Indigenous fertility in Aotearoa New Zealand: How does ethnic identity affect birth spacing and timing?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The survival of Indigenous peoples in the CANZUS states of Canada, Australia, Aotearoa New Zealand, and the United States is nothing short of remarkable. Not only have Indigenous peoples thwarted colonial tropes of the vanishing native but, for decades, Indigenous population growth rates have significantly outpaced those of the dominant settler populations. The future survival of Indigenous peoples fundamentally rests on continued natural increase, and understanding the causes and consequences of fertility behaviour is critical. While total fertility rates for Indigenous women in CANZUS countries are relatively low, childbearing tends to be concentrated at younger ages in contrast to the dominant white populations. The fertility transitions of both settler and Indigenous populations in the CANZUS states are well documented, however, a significant gap remains: how cultural factors shape contemporary Indigenous fertility behaviours. Using Aotearoa as a case study, we explore the relationship between Māori cultural identity, birth timing, and the duration of birth intervals. We use the 1995 New Zealand Women: Family, Employment and Education survey data to further test the impact of cultural identity on birth transition rates using the piecewise exponential model and Kaplan-Meier estimates. We find that women who identify Mainly Māori (exclusively or primarily) are at greater risk of bearing much earlier to first birth but not necessarily subsequent births. However, because of the earlier start, Māori have a longer reproductive window to bear more children, and at higher birth orders still bear earlier than non-Māori. The empirical evidence strengthens our case to suggest that cultural orientation has some influence on Indigenous fertility and contributes to the development of Indigenous-centred theories of fertility and demography more broadly.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".