of 

all three events (20%), followed by typically timed sex but earlier marriage and birth (19%) and typically 

timed sex and later marriage and birth (18%). Rwanda most closely resembles Mali, although the 

proportions of men experiencing premarital sex and childbearing are much lower. In Rwanda, few men 

who marry at a typical age or later-than-typical experience the birth of their first child earlier-than-typical 

(<3%), with most (67% or 20% of all men) remaining on the typical trajectory. 

Figure 11 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Uganda 

In contrast, Uganda’s patterns (Figure 11) show slightly more movement from later-than-typical marriage 

to earlier or typical time of birth than in other countries. The small proportion of men for whom sex 

occurs earlier-than-typical means that trajectories originating from this point include very few men. Only 

3% of men had an earlier sex, earlier marriage, and earlier birth trajectory. As with Ethiopia, the 

overwhelming majority of men experiencing later-than-typical initiation of sexual intercourse remain on a 

late trajectory for first marriage and first birth. 

3.3.4 Family formation trajectories in South Asia 

Both India and Nepal exhibit the Typology 3 pattern of family formation in which the median ages at first 

sex and marriage are very close, followed by a moderate gap to first birth. This suggests that premarital 

sex is not common and premarital childbearing is very rare. 

Figure 12 indicates that there are no appreciably sized trajectories originating from later-than-typical first 

sex in India, which reflects the very low proportion of men (4%) in this category. However, there is a 

large proportion of Indian men for whom trajectories originate with typically timed first sex. Most 
26 

trajectories leading to later-than-typical marriage (32%) or birth (29%) originate from typically timed first 

sex. 

Figure 12 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, India 

Both India and Nepal have the largest trajectories with all three events occurring earlier-than-typical 

compared with the other six countries in the study. In India, this trajectory accounts for 13% of men and 

15% of men in Nepal. In Nepal (Figure 13), men who have sex earlier-than-typical are unlikely to have 

any trajectory other than this earlier marriage and birth trajectory. Nepal is distinctive for having the most 

sizable trajectory of later-than-typically timed events (17%), in contrast to India. 

Figure 13 Family formation trajectories among men age 30-34, Nepal 

3.4 Association of Marriage-Birth Trajectories with Social, Economic, and 

Fertility-related Outcomes 

The concept of linked events is central to LCT, with events taking place earlier in the life course assumed 

to shape a range of outcomes and behaviors later in the life course. As a result, we can expect that the 

various family formation trajectories have consequences for other aspects of a man’s life. In this section, 

we explore these relationships, and focus on economic, social, or fertility-related behaviors. To do this, 
27 

we assess if the trajectories are associated with selected behaviors using a chi-square test of 

independence. Although we are ultimately interested in consequences and effects of men’s trajectories, 

this is an initial exploration. Results are descriptive and no causal direction can be established, although 

LCT and research on the impact of family formation patterns for women suggest that some behaviors are 

influenced at least to some extent by men’s family formation experiences. We focus mainly on off-time 

trajectories, those that include earlier-than or later-than-typical family formation events, as compared with 

typical trajectories, because LCT suggests that these are most likely to be socially sanctioned and harmful 

to life course progress. We further focus on the segment between first marriage and birth of the first child. 

This is for two reasons. First, the analyses above suggest that the initiation of sexual activity may be 

different in some important ways than the marriage and the initiation of childbearing. In particular, the 

latter two events may be more closely associated with the formation of a family unit than the initiation of 

sexual activity (with the possible exception of countries such as Nepal and India where entry into 

marriage and initiation of sexual activity are very closely tied). Secondly, the consequences of entry into 

marriage and initiation of childbearing are likely to be more substantial than becoming sexually active, 

particularly for men and when this does not result in pregnancy. 

3.4.1 Overview of outcomes 

We explored a wide range of indicators as possible economic, social, and fertility-related outcomes that 

might be influenced by variations in the family formation, as shown in Table 5. We do not present all of 

them in this report. We selected for presentation those indicators that more consistently demonstrated a 

statistically meaningful relationship with marriage-to-birth trajectories across the eight countries. Table 5 

provides an overview of all indicators that we explored, displays the countries in which an association, 

either positive or negative, is indicated by an ‘x’, and notes if the indicator is calculated on a subsample or 

the full sample of men. 
28 

Table 5 Overview of relationship between various economic, social and fertility-related 

outcomes and marriage-birth trajectories among men age 30-34 

Benin Mali Nigeria Ethiopia Rwanda Uganda India Nepal 

Economic Outcomes 

Has year-round employment x x 

Owns a house x x x x x x x 

Owns land x x x x x x x 

Household wealth quintile x x x x x x x x 

Decision-making* 

Man’s own earnings x 

Man’s own health care x x x 

Large household purchases x x x x 

Social Outcomes Current marital status x x x x x x x x 

Has had multiple sexual partners in 

past 12 months x x x x x x x x 

Agreement with any reasons for 

gender-based violence x x x x 

Educational attainment x x x x x x x x 

 

Fertility-Related Outcomes 

Contraceptive attitudes 

Contraception is a woman’s concern x x x 

Women who use contraception may 

become promiscuous x x x 

Used any contraceptive method at last 

sex** x x x x x x x 

Used modern contraceptive method at 

last sex** x x x x x 

Number of living children x x x x x x x x 

Fertility desires x x x x x x x x 

* Includes only currently married men. 

** Includes only those who have been sexually active in past 3 months. 

Of 16 possible indicators, we retained four economic outcomes, three social outcomes, and four fertilityrelated outcomes. Among the economic outcomes, household wealth quintile is associated with marriageto-birth trajectories in all eight study countries, and house and land ownership in all countries except 

Nepal. Currently married men’s decision-making regarding large household purchases is related to these 

trajectories in half of the study countries: Benin, Nigeria, India, and Nepal. 

The social outcomes of current marital status and educational attainment are associated with marriage-tobirth trajectories in all study counties, while attitudes toward gender-based violence are associated with 

trajectories in Benin, Nigeria, India, and Nepal. We do not further explore men’s sexual partnerships in 

the past 12 months, although this outcome shows an association in all eight countries. 

We assessed two contraceptive attitudes, each of which is associated with men’s trajectories in three 

countries. We focus on agreement with the statement, “contraception is a woman’s concern and a man 

should not have to worry about it,” which indicates a significant relationship in Benin, Rwanda, and 

India. The indicators for contraceptive used and modern method of contraception used at last sex show 

similar results. We focus on the latter outcome, which is significant in Benin, Nigeria, Rwanda, India, and 

Nepal. 

3.4.2 Men’s trajectories and economic outcomes 

Table 6 shows the proportion of men who own a home by marriage-birth trajectory. In all countries, men 

are most likely to own a house, alone or jointly, if they are in the earlier marriage-earlier birth or earlier 

marriage-typically timed birth trajectory. House ownership also remains quite common among men in the 
29 

typical marriage-early birth and typical marriage-typical birth trajectories in Mali, Ethiopia, Rwanda, and 

India. House ownership is consistently lower among men in the later-than-typical birth trajectories 

(typical marriage or late marriage). Men’s house ownership, overall, appears to be the highest in Ethiopia 

and Rwanda, especially among men who marry and have the birth of their first child earlier-than-typical 

(91%-92%). 

Table 6 House ownership by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 

Percentage of men who own a house (alone or jointly) 

p-value8 EM-EB1

 EM-TB2 TM-EB3 TM-TB4 TM-LB5 LM-LB6 Other7

Benin (N=880) 55.7 68.0 37.4 45.5 34.1 29.4 33.7 0.000 

Mali (N=614) 66.4 61.7 60.3 60.3 53.4 40.8 56.6 0.009 

Nigeria (N=1,793) 62.4 65.9 43.2 44.3 34.5 29.3 43.0 0.000 

Ethiopia (N=1,634) 91.8 86.7 76.1 84.5 71.2 43.2 73.7 0.000 

Rwanda (N=931) 90.9 84.3 85.8 83.1 75.3 50.9 56.3 0.000 

Uganda (N=734) 87.4 86.0 79.5 75.3 68.7 52.7 67.4 0.000 

India (N=14,604) 78.0 72.2 72.9 70.7 70.0 61.1 71.1 0.000 

Nepal (N=536) 23.6 25.1 18.4 18.8 13.7 8.5 19.4 0.107 

1

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier-than-typical age (EM) and first birth at earlier-thantypical age (EB). 

2

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier-than-typical age (EM) and first birth at typical age (TB). 3

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at earlier-than-typical age (EB). 4

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at typical age (TB). 5

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at later-than-typical age (LB). 6

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at later-than-typical age (LM) and first birth at later-than-typical 

age (LB). 

7

 Other marriage-birth trajectories. 

8 p-value for a chi-square test of independence between house ownership and trajectory. 

Land ownership shows similar patterns to those of house ownership (Table 7). Land ownership is usually 

most likely among men experiencing an earlier marriage-earlier birth trajectory. Land ownership is also 

common among men in the earlier marriage-typical birth and typical marriage-earlier birth trajectories. In 

Mali, men’s land ownership in the typical marriage-earlier birth trajectory (64%) exceeds that of all other 

trajectories. Similar to house ownership, land ownership is least likely within the later marriage-later birth 

trajectory, and occasionally substantially so. In Ethiopia, 37% of men in this trajectory own land 

compared with 82% of men in the earlier marriage and birth trajectory, a difference of 45 percentage 

points. 

Table 7 Land ownership by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 

Percentage of men who own land (alone or jointly) 

p-value8 EM-EB1

 EM-TB2 TM-EB3 TM-TB4 TM-LB5 LM-LB6 Other7

Benin (N=880) 63.1 67.9 39.4 49.2 44.1 33.5 40.7 0.000 

Mali (N=614) 62.5 48.7 64.2 59.4 34.5 34.1 43.3 0.000 

Nigeria (N=1,793) 65.2 62.5 42.7 42.1 31.3 28.3 50.2 0.000 

Ethiopia (N=1,634) 82.2 72.2 76.0 72.6 60.6 36.7 77.4 0.000 

Rwanda (N=931) 81.3 74.9 67.6 71.8 75.7 60.3 50.9 0.000 

Uganda (N=734) 81.0 68.9 78.1 75.9 69.1 57.2 58.9 0.000 

India (N=14,604) 56.5 49.5 52.7 51.2 55.4 46.2 56.6 0.000 

Nepal (N=536) 34.1 35.9 21.7 22.1 20.1 20.3 30.7 0.183 

1

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier-than-typical age (EM) and first birth at earlier than 

typical age (EB). 

2

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier-than-typical age (EM) and first birth at typical age (TB). 3

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at earlier-than-typical age (EB). 4

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at typical age (TB). 5

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at later-than-typical age (LB). 6

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at later-than-typical age (LM) and first birth at later-than-typical 

age (LB). 

7

 Other marriage-birth trajectories. 

8 p-value for a chi-square test of independence between house ownership and trajectory. 
30 

Table 8 shows the proportion of men in each household wealth quintile, by trajectory. Men who 

experience earlier trajectories, whether earlier marriage-earlier birth or earlier marriage-typically timed 

birth, predominantly occupy the poorest and poorer household wealth quintiles in Benin, Nigeria, and 

Ethiopia. These men are concentrated in the middle quintiles (presenting a normal distribution) in 

Rwanda, Uganda, and Nigeria. 

Even clearer are the wealth patterns of men experiencing family formation events later-than-typical. Men 

in later typical marriage-later birth and later marriage-later birth trajectories are more likely to be in the 

richer and richest quintiles, while few are in the poorest quintile. In many countries, this same pattern—a 

greater likelihood of being in the wealthier quintiles—applies for the typical marriage-typical birth 

trajectory as well. Men who experience the typical marriage-earlier birth trajectory exhibit a variety of 

wealth patterns, with little consistency across study countries. 

The dominant pattern of decision-making about large household purchases (asked only of those who are 

currently married or cohabiting), across all trajectories, is that these decisions are made by men alone in 

Benin, Mali, and Nigeria, and that these decisions are made jointly with their wives in Ethiopia, Rwanda, 

and India (Table 9). The proportions making these decisions themselves and jointly are similar in Uganda. 

The participation of others in these decisions is common only in Nepal. The pattern of decision-making 

varies with the family formation trajectory in Benin, Nigeria, India, and Nepal. 
31 

Table 8 Household wealth by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 

EM-EB1 EM-TB2 TM-EB3 TM-TB4 TM-LB5 LM-LB6 Other7 p -value8

Benin (N=880)

Poorest 19.3 33.0 11.7 20.4 21.7 9.6 14.8

Poorer 26.3 21.4 15.1 15.2 21.6 13.7 23.6

Middle 18.6 14.1 22.2 20.2 4.4 13.1 18.4

Richer 21.0 12.1 20.8 19.9 9.9 20.2 21.5

Richest 14.8 19.5 30.2 24.3 42.4 43.4 21.7

Mali (N=614)

Poorest 27.6 24.7 33.5 15.2 8.0 10.8 21.3

Poorer 15.2 20.7 9.3 19.8 17.5 10.5 12.0

Middle 21.6 23.3 20.9 17.8 19.6 13.9 9.2

Richer 22.7 17.9 16.8 23.5 31.7 24.2 27.0

Richest 12.9 13.4 19.5 23.7 23.2 40.6 30.5

Nigeria (N=1,793)

Poorest 27.9 11.9 17.3 8.7 9.8 7.4 11.4

Poorer 23.3 35.8 13.9 13.6 7.9 8.6 22.7

Middle 21.1 23.6 21.5 20.2 17.9 18.3 18.1

Richer 17.0 21.1 26.4 35.3 23.2 26.5 18.1

Richest 10.7 7.6 20.9 22.1 41.2 39.2 29.6

Ethiopia (N=1,634)

Poorest 22.6 23.6 18.3 13.9 12.0 8.5 15.7

Poorer 23.7 22.4 23.0 24.5 24.6 13.4 23.8

Middle 20.9 20.7 16.7 23.9 15.0 14.0 16.6

Richer 19.2 18.4 21.1 14.2 11.3 19.1 14.3

Richest 13.6 14.9 20.9 23.6 37.1 45.0 29.5

Rw anda (N=931)

Poorest 15.7 19.0 31.7 17.5 17.7 16.0 15.4

Poorer 21.1 25.7 12.9 21.2 19.6 18.4 7.6

Middle 25.8 26.1 21.5 24.2 22.3 15.5 19.7

Richer 24.0 15.4 24.7 16.8 19.5 14.7 19.3

Richest 13.4 13.9 9.1 20.3 20.9 35.4 37.9

Uganda (N=734)

Poorest 21.4 28.5 18.1 16.3 26.3 10.0 10.9

Poorer 28.3 15.1 21.0 17.0 14.4 9.5 22.5

Middle 24.0 14.8 24.4 18.2 11.1 12.0 11.9

Richer 16.3 19.7 21.8 23.9 17.6 16.9 20.5

Richest 9.9 21.8 14.6 24.5 30.6 51.5 34.3

India (N=14,604)

Poorest 24.2 21.8 16.7 12.2 9.4 6.1 16.4

Poorer 24.3 20.2 19.4 16.4 17.8 13.1 18.3

Middle 22.3 21.7 25.2 21.2 23.0 19.1 24.1

Richer 19.0 19.3 21.8 23.6 24.7 26.2 20.7

Richest 10.1 17.1 16.8 26.5 25.1 35.5 20.5

Nepal (N=536)

Poorest 19.3 20.1 15.0 19.4 3.1 9.3 34.9

Poorer 20.3 24.7 10.4 15.3 21.9 9.4 10.5

Middle 21.6 4.1 16.2 22.2 12.7 16.4 16.5

Richer 22.8 34.4 50.0 21.5 30.0 23.8 26.0

Richest 16.0 16.8 8.4 21.6 32.4 41.1 12.1

Percent distribution of men by household wealth quintile

1 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier than typical age (EM) and first birth at earlier than typical age (EB).

2 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier than typical age (EM) and first birth at typical age (TB).

3 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at earlier than typical age (EB).

0.000

0.002

0.000

0.002

0.000

0.000

0.001

0.000

6 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at later than typical age (LM) and first birth at later than typical age (LB).

7 Other marriage-birth trajectories.

8 p -value for a chi-square test of independence betw een house ow nership and trajectory.

4 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at typical age (TB).

5 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at later than typical age (LB).
32 

Table 9 Decision-making about large household purchases by marriage-birth trajectory among 

currently married men age 30-34 

EM-EB1 EM-TB2 TM-EB3 TM-TB4 TM-LB5 LM-LB6 Other7 p -value8

Benin (N=777)

Man alone 66.9 66.1 56.9 66.4 53.9 58.0 49.1

Jointly w ith w ife or w ife alone 26.9 27.9 39.0 25.2 44.2 36.7 43.9

Someone else/other 6.2 4.6 4.1 8.4 1.9 5.4 7.1

Mali (N=566)

Man alone 83.3 84.8 83.8 78.3 72.1 74.7 69.1

Jointly w ith w ife or w ife alone 2.8 1.6 2.9 4.9 7.5 9.8 10.1

Someone else/other 11.9 13.6 13.3 16.8 19.1 12.7 14.4

Nigeria (N=1,413)

Man alone 62.7 64.9 48.9 52.2 51.4 42.3 50.5

Jointly w ith w ife or w ife alone 22.5 9.7 35.1 33.1 33.4 37.4 26.4

Someone else/other 14.5 25.4 16.0 14.7 15.3 20.2 23.1

Ethiopia (N=1,389)

Man alone 19.3 20.5 18.0 9.9 23.4 11.1 23.0

Jointly w ith w ife or w ife alone 76.6 74.3 75.9 87.1 72.6 83.1 75.1

Someone else/other 4.0 5.2 6.2 3.0 4.0 5.8 1.9

Rw anda (N=774)

Man alone 31.0 29.7 28.5 33.1 26.5 30.0 12.3

Jointly w ith w ife or w ife alone 64.0 63.6 64.8 64.8 72.2 66.4 84.6

Someone else/other 5.0 6.7 6.7 2.1 1.3 3.6 3.1

Uganda (N=633)

Man alone 46.6 48.7 51.8 45.8 59.0 48.5 48.6

Jointly w ith w ife or w ife alone 39.4 43.0 39.1 42.7 37.2 41.3 41.2

Someone else/other 14.0 8.3 9.1 11.5 3.8 10.1 10.2

India (N=12,638)

Man alone 25.5 25.0 22.0 23.8 21.4 21.4 23.9

Jointly w ith w ife or w ife alone 66.8 65.7 68.4 67.5 69.6 66.0 64.2

Someone else/other 7.7 8.9 9.2 8.4 8.5 12.3 11.8

Nepal (N=514)

Man alone 24.7 41.3 48.8 43.0 23.0 23.5 21.2

Jointly w ith w ife or w ife alone 30.9 15.9 21.3 24.3 29.1 16.4 25.9

Someone else/other 44.3 42.8 29.9 32.8 48.0 60.1 52.9

6 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at later than typical age (LM) and first birth at later than typical age (LB).

7 Other marriage-birth trajectories.

8 p -value for a chi-square test of independence betw een house ow nership and trajectory.

1 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier than typical age (EM) and first birth at earlier than typical age (EB).

2 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier than typical age (EM) and first birth at typical age (TB).

3 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at earlier than typical age (EB).

4 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at typical age (TB).

5 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at later than typical age (LB).

0.971

0.054

0.006

0.095

0.455

0.056

0.214

0.547

Percent distribution of men by who makes decisions about large household 
33 

In Benin and Nigeria, the likelihood of joint decision-making is decreased—and men’s sole decisionmaking is increased—among men in the earlier marriage-earlier birth and earlier marriage-typical birth 

trajectories. In India, the likelihood of sole decision-making is similarly higher among men in these 

trajectories, although others’ participation in decision-making (not joint decision-making) is lower in 

these trajectories. Joint decision-making occurs at similar levels within all trajectories in India. Similarly, 

in Nepal, others’ participation in decision-making increases in trajectories with a later-than-typical (and 

the other trajectories category) compared to trajectories with earlier or typically timed marriages and 

births. However, the pattern of joint and sole decision-making across trajectories is not clear. 

3.4.3 Men’s trajectories and social outcomes 

Attitudes toward gender-based violence are associated with family formation trajectory in Benin, Nigeria, 

India, and Nepal (Table 10). Yet, the pattern of these attitudes varies in each of these four countries. In 

Benin and Nepal, acceptance of wife-beating in at least one scenario is highest among men in the typical 

marriage-earlier birth trajectory (27% and 51%, respectively). It is lowest among men in the later 

marriage-later birth trajectory in Benin (7%), but lowest among men in the earlier marriage-typical birth 

trajectory in Nepal (8%). Nepal also has the largest difference in acceptance of wife-beating, with these 

trajectories separated by 43 percentage points. The differences are more modest in India, where 

acceptance of wife-beating is highest among men in the other trajectories (37%) and lowest among men in 

the typical marriage-typical birth trajectory (28%). In Nigeria, acceptance is highest among men in the 

earlier marriage-earlier birth trajectory (24%) and lowest in the typical marriage-later birth trajectory 

(9%). 

Table 10 Attitude toward gender-based violence by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-

34 

Percentage of men who agree that a husband is justified in hitting or 

beating his wife in any of 5 specific scenarios1

p-value9 EM-EB2

 EM-TB3 TM-EB4 TM-TB5 TM-LB6 LM-LB7 Other8

Benin (N=880) 17.0 13.2 26.6 17.8 15.9 6.8 22.4 0.008 

Mali (N=614) 47.4 56.9 38.2 51.2 48.3 36.1 45.3 0.204 

Nigeria (N=1,793) 23.7 21.3 14.2 17.9 8.5 16.2 19.3 0.033 

Ethiopia (N=1,634) 23.6 37.5 17.0 24.4 17.9 20.3 35.0 0.135 

Rwanda (N=931) 18.3 18.3 19.6 10.7 14.2 11.2 15.0 0.182 

Uganda (N=734) 41.9 30.2 51.0 30.0 40.6 31.6 34.1 0.100 

India (N=14,604) 31.3 32.4 33.0 27.9 27.5 31.3 36.6 0.017 

Nepal (N=536) 22.5 7.7 51.0 20.7 12.3 8.5 32.7 0.000 

1

 If she burns the food, if she argues with him, if she goes out without telling him, if she neglects the children, 

and/or if she refuses to have sexual intercourse with him. 

2

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier-than-typical age (EM) and first birth at earlier-thantypical age (EB). 

3

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier-than-typical age (EM) and first birth at typical age (TB). 4

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at earlier-than-typical age (EB). 5

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at typical age (TB). 6

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at later-than-typical age (LB). 7

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at later-than-typical age (LM) and first birth at later-than-typical 

age (LB). 

8

 Other marriage-birth trajectories. 

9 p-value for a chi-square test of independence between house ownership and trajectory. 

Table 11 presents the educational attainment by trajectory, which is significantly associated in all eight 

study countries. This indicates that higher levels of education are most likely among men in the typical 

marriage-later birth and later marriage-later birth trajectories, while less education is more common in 
34 

trajectories characterized by earlier marriage. This pattern is true both in countries with low levels of 

education, like Benin, and where secondary or higher education is common, like Nigeria. 

Table 11 Educational attainment by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 

EM-EB1 EM-TB2 TM-EB3 TM-TB4 TM-LB5 LM-LB6 Other7 p -value8

Benin (N=880)

None 75.4 70.6 70.0 61.9 63.3 46.6 62.8

Primary 21.5 24.0 24.3 26.9 17.9 26.2 28.2

Secondary or higher 3.1 5.4 5.8 11.2 18.8 27.2 9.0

Mali (N=614)

None 73.5 83.3 64.5 71.5 55.8 47.2 67.5

Primary 20.7 15.5 35.5 22.5 28.8 35.0 28.5

Secondary or higher 5.9 1.1 0.0 6.1 15.4 17.8 4.0

Nigeria (N=1,793)

None 40.2 27.0 26.0 18.5 11.6 7.3 19.4

Primary 23.7 22.4 14.4 19.3 17.8 14.2 18.8

Secondary or higher 36.1 50.6 59.6 62.2 70.6 78.5 61.8

Ethiopia (N=1,634)

None 89.1 88.6 89.3 76.4 78.1 45.1 73.4

Primary 6.8 6.2 5.7 11.0 7.3 26.9 8.8

Secondary or higher 4.1 5.1 5.0 12.6 14.7 28.0 17.7

Rw anda (N=931)

None 77.1 76.3 70.6 61.8 66.9 54.0 37.7

Primary 22.4 21.8 29.4 33.0 16.0 23.4 44.9

Secondary or higher 0.5 1.9 0.0 5.1 17.1 22.6 17.4

Uganda (N=734)

None 58.1 36.4 44.3 29.5 17.3 22.0 42.9

Primary 33.6 54.4 46.5 53.8 48.1 26.2 35.9

Secondary or higher 8.2 9.2 9.2 16.7 34.6 51.9 21.2

India (N=14,604)

None 30.9 27.4 23.8 16.6 18.3 9.1 18.5

Primary 56.7 56.6 55.4 53.5 49.0 44.7 54.1

Secondary or higher 12.4 16.0 20.8 29.9 32.7 46.2 27.4

Nepal (N=536)

Less than primary 34.3 12.2 31.9 28.5 17.7 13.0 36.0

Less than secondary 44.5 71.2 53.6 39.1 51.5 26.0 20.6

Secondary or higher 21.2 16.6 14.4 32.4 30.7 61.0 43.5

6 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at later than typical age (LM) and first birth at later than typical age (LB).

7 Other marriage-birth trajectories.

8 p -value for a chi-square test of independence betw een house ow nership and trajectory.

1 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier than typical age (EM) and first birth at earlier than typical age (EB).

2 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier than typical age (EM) and first birth at typical age (TB).

3 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at earlier than typical age (EB).

4 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at typical age (TB).

5 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at later than typical age (LB).

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

Percent distribution of men by highest level of educational attained
35 

3.4.4 Men’s trajectories and fertility-related outcomes 

Men were asked if they agreed with the statement, “contraception is a woman’s concern and a man should 

not have to worry about it.” Men’s trajectories are associated with contraceptive attitudes in three 

countries: Benin, Rwanda, and India, as shown in Table 12. Agreement with the statement is highest 

among men in the typical marriage-earlier birth trajectory (34% and 21%, respectively) and lowest among 

men in the later marriage-later birth trajectory (14% and 3%, respectively) in both Benin and Rwanda. In 

India, the level of agreement does not vary across family formation trajectories. Still, agreement is 

significantly higher (47%) within the earlier marriage-earlier birth trajectory than the typical marriagetypical birth trajectory (41%). 

Table 12 Attitude toward contraceptive decision-making by marriage-birth trajectory among men 

age 30-34 

Percentage of men who agree that “Contraception is a woman’s 

concern and a man should not have to worry about it” 

p-value8 EM-EB1

 EM-TB2 TM-EB3 TM-TB4 TM-LB5 LM-LB6 Other7

Benin (N=880) 30.4 20.5 34.2 23.4 16.7 14.1 33.4 0.002 

Mali (N=614) 30.6 28.8 28.8 18.5 33.2 26.1 27.1 0.546 

Nigeria (N=1,793) 38.0 38.1 31.3 38.6 31.4 34.7 25.9 0.594 

Ethiopia (N=1,634) 9.5 12.6 10.0 9.1 7.4 9.6 12.8 0.943 

Rwanda (N=931) 6.9 5.9 20.7 3.2 6.5 3.1 4.5 0.052 

Uganda (N=734) 22.7 8.8 27.7 20.3 31.7 17.7 28.0 0.207 

India (N=14,604) 47.0 45.8 41.8 41.2 45.9 41.9 42.3 0.040 

Nepal (N=536) 12.5 20.4 27.2 6.8 13.3 8.8 19.4 0.139 

1

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier–than-typical age (EM) and first birth at earlier-thantypical age (EB). 

2

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier-than-typical age (EM) and first birth at typical age (TB). 3

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at earlier-than-typical age (EB). 4

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at typical age (TB). 5

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at later-than-typical age (LB). 6

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at later-than-typical age (LM) and first birth at later-than-typical 

age (LB). 

7

 Other marriage-birth trajectories. 

8 p-value for a chi-square test of independence between house ownership and trajectory. 

Although men’s family formation trajectories are frequently related to modern contraceptive use, the 

patterns of those relationships are highly individual to each specific country. For example, Table 13 shows 

that use of a modern method of contraception at last sex4

 is most likely among men in the later marriagelater birth trajectory (21%) and least likely in the typical marriage-later birth trajectory (1%) in Benin, 

although the opposite pattern is found in Rwanda. Modern method use at last sex is most common within 

the typical marriage-later birth trajectory (62%) and least common in the later marriage-later birth 

trajectory (44%) here. In Nigeria, modern method use is most common in the later marriage-later birth 

trajectory (45%), like Benin, but least common in the typical marriage-earlier birth trajectory (10%). In 

both India and Nepal, modern method use is most likely in this typical marriage-earlier birth trajectory 

(29% and 89%, respectively), but least likely in the typical marriage-later birth trajectory in India and in 

the later marriage-later birth trajectory in Nepal. 

4

 Measured only among men who have had sex in the past three months. 
36 

Table 13 Use of modern contraception by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 in the 

past 3 months 

Percentage of men who had sexual intercourse in the past 3 months 

and used a modern method of contraception1

 at last sex 

p-value9 EM-EB2

 EM-TB3 TM-EB4 TM-TB5 TM-LB6 LM-LB7 Other8

Benin (N=852) 10.5 11.1 9.5 13.9 1.1 21.2 8.9 0.004 

Mali (N=568) 13.7 11.0 10.1 14.7 16.6 26.7 11.6 0.139 

Nigeria (N=1,532) 9.9 12.6 9.7 13.1 10.5 44.7 21.7 0.000 

Ethiopia (N=1,399) 38.5 48.5 41.0 46.1 42.8 51.3 49.1 0.424 

Rwanda (N=812) 59.6 54.2 47.4 59.5 61.6 43.7 48.0 0.051 

Uganda (N=662) 33.2 30.2 48.0 38.7 26.5 36.4 44.8 0.238 

India (N=12,208) 23.8 14.1 28.7 23.6 12.0 14.7 13.2 0.000 

Nepal (N=492) 62.6 72.1 89.4 57.5 41.5 31.2 44.2 0.000 

1

 Female sterilization, male sterilization, pill, IUD, injectables, implants, male condom, female condom, 

emergency contraception, standard days method (SDM; excluding Nepal), lactational amenorrhea method 

(LAM), and other modern methods. 

2

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier-than-typical age (EM) and first birth at earlier- thantypical age (EB). 

3

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier-than-typical age (EM) and first birth at typical age (TB). 4

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at earlier-than-typical age (EB). 5

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at typical age (TB). 6

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at later-than-typical age (LB). 7

 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at later-than-typical age (LM) and first birth at later-than-typical 

age (LB). 

8

 Other marriage-birth trajectories. 

9 p-value for a chi-square test of independence between house ownership and trajectory. 

Table 14 shows the percent distribution of the number of living children by family formation trajectory. It 

shows that the number of children increases as trajectories start earlier. The likelihood of men having no 

children or 1-2 children is concentrated in the trajectories with later marriage-later birth or typical 

marriage-later birth, while the likelihood of having 3-5 children or 6 or more children is highest among 

men in the earlier marriage-earlier birth and earlier marriage-typical birth trajectories. Men in the typical 

marriage-earlier birth and typical marriage-typical birth trajectories fall between these two groups, 

typically having either 1-2 or 3-4 children. 
37 

Table 14 Living children by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 

EM-EB1 EM-TB2 TM-EB3 TM-TB4 TM-LB5 LM-LB6 Other7 p -value8

Benin (N=880)

None 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 5.4 44.1 3.7

1 to 2 7.2 23.1 20.4 41.4 61.8 48.1 58.6

3 to 5 56.2 62.2 59.1 53.7 29.0 7.8 30.2

6+ 36.7 14.8 20.5 4.3 3.9 0.0 7.5

Mali (N=614)

None 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.9 46.5 6.2

1 to 2 13.9 20.1 28.7 49.5 71.9 50.9 61.1

3 to 5 71.8 68.5 66.0 46.3 13.2 2.6 29.4

6+ 14.3 11.4 5.3 4.1 0.0 0.0 3.2

Nigeria (N=1,793)

None 0.1 2.9 0.0 1.0 27.8 73.1 17.5

1 to 2 22.3 49.0 42.6 76.0 65.0 26.4 60.5

3 to 5 66.5 47.2 48.3 22.4 7.2 0.4 19.0

6+ 11.1 0.8 9.1 0.6 0.0 0.1 2.9

Ethiopia (N=1,634)

None 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.2 60.2 13.4

1 to 2 23.2 47.8 30.5 57.4 70.4 38.1 62.4

3 to 5 62.8 49.9 60.5 39.2 3.4 1.7 21.9

6+ 14.0 2.3 8.9 3.3 0.0 0.0 2.4

Rw anda (N=931)

None 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 8.8 50.5 1.8

1 to 2 18.8 42.7 27.5 70.8 74.7 47.6 64.6

3 to 5 77.3 55.0 72.5 29.2 16.5 1.8 33.6

6+ 3.9 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Uganda (N=734)

None 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 14.7 38.8 1.2

1 to 2 7.0 18.0 8.1 27.5 40.8 50.9 43.8

3 to 5 63.9 58.6 70.1 69.0 36.9 10.4 47.0

6+ 29.1 23.4 21.0 3.5 7.7 0.0 8.0

India (N=14,604)

None 0.4 1.1 0.1 0.5 47.6 63.4 21.6

1 to 2 45.8 69.4 64.6 83.3 49.0 35.9 69.3

3 to 5 52.2 29.2 34.6 16.0 3.4 0.7 8.8

6+ 1.6 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3

Nepal (N=536)

None 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.2 28.9 17.0

1 to 2 46.2 56.4 29.8 65.6 70.1 66.3 58.2

3 to 5 52.9 41.4 70.2 34.4 10.7 4.8 24.8

6+ 0.8 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

6 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at later than typical age (LM) and first birth at later than typical age (LB).

7 Other marriage-birth trajectories.

8 p -value for a chi-square test of independence betw een house ow nership and trajectory.

1 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier than typical age (EM) and first birth at earlier than typical age (EB).

2 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier than typical age (EM) and first birth at typical age (TB).

3 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at earlier than typical age (EB).

4 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at typical age (TB).

5 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at later than typical age (LB).

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

Percent distribution of men by number of living children
38 

The patterns of fertility desires, on their own and in relation to men’s family formation trajectories, differ 

by region (Table 15). Regardless of trajectory, the most common fertility desire is typically for another 

child after 2 years or more, followed by another child within 2 years throughout the six West and East 

African countries in the study. In South Asia, it is more likely that men want no more children. 

The proportion of men reporting that they cannot have any more children is negligible in most 

trajectories. In the six West and East African countries, it is typically only measurable among men in the 

later marriage-later birth trajectory. In India, this response is most likely among men in the later marriagelater birth trajectory (36%) as well. However, in Nepal, this response is most likely among men in the 

typical marriage-later birth trajectory (26%). Both India and Nepal have a measurable proportion of men 

with this response in most trajectories, which distinguishes them from the patterns observed in the African 

countries. 

In West African countries in this study and Uganda, which all exhibit typology 1, wanting a child within 

the next 2 years is most likely in the typical marriage-typical birth or other trajectories. In Ethiopia and 

Rwanda, both typology 2 countries, wanting no more children is most likely among trajectories with 

either earlier marriage or earlier birth or both. In all countries, regardless of typology or region, wanting 

no more children is most common among men experiencing earlier marriage, earlier birth, or both. 
39 

Table 15 Fertility desires by marriage-birth trajectory among men age 30-34 

EM-EB1 EM-TB2 TM-EB3 TM-TB4 TM-LB5 LM-LB6 Other7 p -value8

Benin (N=784)

Want no more 23.2 9.5 22.1 8.7 6.6 1.9 5.7

Yes, w ithin 2 years9 35.3 33.9 12.6 36.7 33.5 36.1 32.6

Yes, after 2 years or more 39.8 56.6 65.3 52.8 57.9 57.4 61.7

Sterilized/infecund 1.8 0.0 0.0 1.9 2.0 4.6 0.0

Mali (N=574)

Want no more 9.7 13.6 11.2 11.4 3.4 6.7 0.1

Yes, w ithin 2 years 46.0 40.3 40.8 40.7 50.9 40.4 61.6

Yes, after 2 years or more 43.9 46.2 44.4 46.8 44.2 40.8 38.2

Sterilized/infecund 0.4 0.0 3.5 1.1 1.4 12.0 0.0

Nigeria (N=1,527)

Want no more 11.7 7.5 11.5 5.2 2.8 2.2 5.9

Yes, w ithin 2 years9 46.4 38.1 48.5 49.1 63.9 35.9 64.0

Yes, after 2 years or more 41.6 53.1 39.5 45.5 32.3 26.3 30.1

Sterilized/infecund 0.3 1.3 0.4 0.2 0.9 35.6 0.0

Ethiopia (N=1,477)

Want no more 24.5 24.8 20.7 11.9 9.5 1.4 24.1

Yes, w ithin 2 years9 19.9 25.7 11.1 20.8 36.0 20.4 9.4

Yes, after 2 years or more 55.5 49.5 64.9 67.2 54.4 50.1 66.5

Sterilized/infecund 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.1 28.1 0.0

Rw anda (N=811)

Want no more 61.7 51.6 21.8 38.6 27.9 10.7 37.2

Yes, w ithin 2 years9 3.9 9.4 0.0 8.8 16.5 12.9 13.0

Yes, after 2 years or more 34.4 39.0 78.2 52.6 55.6 55.5 49.8

Sterilized/infecund 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.9 0.0

Uganda (N=645)

Want no more 35.3 14.6 32.0 22.4 10.3 6.4 15.8

Yes, w ithin 2 years9 17.3 19.7 19.4 12.1 16.3 24.8 16.1

Yes, after 2 years or more 47.4 65.7 48.6 65.5 68.2 58.9 68.1

Sterilized/infecund 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.2 9.9 0.0

India

Want no more 80.9 63.6 74.4 60.7 35.3 16.9 45.0

Yes, w ithin 2 years9 5.3 12.4 8.8 16.2 29.4 19.8 25.7

Yes, after 2 years or more 6.8 20.4 9.8 17.4 29.6 27.4 25.5

Sterilized/infecund 7.0 3.7 7.0 5.6 5.8 35.9 3.8

Nepal (N=519)

Want no more 76.2 68.6 44.0 69.5 52.6 35.2 56.4

Yes, w ithin 2 years9 5.6 4.3 4.6 8.0 21.6 21.4 15.8

Yes, after 2 years or more 5.1 13.3 25.6 16.4 25.8 37.9 27.8

Sterilized/infecund 13.1 13.8 25.8 6.2 0.0 5.5 0.0

9 Includes those w ho w ant a(nother) child but are undecided as to w hen and those w ho are undecided as to w hether they w ant 

4 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at typical age (TB).

5 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at later than typical age (LB).

6 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at later than typical age (LM) and first birth at later than typical age (LB).

7 Other marriage-birth trajectories.

8 p -value for a chi-square test of independence betw een house ow nership and trajectory.

Percent distribution of men by desire for children

1 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier than typical age (EM) and first birth at earlier than typical age (EB).

2 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at earlier than typical age (EM) and first birth at typical age (TB).

3 Marriage-birth trajectory of first marriage at typical age (TM) and first birth at earlier than typical age (EB).

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.001

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

41 

4 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 

This study examined the family formation process for men within the conceptual framework provided by 

LCT. The study sought to better understand the patterns of family formation for men in the selected 

countries, the family formation trajectories of these men, and the potential consequences of following 

different family formation pathways. 

4.1 Patterns of Family Formation for Men 

The patterns of family formation for the eight countries in this study suggest that while there are 

important differences in the ages and compactness of the family formation processes across countries, 

most follow a similar pattern in the order of family formation events. This is consistent with the patterns 

predicted by the LCT, because each country is subject to somewhat different normative structures that 

guide the timing of family formation. The most significant differences were in the degree to which 

premarital sexual activity and, to a much lesser extent, premarital childbearing, are prevalent in each 

country. The relatively smaller differences across countries and typologies for the gap between the median 

age at first marriage and the birth of their first child suggest that sexual activity is, at least in some 

countries, not as integral a part of the family formation process as marriage and having children. This is 

supported by the differences in the timing of first sexual intercourse and the other two family formation 

events, with much higher proportions of men reporting typical timing for first sex. The relative disconnect 

of sexual activity with the overall family formation process is likely to be especially true for men, for 

whom premarital sexual activity is often encouraged or expected and the consequences of unplanned 

pregnancies less severe than for women. 

In all settings, these patterns suggest that marriage or long-term cohabitation signifies a concrete step 

toward having children, with both events representing more significant components of the family 

formation process than sexual activity. This is particularly the case in countries where premarital sex was 

common (typology 1 and, to a lesser extent, typology 2), where the gap between the median age at first 

marriage and birth of the first child is small. In these settings, couples may already know each other well, 

and marriage takes place either after pregnancy or in anticipation of having children soon. For example, in 

both Benin and Mali, the gap between the median age at first sex and birth of first child is less than a year, 

while the median age at first sexual intercourse is significantly earlier. In contrast, marriage and sexual 

activity are much more closely linked in typology 3 countries, where arranged marriage is more common, 

and the gap between marriage and birth of first child somewhat larger than in typology 1 countries. 

While a greater range of countries is required to assess the validity of the typology scheme developed 

here, the results strongly suggest that this may be an effective way of classifying countries in terms of 

family formation processes. Further research to better understand the underlying reasons for the 

commonalities evident within the different typologies may provide useful information for programmers 

and policymakers. Further research can also provide the framework for grouped analyses that may 

provide further insights into the drivers of family formation behaviors across multiple settings. With the 

exception of Uganda, the typologies largely grouped countries together from the same geographical 

region, and this suggested that common cultural, religious, or economic factors may be shaping family 

formation behavior in ways that are common in broader regions. Although the results suggest some 
42 

differences within countries, particularly in terms of rural and urban areas, the patterns of family 

formation within countries are broadly the same (although rural areas consistently experienced family 

formation events at earlier ages). This strengthens the argument for common macro-level drivers of 

behavior. 

Finally, the findings suggest that there is more diversity in the timing of both first marriage and birth of 

first child relative to the median age than is the case for first sexual intercourse. Based on the 

classification in this study, significant proportions of men experience off-time family formation events. 

This is, in part, due to the significant diversity in the family formation trajectories followed by men in 

each country. 

4.2 Family Formation Trajectories 

The family formation trajectories for men match the patterns suggested by LCT in a number of respects. 

Although there is significant variation both between and within countries in terms of trajectories, the most 

common trajectories were those that were either entirely typical in terms of timing or where the key 

family formation events of marriage and childbearing took place at typical ages. As predicted by LCT, 

there is evidence of a continuity of behavior throughout the family formation process (men who initiated 

sexual activity earlier-than-typical were also more likely to be earlier-than-typical for marriage and 

childbearing) and some suggestion of individuals changing their trajectories by adapting their behavior. 

4.3 Relationship between Marriage-Birth of First Child Trajectories, and 

Social, Economic, and Fertility-related Outcomes 

The relationship between the trajectories of first marriage to birth of the first child and the behavioral 

outcomes is complex, because there is considerable diversity in the trajectories across countries and many 

of the outcomes are interrelated. The descriptive approach allows for the identification of broad 

relationships but cannot take other potentially confounding factors fully into account. Furthermore, the 

causal relationship between the family formation trajectory and a number of the outcomes is unclear and 

bidirectional. For example, earlier-than-typical marriage and childbearing is associated with lower 

educational attainment. Young men who started their family formation process relatively early face 

additional pressure to perform in the role of provider for the new family, which leads to dropping out of 

school. Those who drop out of school may be more likely to engage in behaviors that lead to premature 

family formation. 

The analyses do suggest that earlier-than-typical transitions are associated with poorer outcomes for men. 

These men are more likely to be poor, to be less equitable in their household decision-making processes, 

have dropped out of school at relatively early ages, and have less favorable views of contraceptive use. 

They also have more children. They are also more likely to own a home or land, which possibly reflects 

the higher proportions of men with earlier-than-typical trajectories in rural areas, who are more likely to 

be using modern contraception and are less likely to want more children. These relationships are likely to 

be due, in part, to the earlier start these men had in the family formation process, and that they have more 

opportunity to accumulate assets or have children. For example, those marrying earlier may have already 

achieved their desired family size and be more motivated to use contraception. 
43 

4.4 Limitations 

There are a number of limitations to this study that should be taken into account when applying the 

findings more broadly. First, the relatively small sample sizes available limited our ability to use 

inferential statistical approaches that would have aided in clarifying the relationships between family 

formation trajectories and outcomes. Secondly, we are unable to directly examine other markers of life 

course transitions that typically accompany family formation, such changes in residence patterns, ending 

education, or the initiation of fulltime employment. Thirdly, the focus on the 30-34-year-old cohort, 

necessitated by the use of median ages as indicators of the ‘typical’ age at which specific events take 

place, may not reflect the more current behavior of younger cohorts. Finally, as noted above, our analysis 

assumes heterosexual relationships and family formation patterns, thus potentially excluding the 

experiences of homosexual men. 

4.5 Conclusion 

Overall, the results of this study provide strong support for LCT as an organizing framework for 

examining family formation patterns for men. The results provide some evidence for the relationship 

between the trajectory taken by men in their family lives and other outcomes. Further research is needed 

with a wider range of countries, which would allow for a deeper examination of the validity of the 

typologies used here, and approaches that allow for a more direct assessment of causal relationships than 

was possible in this study. It is imperative that we collect better, more complete data from men, which 

will allow for the same level of depth in analyses as is possible for women. Understanding family 

formation behaviors for both men and women requires a more complete engagement with men and their 

needs than has been the case to date. This has hampered our understanding of the family formation 

process and our ability to develop programming and policy approaches that can improve key social, 

economic, and demographic outcomes. 

45 

REFERENCES 

Central Statistical Agency - CSA/Ethiopia, and ICF. 2017. Ethiopia Demographic and Health Survey 

2016. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: CSA and ICF. http://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR328/FR328.pdf. 

Elder Jr, G. H. 2001. “Life Course: Sociological Aspects.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social & 

Behavioral Sciences, edited by Neil J. Smelser and Paul B. Baltes, 8817-8821. Amsterdam, The 

Netherlands: Elsevier LTD. 

Elder Jr, G. H., M. K. Johnson, and R. Crosnoe. 2007. “The Emergence and Development of Life Course 

Theory.” In Handbook of the Life Course edited by Jeylan T. Mortimer and Michael J. Shanahan, 3-19. 

New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. 

Fenn, N. S., J. Edmeades, H. Lantos, and O. Onovo. 2015. Child Marriage, Adolescent Pregnancy and 

Family Formation in West and Central Africa. Dakar, Senegal: International Center for Research on 

Women and UNICEF. 

Greene, M., S. Perlson, J. Hart, and M. Mullinax. 2018. “The Centrality of Sexuality for Understanding 

Child, Early and Forced Marriage.” Washington, DC, and New York: GreeneWorks and American Jewish 

World Service. https://ajws.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/centrality_of_sex__final.pdf. 

Hagestad, G. O. 1990. “Social Perspectives on the Life Course.” In Handbook of Aging and the Social 

Sciences, edited by Robert H. Binstock and Linda K. George, 151-168. New York, NY: Academic Press. 

Hagestad, G. O. 1991. “Trends and Dilemmas in Life Course Research: An International Perspective.” In 

Theoretical Advances in Life Course Research, 23-57. Weinheim, Germany: Deutscher Studien Verlag. 

Hareven, T. K. 1977a. “The Family Cycle in Historical Perspective: A Proposal for a Developmental 

Approach.” The Family Life Cycle in European Societies: 339-352. 

Hareven, T. K. 1977b. “Family Time and Historical Time.” Daedalus 106: 57-70. 

Harley, C., and J. T. Mortimer. 2000. “Social Status and Mental Health in Young Adulthood: The 

Mediating Role of the Transition to Adulthood.” Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society 

for Research on Adolescence, Chicago, IL, March 30 - April 2.

Heilman, B., G. Barker, and A. Harrison. 2017. The Man Box: A Study on Being a Young Man in the US, 

UK, and Mexico. Washington, DC: Promundo. 

ICF International. 2015. Questionnaires: Household, Woman’s, and Man’s, Demographic and Health 

Surveys Methodology. Rockville, MD: ICF International. 

Institut National de la Statistique - INSTAT, Cellule de Planification et de Statistique Secteur SantéDéveloppement, and ICF. 2019. Mali Demographic and Health Survey 2018. Bamako, Mali: 

INSTAT/CPS/SS-DS-PF and ICF. http://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR358/FR358.pdf. 
46 

Institut National de la Statistique et de l’Analyse Économique , and ICF. 2019. République du Bénin 

Ciquième Enquête Démographique et de Santé au Bénin (Edsb-V) 2017-2018. Cotonou, Bénin: 

INSAE/Benin and ICF. http://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR350/FR350.pdf. 

International Institute for Population Sciences - IIPS/India, and ICF. 2017. India National Family Health 

Survey NFHS-4 2015-16. Mumbai, India: IIPS and ICF. 

http://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR339/FR339.pdf. 

Krishnan, S., C. H. Rocca, A. E. Hubbard, K. Subbiah, J. Edmeades, and N. S. Padian. 2010. “Do 

Changes in Spousal Employment Status Lead to Domestic Violence? Insights from a Prospective Study in 

Bangalore, India.” Social Science & Medicine 70 (1): 136-143. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.09.026. 

MacQuarrie, K. L. D., J. Edmeades, M. Steinhaus, and S. K. Head. 2015. Men and Contraception: Trends 

in Attitudes and Use. DHS Analytical Studies No. 49. Rockville, MD, USA: ICF International. 

http://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/AS49/AS49.pdf. 

Ministry of Health - MOH/Nepal, New ERA/Nepal, and ICF. 2017. Nepal Demographic and Health 

Survey 2016. Kathmandu, Nepal: MOH/Nepal, New ERA, and ICF. 

http://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR336/FR336.pdf. 

National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda, Ministry of Finance, Economic Planning/Rwanda, Ministry of 

Health/Rwanda, and ICF International. 2016. Rwanda Demographic and Health Survey 2014-15. Kigali, 

Rwanda: National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning/Rwanda, 

Ministry of Health/Rwanda, and ICF International. http://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR316/FR316.pdf. 

National Population Commission - NPC, and ICF. 2019. Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey 2018 - 

Final Report. Abuja, Nigeria: NPC and ICF. http://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR359/FR359.pdf. 

Neugarten, B. L. 1996. The Meanings of Age: Selected Papers. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago 

Press. 

Ragonese, C., T. Shand, and G. Barker. 2019. Masculine Norms and Men’s Health: Making the 

Connections. Washington, DC: Promundo-US. https://promundoglobal.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/02/Masculine-Norms-Mens-Health-Report_007_Web.pdf. 

Roy, K. 2014. “Fathering from the Long View: Framing Personal and Social Change through Life Course 

Theory.” Journal of Family Theory & Review 6 (4): 319-335. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12050. 

Rutstein, S. O., and K. Johnson. 2004. The DHS Wealth Index. DHS Comparative Reports No. 6. 

Calverton, MD: ORC Macro. https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/CR6/CR6.pdf. 

Stergiou-Kita, M., E. Mansfield, R. Bezo, A. Colantonio, E. Garritano, M. Lafrance, J. Lewko, et al. 

2015. “Danger Zone: Men, Masculinity and Occupational Health and Safety in High Risk Occupations.” 

Safety Science 80: 213-220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.07.029. 
47 

Uganda Bureau of Statistics - UBOS, and ICF. 2018. Uganda Demographic and Health Survey 2016. 

Kampala, Uganda: UBOS and ICF. http://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR333/FR333.pdf. 

49 

APPENDIX TABLES 

Appendix Table A1 Median ages at family formation events (age at first sex, age at first marriage, 

and age at birth of first child) among men age 15-44, according to current age 

Current Age 

15-19 N 20-24 N 25-29 N 30-34 N 35-39 N 35-44 N 

FIRST SEX 

Benin na 1,559 18.70 1,137 18.66 1,140 18.44 883 18.71 798 18.75 1,419 

Mali na 894 19.77 551 20.59 538 20.89 631 20.95 563 21.21 1,040 

Nigeria na 2,474 na 1,545 22.08 1,618 21.81 1,751 21.49 1,774 21.57 3,288 

Ethiopia na 2,533 na 1,969 21.79 2,030 21.06 1,585 20.99 1,375 20.95 2,592 

Rwanda na 1,281 na 999 22.54 964 22.56 932 22.55 559 22.53 1,028 

Uganda na 1,270 17.99 944 18.40 740 18.48 737 18.63 497 18.48 989 

India na 19,082 na 16,630 24.43 16,151 24.61 14,640 24.23 13,897 24.07 25,851 

Nepal na 964 na 633 20.81 522 20.54 532 20.04 516 20.24 989 

FIRST MARRIAGE 

Benin na 1,559 na 1,137 24.77 1,140 24.73 883 25.00 798 25.03 1,419 

Mali na 894 na 551 na 538 25.85 631 26.06 563 26.17 1,040 

Nigeria na 2,474 na 1,545 na 1,618 26.51 1,751 27.69 1,774 27.81 3,288 

Ethiopia na 2,533 na 1,969 24.74 2,030 23.66 1,585 23.11 1,375 23.02 2,592 

Rwanda na 1,281 na 999 na 964 25.50 932 25.23 559 25.31 1,028 

Uganda na 1,270 na 944 23.26 740 23.26 737 23.50 497 23.27 989 

India na 19,082 na 16,630 na 16,151 24.67 14,640 24.29 13,897 24.11 25,851 

Nepal na 964 na 633 23.01 522 21.71 532 20.70 516 20.97 989 

FIRST BIRTH 

Benin na 1,559 na 1,137 na 1,140 25.68 883 25.62 798 25.68 1,419 

Mali na 894 na 551 na 538 26.23 631 27.22 563 27.26 1,040 

Nigeria na 2,474 na 1,545 na 1,618 28.03 1,751 28.90 1,774 29.06 3,288 

Ethiopia na 2,533 na 1,969 na 2,030 25.78 1,585 25.52 1,375 25.62 2,592 

Rwanda na 1,281 na 999 na 964 26.30 932 26.01 559 26.43 1,028 

Uganda na 1,270 na 944 23.94 740 24.47 737 23.97 497 23.87 989 

India na 19,082 na 16,630 na 16,151 27.00 14,640 26.61 13,897 26.56 25,851 

Nepal na 964 na 633 na 522 24.22 532 23.52 516 23.76 989 

na = Omitted because less than 50% of men experienced the family formation event for the first time before reaching the beginning of the age 

group. 
50 

Appendix Table A2 Median ages at family formation events (age at first sex, age at first marriage, 

and age at birth of first child) among urban men age 15-44, according to current 

age 

Current Age 

15-19 N 20-24 N 25-29 N 30-34 N 35-39 N 35-44 N 

FIRST SEX 

Benin na 673 18.75 501 18.72 509 18.41 402 18.56 368 18.80 663 

Mali na 293 19.61 185 19.91 195 21.30 224 21.44 179 21.73 331 

Nigeria na 976 na 605 20.93 606 21.53 736 21.40 796 21.47 1,480 

Ethiopia na 703 na 662 21.77 741 21.67 513 21.52 396 21.23 730 

Rwanda na 279 na 305 22.09 305 22.59 259 22.60 149 22.74 273 

Uganda na 216 17.64 242 18.45 204 18.62 169 18.78 104 18.64 205 

India na 5,844 na 5,290 na 5,169 25.69 4,690 25.54 4,428 25.42 8,289 

Nepal na 642 na 432 21.52 342 20.85 342 19.83 345 20.39 641 

FIRST MARRIAGE 

Benin na 673 na 501 na 509 25.57 402 26.00 368 25.96 663 

Mali na 293 na 185 na 195 27.68 224 28.37 179 28.14 331 

Nigeria na 976 na 605 na 606 27.42 736 29.41 796 29.79 1,480 

Ethiopia na 703 na 662 na 741 27.02 513 28.48 396 27.83 730 

Rwanda na 279 na 305 na 305 27.72 259 29.06 149 28.41 273 

Uganda na 216 na 242 na 204 25.45 169 25.58 104 24.67 205 

India na 5,844 na 5,290 na 5,169 26.13 4,690 25.63 4,428 25.40 8,289 

Nepal na 642 na 432 23.75 342 22.22 342 20.84 345 21.44 641 

FIRST BIRTH 

Benin na 673 na 501 na 509 26.86 402 25.98 368 26.23 663 

Mali na 293 na 185 na 195 28.21 224 29.75 179 29.54 331 

Nigeria na 976 na 605 na 606 29.24 736 30.71 796 30.95 1,480 

Ethiopia na 703 na 662 na 741 29.35 513 30.29 396 29.56 730 

Rwanda na 279 na 305 na 305 27.75 259 27.93 149 28.20 273 

Uganda na 216 na 242 na 204 26.42 169 25.29 104 25.25 205 

India na 5,844 na 5,290 na 5,169 28.29 4,690 27.96 4,428 27.87 8,289 

Nepal na 642 na 432 na 342 24.49 342 23.45 345 23.86 641 

na = Omitted because less than 50% of men experienced the family formation event for the first time before reaching the beginning of the age 

group. 
51 

Appendix Table A3 Median ages at family formation events (age at first sex, age at first marriage, 

and age at birth of first child) among rural men age 15-44, according to current 

age 

Current Age 

15-19 N 20-24 N 25-29 N 30-34 N 35-39 N 35-44 N 

FIRST SEX 

Benin na 886 18.66 636 18.61 631 18.47 481 18.86 430 18.75 756 

Mali na 601 19.83 366 20.79 343 20.82 407 20.86 384 21.21 709 

Nigeria na 1,498 na 940 22.61 1,012 22.05 1,015 21.63 978 21.57 1,808 

Ethiopia na 1,830 na 1,307 21.79 1,289 20.96 1,072 20.91 979 20.95 1,862 

Rwanda na 1,002 na 694 22.67 659 22.54 673 22.54 410 22.53 755 

Uganda na 1,054 18.10 702 18.38 536 18.42 568 18.60 393 18.48 784 

India na 13,238 na 11,340 23.78 10,982 23.77 9,950 23.29 9,469 24.07 17,562 

Nepal na 322 19.37 201 19.85 180 20.08 190 20.42 171 20.24 348 

FIRST MARRIAGE 

Benin na 886 na 636 23.84 631 24.09 481 24.87 430 25.03 756 

Mali na 601 na 366 24.73 343 24.95 407 25.95 384 26.17 709 

Nigeria na 1,498 na 940 na 1,012 25.50 1,015 27.09 978 27.81 1,808 

Ethiopia na 1,830 na 1,307 23.80 1,289 22.83 1,072 23.40 979 23.02 1,862 

Rwanda na 1,002 na 694 na 659 25.05 673 25.42 410 25.31 755 

Uganda na 1,054 na 702 22.63 536 22.48 568 23.36 393 23.27 784 

India na 13,238 na 11,340 24.43 10,982 23.83 9,950 24.48 9,469 24.11 17,562 

Nepal na 322 na 201 21.38 180 20.73 190 21.12 171 20.97 348 

FIRST BIRTH 

Benin na 886 na 636 na 631 25.09 481 25.35 430 25.68 756 

Mali na 601 na 366 na 343 25.60 407 26.24 384 27.26 709 

Nigeria na 1,498 na 940 na 1,012 26.76 1,015 26.98 978 29.06 1,808 

Ethiopia na 1,830 na 1,307 na 1,289 24.89 1,072 25.11 979 25.62 1,862 

Rwanda na 1,002 na 694 na 659 26.01 673 25.60 410 26.43 755 

Uganda na 1,054 na 702 23.20 536 23.56 568 23.60 393 23.87 784 

India na 13,238 na 11,340 na 10,982 26.24 9,950 25.79 9,469 26.56 17,562 

Nepal na 322 na 201 23.83 180 23.65 190 23.74 171 23.76 348 

na = Omitted because less than 50% of men experienced the family formation event for the first time before reaching the beginning of the age 

group. 
52 

Appendix Table A4 Percentage of men age 30-34 experiencing earlier-than-typical, typical, or laterthan-typical timing of first sex, first marriage, and birth of first child, according 

to residence 

Timing

Urban Rural 

First sex 

First 

marriage 

Birth of 

first child N First sex 

First 

marriage 

Birth of 

first child N 

Benin 385 496 

Earlier 31.91 54.23 29.89 31.30 32.28 28.49 

Typical 49.99 24.18 37.20 50.52 33.77 41.32 

Later 18.10 21.60 32.92 18.18 33.95 30.19 

Mali 169 445 

Earlier 23.70 41.46 31.87 11.11 30.50 34.41 

Typical 60.98 29.60 31.76 82.27 37.11 33.33 

Later 15.32 28.94 36.37 6.62 32.39 32.26 

Nigeria 880 912 

Earlier 21.72 46.82 32.53 14.07 33.68 35.80 

Typical 59.33 23.33 21.72 73.36 32.60 28.48 

Later 18.95 29.85 45.75 12.57 33.72 35.72 

Ethiopia 374 1,261 

Earlier 32.59 43.70 29.47 11.64 34.32 31.90 

Typical 39.13 28.19 23.33 78.19 36.38 38.25 

Later 28.28 28.10 47.19 10.17 29.30 29.85 

Rwanda 201 728 

Earlier 26.12 40.59 27.78 12.40 33.00 30.94 

Typical 60.57 28.49 39.46 81.39 33.35 37.87 

Later 13.31 30.92 32.76 6.21 33.66 31.19 

Uganda 226 509 

Earlier 10.93 32.90 29.67 8.96 37.79 37.69 

Typical 80.56 36.79 38.15 80.93 29.14 30.86 

Later 8.50 30.32 32.18 10.11 33.07 31.46 

India 5,689 8,915 

Earlier 18.74 29.25 34.26 15.54 35.96 32.14 

Typical 77.10 34.63 26.40 79.54 34.13 36.37 

Later 4.17 36.12 39.34 4.92 29.92 31.49 

Nepal 350 185 

Earlier 19.99 35.92 36.90 37.18 33.62 33.22 

Typical 63.56 33.13 30.28 37.90 42.68 39.46 

 Later 16.45 30.95 32.82 24.91 23.71 27.32 
53 

Appendix Table A5 Ordering of family formation events among men age 30-34, according to 

residence 

 

Percentage 

Urban Rural 

First sex 

before 

first 

marriage N 

First 

marriage 

before 

first birth N 

First sex 

before 

first 

marriage N 

First 

marriage 

before 

first birth N 

Benin No 11.60 44 19.00 66 17.00 84 19.20 91 

Yes 88.40 338 81.00 281 83.00 408 80.80 384 

Total 382 347 492 475 

Mali No 20.00 33 22.70 34 29.80 127 19.90 84 

Yes 80.00 133 77.30 117 70.20 300 80.10 339 

Total 166 151 427 423 

Nigeria No 24.60 199 7.50 51 45.40 385 12.00 93 

Yes 75.40 610 92.50 628 54.60 463 88.00 685 

Total 809 679 848 778 

Ethiopia No 28.20 97 6.50 18 55.30 651 9.00 105 

Yes 71.80 247 93.50 265 44.70 526 91.00 1,060 

Total 344 283 1,177 1,165 

Rwanda No 31.90 60 23.30 38 53.70 367 11.20 74 

Yes 68.10 129 76.70 123 46.30 316 88.80 590 

Total 189 161 683 664 

Uganda No 19.70 43 22.90 45 26.00 129 23.40 114 

Yes 80.30 175 77.10 153 74.00 367 76.60 375 

Total 218 198 496 489 

India No 77.40 3,733 4.10 197 79.10 6,226 4.80 381 

Yes 22.60 1,092 95.90 4,579 20.90 1,642 95.20 7,592 

Total 4,825 4,776 7,868 7,973 

Nepal No 68.10 234 1.90 6 73.30 133 0.70 1 

Yes 31.90 110 98.10 333 26.70 49 99.30 177 

Total 344 339 182 178 

Note: The calculation of the percentage experiencing first sex before first marriage excludes those who have 

never had sex or been married. The calculation of the percentage experiencing first marriage before first 

birth excludes those who have never been married or fathered a child.