Age at marriage in Sri Lanka

This serf ;s of unreferred discussim p a p e r s is intended t o p r o v i d e an i n i t i a l c i r c u l a t i o n of work p r e p a r e d under t h e auspices of t h e ~ o ~ r ~ l a t i & r a and Human Resources Divfsion. C o m e n t s a r e t h e r e f o r e v e r y welcome, The p a p e r s should n o t b e c i t e d vith- o u t c l e a r a n c e by t h e a u t h o r . Tha views expr .-\sed a r e n o t n e c e s s a r i l y t h o s e of t h e World Bank Group, Diecusefon Paper No. 81-54 AGE AT MARRIAGE IN SRI LANU October 1981 Prepared by: a D r . N. Krishnan Namboodiri, DEDPH Consultant Prepared f o r : . RPO NO. 67:-70 - The World Bank Washington, D.C. 20433 U. S .A.  ABL TRACT (To Be Added)  TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Nunber .,. Preface.......................................................... v The D ata ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .,. ... .. 2 Analytic S t r a t e ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Trend in Age A t M a m i a g e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................... 4 Theoretical Consideration~......................................~..... 6 Results of Empirical A n a l y s e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................... 14 Preferences Regarding Age A t Marriage........ ......................... 24 F oot noe ts. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 26 R efe rec nes ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. 27 L i s t of Population and Human Resources Discussion Papers .............. LO  LIST OF TABLES . Page Number Table 1. Age of Never-Married Males and Females............... 28 Table 2. Never-Married Persons i n t h e House- h o l d Population by Age and Sex: World 9 F e r t i l i t y Survey, S r i Lanka, 17. 5.. ... ... ... ... ... .. 29 Table 3. P e r c e n t D i s t r i b u t i o n of Successive Marriage Cohorts by Age a t Marriage: 1975-1979 surveys, S r i L a nka ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . 30 Table 4. Mean and Standard Deviation of Age a t Marriage of Ever-Married Women of Age 25-49 and Married Before Reaching Age 25, by S e l e c t e d C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : S r i L&1979............... ............................ 31 2 Table 5. Incremental R A t t r i b u t a b l e t o Indi- v i d u a l Regressors ( i ) When Introduced i n t h e Regre s i o n in t h e Sequence In- dicated 1 R ) , and ( i i ) When I n t r o - duced l a 3 $ R 2 ) : hltivariate AnAlysis of Age a t ~ a r r i a g e : Ever- Married Women o f S e l e c t e d Age Groups, Married Before Reaching Age 25: S r i Lanka, 1 99 7.. .... ..... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . 33 Table 6. Parameter Estimates: M u l t i p l e Regres- s i o n Analysis of Age a t Marriage: Ever-Married Women of Selected Age Groups, Married Before Reaching Age 25: S r i Lanka, 1979 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. 34 Table 7. Incremental Attributable t o Indivi- d u a l Regressors ( i ) 'When Introduced i n The Regression i n t h e Sequence Indi- cated R ) and ( i i ) When Introduced L a s t ((4A23: Hu l t i v a r i a t e Analysis of Age k t k r r i a g e : Ever-Marriad Women of a e 25 Years o r Over and Married a t Age B e l o w 25, by Ethnic Group: S r i .................................... Table 8. ~anG, * 1979 P a r d e t e r Estimates : Multiple Re- 35 g r e s s i o n Analysis of Age A t Marriage: Ever-Married Women of Age 25 t o 49 and ~Yarrieda t Age Below 25, i n Dif- f e r e n t Ethnic Groups: S r i Lanka, 1979................ 36 I d e a l Age f o r Brides and Grooms: Ever-Married Womens' Responses: S r i Lanka, 1979 .......................................... 37 iii L i s t of Tables, Continued Page Number Table 10. M e a a Age at F i r s t Hatriage of Wives, t h e Corresponding Figure f o r Huabanda, arrd Htan f o r Brides' and Grooms' Ages Considered I d e a l by t h e W i v e s , by Selected Charac- teristics: Sri L &, 1979.......................... 38 Table U. Hean Age A t F i r s t Harriage of Wives, t h e Corresponding Figure f o r Husbands, arrd Nean Brides?, and Groom' Ages Considered I d e a l by t h e Wives, by Duration of Marriage (Below 25 Years) and Wife's Age a t Marriage: S r i Laaka, 1979.. ...................... 39  Preface This i s second i ;' a series of r e p o r t s on t h e World Bank - Department of Census and S t a t i s t i c s (Colombo) r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t on t h e determinants of f e r t i l i t y d e c l i n e in S r i Lanka. Other r e p o r t s on t h e p r o j e c t are b e i n g pre- pared by t h e Department of Censt~sand S t a t i s t i c s Colombo, and t h e World Bank s t a f f . The S r i Lanka study i s p a r t of a l a r g e r World Bank research p r o j e c t e n t i t l e d "Determinants of F e r t i l i t y Decline i n S r i Lanka and South India" (World Bank 2esearch P r o j e c t No. 671-70), co-sponscred by t h e World Bank, t h e United Nations Fund f o r Population A c t i v i t i e s (UNFPA) and t h e Government of I n d i a and S r i Lanka. The s t u d y i n S r i Lanka was c a r r i e d o u t by t h e Depart- ment of Census and S t a t i s t i c s , Government of S r i Lanka, Colombo under t h e d i r e c t i o n of W.A.A.S. P e i r i s ; D r . N.K. Namboodiriworked as a Bank c o n s u l t a n t t o t h e p r o j e c t from i t s beginning. Data f o r t h e s t u d y were c o l l e c t e d from about 4,400 households from amonc t h e 6,800 households covered i n t h e S r i Lanka World F e r t i l i t y Survey (1975). The f i e l d work w a s c a r r i e d o u t i n J u l y - September 1979. The s t u d y used t h e following schedules : Q 1. Household Schedule 2. I n d i v i d u a l Questionnaire f o r ever-married women 12-49 y e a r s - - Respondent's background and m a t e r n i t y h i s t o r y '5 i Narriage Contraceptive knowledge and use - e F v t i l i t y regulation Wtark h i s t o r y Husband ' s background - Children's employment Family assets 3. I n d i v i d u a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e f o r never-married females 25-34 y e a r s  4. Individual questionnaire f o r nevermarried males 28-34 years 5. Individual questiounalre f o r husbands 30-39 years o l d This report is based a9 the Information on a matched sample of 2,989 ever- married waman uho were Interviewed both in tha 1975 World F e r t i l i t y Suroey and the 1979 World Bank F e r t i l i t y Survey. K.C. Zachariah October 1981  AGE AT X G R U G E I N SRI ' d A K A It is w e l l known t h a t t h e t r a n s i t i o n from h i g h t o low f e r t i l i t y o c c u r r e d i n Europe i n a s s o c i a t i o n with changes i n n u p t i a l i t y p a t t e r n s (Hajnal, 1965). -. During t h e p r e t r a n s i t i o n s t a g e , t h e most . common p a t t e r n had been one of e a r l y . marriages and h i g h m a r i t a l f e r t i l i t y . L a t e m a r r i a g e s came i n t o vogue i n t h e f i f t e e n t h and s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r i e s , a s a r e s u l t of which moderate f e r t i l i t y l e v e l s of a b o u t 35 b i r t h s p e r thousand p o p u l a t i o n became common. H a r i t a l f e r t i l i t y began t o be d e l i b e r a t e l y c o n t r o l l e d on a widespread s c a l e i n any population only s i n c e t h e 1870's. F e r t i l i t y r e d u c t i o n i n t o d a y ' s l e s s developed c o u n t r i e s , wherever i t h a s I occurred on a n i m p r e s s i v e s c a l e , h a s a l s o been a s e o c i a t e d w i t h a s h i f t from e a r l y marriages t o l a t e marriages. T h i s was t r u e , f o r exampie, i n Taiwan, i n Korea, and i n West Malaysia i n t h e 1960's (Cho and Retherford, 1973) and i n S r i h n k a d u r i n g approximately t h e same p e r i o d (Fernando, 1976). D e s p i t e t h e recognized importance of s h i f t s i n n u p t i a l i t y p a t t e r n s i n t h e I causaf nexus of f e r t i l i t y d e c l i n e s , t h e s t u d y of n u p t i a l i t y a s such has n o t been g i v e n any s e r i o u s a t t e n t i o n i n f e r t i l i t y i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . The two-wave study i n S r i Lanka, on which t h i s r e p o r t i s based, is n o t a major exception t o t h i s general pattern, although t h e a t t e n t i o n given i n the-study t o f a c t o r s affectl.ng a g e a t marriage is r e l a t i v e l y g r e a t e r t h a n is u s u a l f o r f e r t i l i t y s t u d i e s . Reported below a r e t h e r e s u l t s of a p r e l i m i n a r y a n a l y s i s of t h e f a c t o r s '9 a f f e c t i n g s a g e a t marriage of women i n S r i Lanka. - A t t e n t i o n is focused p r i m a r i l y - on t h e ix&rmation c o l l e c t e d i n t h e 1979 i n t e r v i e v , although some u s e i s made of t h e d a t a from t h e 1975 i n t e r v i e v a l s o . Trends a s w e l l a s d i f f e r e n t i a l s i n age a t marriage a r e analyzed. The n e x t s e c t i o n o u t l i n e s t h e n a t u r e of t h e d a t a . This is followed by a b r i e f e x a m h a t i o n of t h 8 t r d in a g e a t marriage. The t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s behind t h e a n a l y s i s of d i f f e r e n t i a l s a r e then o u t l i n e d , f o l l o v e d by t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e r e s u l t s of t h e analyses. THE DATA I n t h a 1975 a s d l a s t h e 1979 i n t e r v i e w , t h e m a r i t a l s t a t u s of members of t h e household was a s c e r t a i n e d vhen f i l l i n g o u t t h e household schedule. This information van used in detennit'.ng t h e e l i g i b i l i c y of t h e household members f o r personal i n t e r v i e w . I n d i v i d u a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were used i n 1979 t o i n t e r v i e w =vet-married women of a g e 12 t o 49, and husbands and never-married males and females of s p e c i f i e d ages i n a random subsample of t h e sample households of t h e World F e r t i l i t y Survey, S r i Lanka, 1975. I n t h e marriage-history s e c t i o n of t h e i n d i v i d u a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e f o r ever-marr3.d women, each c u r r e n t l y married wman was asked i n 1975 and 1979 t h e month and y e a r i n vhich s h e s t a r t e d t o l i v e v i t h her husband, and a l l m e n were asked t o i+ a=?= g i v e t h e month and y e a r of t h e beginning and end of each of t h e i r previous m a r r i a g e s 'A I n a d d i t i o n , a number of q u e s t i o n s v e r e asked covering background f a c t o r s such a s r e l i g i o n , e t h n i c group, e t c . , and such a t t r i b u t e s a s t h e folloving: a ) whether t h e -woman's f i r s t marriage vas arranged by her p a r e n t s o r o t h e r relatives, a . L 5 ) whether s h e p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e l a b o r f o r c e b e f o r e her f i r s t s a r r i a g e , - - C) whether s h e vas i n school during t!~e1 2 months preceding her f i r s t marriage, d ) whether family o b l i g a t i o n s ~ i n t e r v e n e d t o a f f e c t t h e timing of her f i r s t marriage, - - e e l t h e f i n a n c i a l shape h e r hudband was i n a t t h e t i m e of t h e marriage d e c i s i o n , and f ) the p l a c e where she and her f i r s t husband l i v e d during t h e Eirst 1 2 aonchs of her marriage.  Husbands w e r e asked q u e s t i o n s p a r a l l e l t o t h o s e asked of ever-married women, w h i l e never-married men and women v e r e asked about t h e i r i n t e n t i o n of g e t t i n g married, t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l attainment, t h e i r work experience, t h + i r family obligation, etc. I n t h i s r e p o r t a t t e n t i o n is .focused on t h e information c o l l e c t e d from ever- married women ( i n c l u d i n g those re-intervieved and those intervieved f o r t h e f i r s t time i n 1979). See, hovever, Appendixes A and B. AYALYTIC STRATEGY Survey d a t a on n u p t i a l i t y can be analyzed v i t h a n emphasis on t h e percentage of persons vho remain s i n g l e o r v i t h a focus on t h e age a t marriage of those who do marry. I n t h e f i r s t approach a b i r t h cohort ( a c t u a l o r hypothetical) i s followed up, noting a t each age t h e proportion of them who remain s i n g l e (not married). From t h e s e f i g u r e s one e s t i m a t e s t h e cumulative proportion of persons who remain s i n g l e by any given age. These f i g u r e s correspond t o t h e s u r v i v a l f u n c t i o n of t h e m o r t a l i t y t a b l e . Prom t h e s u r v i v a l f u n c t i o n , a n m b e r of summary measures can be c a l c u l a t e d , an example being t h e median age, o r rhe age by which 50 percent of t h e s t a r t i n g cohort e n t e r ever-married s t a t e . The technique of l i f e t a b l e a n a l y s i s w i t h c o v a r i a t e s can be applied t o examine t h e impacts of v a r i o u s demographic, s o c i a l , and economic f a c t o r s on t h e s u r v i v a l function. , I n t h i s r e p o r t w e s h a l l be using a d i f f e r e n t approach, however, which fccuses on t h e age a t marriage of t h e ever-married persons. Before examinigg t h e d a t a from t h e '4 survey, i t may be u s e f u l t o revie* some d a t a from Bources atlfer than t h e survey, - - t o get 9 I idea about t h e trend i n age a t marriage in S r i ~ a & . t h e following s e c t i o n . - This w e do i n  TBEBlO IN AGE AT HAR9fAGE & a l r e a d y mentioned, t h e mean a g e a t marriage has ahova a dramatic i n c r e a s e in r e c e n t y e a r s in S r i Lank. Some o f t h e d e t a i l s of t h i s deve10per;r a r e revieved in t h i s e e c t i o a . Table 1 p r e s e n t s t h e changes o v e r t h e period 1946 t o 1975 i n t h e p r o p e n s i t y t o r a i n s i n g l e up t o given a g e s f o r males and fcmales. The changes d u r i n g the p e r i o d have been much more dranratic f o r feumles t h a n f o r males. Thus t h e percentage of females never married in t h e a g e group 20 t o 24 s t e a d i l y increased from 29.4 t o 60.6 o v e r t h e period (1946 t o 1975). \:rue no such d r a s t i c change has occurred in t h c case of males in any a g e group. The sin,?rlate mean a g e a t - t r i a g e c a l c u l a t e d from t h e percent of males and females s i n g l e ;x s u c c e s s i v e a g e groups shov t h e followtug p a t t e r n : 1946 1953 1963 1971 1975 Females 20.7 20.8 22.1 23.6 24.8 Males 26.8 27.0 28.0 27.9 28.5 I n c r c l a a i n t h e f i g u r e s f o r females is in sharp c o n t r a s t d t h The c o ~ i s t e n t t h e a h e t constancy o f t h e f i g u r e s for males. A consequence of t h i a time :rend of t h e gap between t h e mean a g e s of t h e mean age z 2 m a r x i a g e hag been a ~ r r o v i n g of t h e b r i d e and t h e groom. Assuming t h a t t h e male age a t marriage v i l l cont&ue t o remain more o r less t h e same, on t h e average, a s i t h a s been over t h e p a s t s e v e r a l decades, and - i given t h e universal p r e f e r e n c e f o r t h e brldeproum's a g e t o b e higher than t h a t -3 & of t h e b r i d e , i t seems u n l i k e l y t h a t - t h e female age a t marriage w i l l b e pushed d * up m c h f u r t h e r . Other a n a l y s t s havb come t o a d i f f e r e n t j r e d i c t i o n , hovever. - * - Thus Fernando (1976) b e l i e v e s t h a t a f u r t h e r dramatic i n c r e a s e i n female a= . I a t a a r r i a g e is i n t h e o f f i n g . Feraando's p r e d i c t i o n i s based on an e v a l u a t i o n of t r e n d s i n age-sex r a t i o s of t h e form Y / F uhaze t h e denominator s t a n d s n'x+t n x'  f o r t h e number of females i n t h e age group x t o rCn and t h e numerator far t h e males i n t h e age group x+t t o x+t+n. To a p p r e c i a t e t h e problfm 2n us- such r a t i o s t o s p e c u l a t e about t h e age a t marriage, l e t u s e x a x b e t h e a g e d i s t r l b u cf males and females never married a s of 1975 (Table 2). The f i g u r e s i n Table 2 show more never-married males than n e w e r - m r r i e d f (15,543 versus 13,835). i n d i c a t i n g t h a t in a n open marriage m a r k t t h e r e is no s h o r t a g e of malee. I f a t t e n t i o n i s confined t o persons of age L 5 ye- and 01 t h e p i c t u r e is n o t any d i f f e r e n t (6,660 males f o r 5,048 females), Hcmewcr. If no female of age x is v i l l i n g t o marry a male of age less than x95, thien t h e r e a s h o r t a g e of males: Table 2 showe only 3,908 malee of age 20 arsd o l d e r a g a i n 5,048 females of age 1 5 and o l d e r , f o r example. The r e s t r l c t l o a . t h a t : he bridegroom must be a t least 5 y e a r s o l d e r than t h e b r i d e implies them t h a t 1 .1 the never-married f e n a l e s of age 1 5 and o l d e r ( a s of 1975) v i l l have Ira remain l;fe-time s p i n s t e r s , u n l e s s non-monogamous marriages become p o p u b r . Tbling a non-monogamous marriages, a usual demographic response t o t h e s i t u a t f c m just describzd i s t o r e l a x t h e r e s t r i c t i o n concerni.ng t h e age gap between c&e Srfde and t h e groom. Thus i f s l i g h t l y over a f i f t h of t h e 5,048 females o f age 15 a o l d e r a r e w i l l i n g t o marry males who a r e s e n i o r t o them by less than f5we year t h e market could accommodate a l l females. It should be emp. ..iized t h e s u c h , t r e l a x a t i o n does not n g c e s s a r i l y imply an upturn o r downturn of mean a&= at marriage. Thus a woman who is c u r r e n t l y of age 15 may marry z c u r r e n t l y of age 18, n o t now but four y e a r s from now. - w b is The po.._t a e m is that sex imbalance of t h e kind implied i n a g e s e x r a t i o s of t h e form - mXx+tfaFxdoe: I . n o t by i t s e l f imply an upward push o r downward p u l l l p f t h e mean age at xmarriaf u n l e s s i t a f f e c t s t h e propensity t o remain l i f e - t i m e s p i n s t e r s ( b a c h e l o r s ) . There is no i n d i c a t i o n t h a t any d r a s t i c change has occurred i n S d L b over t h e r e c e n t decades i n t h o propensity of females t o remain s p i n ~ t e r aunePT t h e end of t h e reproductive age span (examine t h e tzend i n t h e percerat of females never married i n t h e age groups 40 t c 44 and 45 t o 4 9 i n Table 1). SQ the agc  6 ratio. of t h e form nH*t/nPx are not r e l i a b l e i n d i c a t o r s of f u t u r e tread. I n age a t marriage. ,'he r'xlevant f a c t s w e know then a r e (a) t h e average age a t marriage of f a n a l e s has been r i s i n g f o r some time nov. (b) t h e average age a t marriage bf males has remained more os less constant f o r the p a s t s e v e r a l decades, (c) only a very s m a l l - percentage of females remain s p h s t e r s beyond age 50. From these one may s p e c u l a t e - t h e folloving: (a) The average age of t h e bridegroom is unlikely t o increase 1. dramatically i n t h e coling years. (b) Unless a d r a s t i c r w i s i o n occurs i n t h e preference regarding t h e gap between t h e ages of t h e b r i d e and the groom, t h e near-constancy i n t h e man age of the groom is Likely t o block f u r t h e r sharp increase i n t h e mean age of t h e bride. (c) Any more upward s h i f t t h a t might 1 occur i n t h e mean age of t h e b r i d e 13 t h e r e f o r e l e s s l i k e l y t o r e s u l t from disproportionately more vomen ma&:yins a t advanced ages than f tom d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e ~ y fever wmen marryhg a t very young ( l e s s than 16) ages. I f these speculations t u r n out t o be true, then t h e f e r t i l i t y impact of f u t u r e changea in n u p t i a l i t y p a t t e r n is l i k e l y t o be r a t h e r modeat. Tha data collected in t h e 1379 sutvay do shed some l i g h t on ti.e speculations ,4* 7 1 * - j u s t mentioned. But before examining t h e data i t may be u s e f u l to a e e d - m some of t h e :heoretical considerations vhich guided the c o l l e c t i o n of the data. 1 THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS I P When analyzing t h e t h h g of marriage i t has become fashionable to s t a r t uLth 1 t h e cotiou t h a t persons marry vhen t h e u t i l i t y expected from marriage exceeds - . . F- t h a t expected from r&ining s i n g l e (Beck .er, 1974). A s l i g h t l y technical r e n d i c i o a L of t h i s idea follovs, - * Assume t h a t consumers combine goods and aervices bought i n the market v i t h non-aarket time and o t h e r resources (e.g., approval by relevant others) t o produce various commodities f o r consunption. An example of such a comodity is one's standing i n one's community. The produl ion and consumption of such cormnodit i e s . 9 shape one's l i f e s t y i e .  Now a s m e t h a t each person h a s a ut?',ity f u n c t i o n of t h e form u (zl, ..., zn), where z * a a r e c v a e s d t t i e s of t h e kind j u s t mentioned, and t h a t each commodity 1 h a s a s s o c i a t e d viLh Cc a production f u n c t i o n which s i v e s t h e q u a n t i t y of t h e commodity t h a t c a n be produced w i t h given market goods and s e r v i c e s and non-market time and resources. While each member of a family has h i s (her) own u t i l i t y f u n c t i o n , seldom do t h e family members c a r r y o u t t h e i r l i v e s a s independent individuals. They work o u t among themselves a system of t r a n s f e r of r e s o u r c e s so t h a t t h e f o r t u n e 9 and misfortunes of each member is shared v i t h each other. Thi:~makes i t p o s s i b l e t o Imagine t h a t t h e family a c t s a s a s i n g l e u n i t and t h a t , a s an abstraction, the u t i l i t y function =P t h e family head may be taken a s a f a m i l y u t i l i t y function. The behavior of t h e family can then be studied i n terns of t h e head*s u t i l i t y f u n c t i o n , t h e corresponding produc t l o n functions, and t h e a s s o c i a t e d resource t . ~ n s t r a i n t s . A postu;ate i s now added s t a t i n g t h a t t h e family head chooses t h a t l i f e s t y l e , i.e., t h e production and consumption of t h a t stream of commodity bundles, which g i v e s maximum expected u t i l i t y v i t h i n t h e c o n s t r a i n t s of t h e a v a i l a b l e resources. With r i s k - n e u t r # d i t y t h i s behavioral c r i t e r i o n s i m p l i f i e s t o t h e maximization of t h e p r e s e n t v a l u e of t h e stream of commodities expected t o be consumed over time- %e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h i s idea t o t h e timing of marriage is i l l u s t r a t e d i n Figure l u The curve S c o r r e e p o ~ d st o t h e l i f e plan accordihg t o which t h e family head's d a u g t t ~ r(focusing o n one daughter f o r the moment) remains a l i f e t i m e s p i n s t e r ; t h e o t h e r curve corresponds t o a l i f e plan which i n c l u d e s 'i L marrying her o f f a t time t. The curve H is-below t h e curve S u n t i l time t , t .. because according t o t h e l i f e plan. c o r r e s p o ~ i n gt o M l e s s consumption and more saving i s c a l l e d f o r u n t i l t h e daughter i s married o f f . The curve M i s shown above aCtcr t S because through t h e marriage a l l i a n c e t h e family g a i n s much more than the a c o s t s i t has t o b e a r in b r h g i n g about t h e marriage, and a l s o becduse t h e continued presence of an u m a r r i e d daughter of marriageable age a t home is a cause of embarrassment, t h e avoidance of v h i c h c e r t a i n l y is comforting. Keeping i n t h e background t h e g e n e r a l i d e a s o u t l i n e d above a n a t t e m p t nov be made t o i d e n t i f y a number of f a c t o r s each of vhich has a p o t e n t i a l bead- .n t h e timing of marriage of t h e family head's daughter (son). I t i s important t o recognize a t t h e o u t s e t t h a t i n Asian c o u n t r i e s , arraPgedl marriages a r e t h e r u l e r a t h e r than t h e exception. This does not mean t h a t the p r i n c i p a l s ( t h e p r o s p e c t i v e b r i d e and groom) a r e given no say i n mate s e l e s t r f a a o r o t h e r matters. In f a c t , novadays v i r t u a l l y no family vill f i n a l i z e a - f o r a daughter (son) v i t h o u t c o n s u l t i n g h e r (him). It is a l s o t r u e t h a t t h e p r i n c i p a l s a r e i n c r e a s i n g l y demanding and r e c e i v i n g more eay i n mate s e l e c t i o z c and r e l a t e d matters. Furthermore, 'love' marriages ( a s opposed t o arranged marriages) a r e becoming s l i g h t l y more common than in t h e past. Despite a l l tAeJz developments, t h e family c o n t i n u e s t o be a t t h e c e n t e r of t h e s t a g e i n e v e r y scene, and t h e s e n i o r members of t h e family, p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e head and h i s ( h e 3 spouse, make a l l t h e important d e c i s i o n s a f f e c t i n g t h e l i v e s of t h e family faembers- The c r u c i a l r o l e of t h e fdilyi n marriage n e g o t i a t i o n s can be appreciated1 fE %.t is r e a l i z e d t h a t when a g i r l (boy) i s married o f f what takes place i s tranmdemrSxxg one person from t h e family of o r i g i n t o another e x i s t i n ~family, r a t h e r t h s a t h e c r e a t i o n of a nw family u n i t a s is u s u a l l y t h e c a s e i n t h e West. The c e n t r a l i t y of t h e w i l y i n marriage n e g o t i a t i o n s a n h i n t h e post-raarSszsX l i f e of the couple makes i t mandatory t h a t when one searches f o r f a c t o r s z f f ~ t h e timing of marriage, t h e cost-benef i t implications of each . f a c t o r f o r t h e family and i t s members be kept i n mind. p We now examine a number of s p e c i f i c f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g t h e timing of mrprt-, 1. The f i r s t f a c t o r we s h a l l consider i s t h e marriage market i t s e l f . kih&kr t h e p r e v a i l i n g market o f f e r s a s u i t a b l e match f o r t h e i n d i v i d u a l involved is obviously a c r u c i a l f a c t o r a f f e c t i n g t h e p r o b a b i l i t y and timing of marriage- Ssmw  t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of a a u i t a b l e match i s a f u n c t i o n of vhat t h e searcher is h k & q g 1 for. Commonly t h e g i r l ' s family l o o k s f o r a boy who is of t h e proper exog-s and endogamous2 group and whose family i s one of good standing. A s f o r pe-l _- a t t r i b u t e s , t h e g i r l ' s family loolQfor such t h i n g s a s t h e means t o s u p p o r t a - new w i f e and c h i l d r e n (when they a r e born); an educated g i r l ' s family p r e f e r s a m educated boy t o be h e r husband; and s o on. The boy's family looks f o r cour~rtierrgaprr a t t r i b u t e s i n t h e g i r l and .her demeanor, h e a l t h , looks, e t c . It is n o t un-l -. a t f i r s t , t o be lo- t o keep t h e a c c e p t a h l a l e v e l of v a r i o u s a t t r i b u t e s high i f t h e market c o n d i t i o n s demand it. Also i t i.-n o t unusual f o r each searckx t o be f l e x i b l e enough t o accept l i m i t e d inadequacies i n c e r t a i n r e s p e c t s , provided t h a t they a r e compensated f o r by better-than-adequate r a t i n g s ia atfsrz r e s p e c t s ; f o r example a lw level of education might b e compensated f o r by e l a r g e dowry. The mutually s a t i s f a c t o r y outcome of any marriage n e g o t i a t i o n is of c - t h a t both f a m i l i e s ( t h e g i r l ' s and t h e boy's) should f e e l t h a t they have ga&amd, I n r e f e r e n c e t o Fig. 1, t h e H curve should be perceived a s going above t h e S curve by both f a m i l i e s . This i s n o t a s i m p r a c t i c a l a s might appear a t f i r e blush. Thus i f one family has wealth b u t low s t a t u s i n t h e c a s t e , an a l l i a s w m w i t h another which needs t h e wealth and can impart higher s t a t u s could u s u a U y make both £ a u k l i e s f e e l t h a t they a r e b & t e r o f f w i t h t h e a l l i a n c e t h a n w i h t W, Whether one g e t s what one wants from t h e marriage n e g a t i a t i o n s i s them a - - f u n c t i o n of t h e d i l i g e n c e with which one makes t h e search and t h e a d e p t n e s s dzh '8 - which one c a r r i e s o u t t h e n e g o t i a t i o n s (playfng up t h e s t r e n g t h s and psayfrrg d E awm the d e f i c i e n c i e s , and s o on). The f a c t t h a t n e a r l y everyone g e t s marrAed lras t o i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e market i s workfng. But t h e e m p i r i c a l question r e m a i n s *char t h e r e i s any d i s c e r n i b l e tendmcy among any population groups t o hold on te, u n r e a l i s t i c s t a n d a r d s with r e s p e c t t o s o c i a l , economic, o r demographic a t t r E b a t e s  of a prospective b r i d e o r groom and vhether such unrealistic p o s i t i o n s a f f m tBe p r o b a b i l i t y o r timing of marriage. 2. The secoad f a c t o r v e shall consider i a r e l a t e d t o t h e r o l e of t h e payments. Providing a m i t a b l e dowry t o a marriageable daughter is commonly a . d i f f i c u l t problem.' Even so v i r t u a l l y no family skfmps on t h e dovrp f o r f e a r i f i t does so t h e f u t u r e of an own c h i l d might b e i n jeopardy. Although n o hard d a t a e x i s t , i t is ganerally believed t h a t f a r many generations t h e do- payments have wiped out in many cases t h a family savings, forced many famil%- t o sell o r mortgage p a r t o r d o l e of t h e family land holdings, and pushed manp a family t o t h e b r i n k of bankruptcy. Y e t t h e p r a c t i c e goes on, a&.today i t is not uncommon f o r upper-class f a m i l i e s t o d d , i n return for a w e l l - educated, well-placed bridegrom, s t e e p cash payments, supplemented w i t h go%B a d jewelry and consumer durables such a s r e f r i g e r a t o r s and automobiles. Lower-dasm f a m i l i e s also expect cash payments and consumer d u r a b l e s though not a e expelmsfve a s t h e ones demanded by upper-class families. Anyone who reads t h e m a t r i m o d a Z advertisements in t h e l o c a l newspapers in S r i Lanka g e t s t h e -istakable . impression t h a t t h e p r a c t i c e of dowry papment is a l i v e and thriving. The empirical question of course is whether dowry-related problems a f f e c t t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o r timing of marriage. P 3. The next f a c t o r worth c o n s i d e r i n i is p r e t e q u i s i t e s , i f any, ;hat t h e p r i n c i p a l s p r e s c r i b e and t h e i r p o s s i b l e e f f e c t on t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o r timing af - marriage. - As a l r e a d y mendoned t h e p r i n c i p a l s a r e nowadays demanding and are L receiving more say - i n nattgrs r e l a t e d t o mate s e l e c t i o n . I t i a conceivable W t h e same a p p l i e s t o t h e t a n g of marriage. a The g r e a t e r independeacc and - of t h e younger generation implied by t h e s e developments say t r a n s l a t e t h e m s d w e s i n t o t h e 3 r i n c i p a l s s e t t i n g p r e s o n d i t i o n s f o r t h e i r marriage. Thus a g i r l mi* 3 s e t a s a p r e c o n d i t i o n f o r h e r m a r r i a g e t h e arrangement of a neolocal r e s i d e n c e f o r h e r t o m o v e i n t o a f t e r marriage. A boy, who works i n a d i s t a n t town, migho i n s ~ s t h a t h i s marriage be postponed u n t i l h e f i n d s a s u i t a b l e p l a c e of r e s i d e c n e a r h i s work c i t e s o t h a t h e and h i s wife could l i v e t o g e t h e r a f t e r m a r r i a g e r a t h e r than be separated.4 Other p r e c o n d i t i o n s might i n c l u d e such t h i n g s a s t h e completion of h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n o r t h e s e c u r i n g of a s u i t a b l e job. The p o i n t i s t h a t honoring such c o n d i t i o n s o f t e n means d e l a y i n g t h e timing of t h e marriage. Not honoring them, on t h e o t h e r hand, e n t a i l c e r t a i n e o c i a l c o a t s , Thus i f a d a u g h t e r ' s marriage is arranged i g n o r i n g h e r l e g i t i m a t e r e q u e s t s , t h e r e s u l t may b e f o r h e r a n M-curve ( s e e Fig. 1 ) v h i c h l i e s below t h e S-curve, v h i c h i s n o t d e s i r a b l e from any body*^ p o i n t s of viev. The e m p i r i c a l q u e s t i o n is t o v h a t e x t e n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n s such as t h e o n e s mentioned above are given importance i n connection w i t h t h e timing of marrialper and t h e d e g r e e t o v h i c h such c o n s i d e r a t i o n s a f f e c t t h e d e c i s i o n . 4. Next ve c o n s i d e r t h e s o c i a l c o s t of n o t marrying o f f a daughter (sea), The presence i n t h e household of a g i r l of m a r r i a g e a b l e age, unwed and unspaken f o r , is embarraaing, t o say t h e l e a s t , to t h e members of t h e household, b e c a u s e s most l i k e l y t o be i n t e r p r e t e d by t k h e r continued p r e s e n c e i n t h e household : L . I r e l e v a n t o t h e r s a s i n d i c a t i v e of f a i l u r e on t h e p a r t of t h e family i n i t s d u t y o r of some s e r i o u s d e f e c t s a f f l i c t i n g t h e g i r l . - Such a n image e n t a i l s a v e r y - high s o c i a l c o s t t o t h e family and t h e g i r l . No won+r therefore the family 3 s finder tranendous p r e s s u r e t o marry h e r off as soon a 9 s h e reaches m a r r i a g e a b l e 8 * dge, u n l e s s t h e r e is some d e f e n s i b l e r e a s o n f o r p u t t i n g o f f t h e marriage.  l.2 me way some farailiea handle t h e situation is t o have t h e g i r l continue i n school when marriage negotiation8 a r e underway, o r , if she has f i n i s h e d schooling, have h e r j o i n t h e l a b o r force. Both t h e s e s t r a t e g i c 8 a r e bound t o w i n s o c i a l approval, given t h e importance t h e s o c i e t y novadays a t t a c h e s t o h t g t l s r - education and w r k p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Those who u s e continued education a s a stop-gap arrangement a r e 1 i W . y ta, discontinue schooling whca t h e d a t e of marrtage nears. The chances a r e t h a t h euch c a s e s t h e age a t marriage is l o v e r than uaral. Those who pursue higher education t o r t h e purpose o t L m n - c a p i t a l development o r p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e l a b o r f o r c e f o r t h e purpose of c a r e e r development a r e l i k e l y t o be s e l f selecced in r e s p e c t t o independence and autonomy and a r e l i k e l y t o be prone t o seek i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c reward8 f o r themselves. Such i n d i v i d u a l s a r e l i k e l y t o marry relatively late, a d 30 are those who seek such persons a s t h e i r spouses. I P a r e n t h e t i c a l l y t w o p o i n t s a r e w r t h noting i n t h i s connection: (a) a f l l y I might f i n d it advantageous t o d e l a y t h e marriage of a w r k i n g daughter, b e c a u s e s h e is an a s s e t t o t h e family r a t h e r the- a l i a b i l i t y . Also t h e ready-cash p e of t h e dovry required t o marry o f f an educated, working female is r e l a t i v e l y Ear, since her life-time income is counted as p a r t of t h e dowry. Thus t h e u s u a l I family has an i n c e n t i v e t o encourage female education and pre-marital female ' labor-force p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and both tend t o defay marriage. (b) The second p & a t t o be noted is t h a t female education might a f f e c t t h e t h i n g of marriage t h r o q g h - i t s e f f e c t on t h e marriage market. I f t h e r e a r e a good many e l i g i b l e b a c h e l o r s *g I i n t h e marriage market, educat_ion can be an a s s e t t o a marriageable female; - - 6 but i f educated, e l i g i b l e bac@lors are scarce, i t may be d i f f i c u l t t o f i n d a I . s u i t a b l e match f o r an educated fanale. I n other words, sumetiines t h e r e is t h e danger of educating oneself beyond o n e ' s marriage bracket.  5. The next f a c t o r t o be mentioned is t h e s o c i a l context of t h e family. The s o c i a l c o s t of not -trying o f f a daughter (son) is no doubt a f u n c t i o n of t h e c u l t u r a l groups i n which t h e family holds membership. Norms regarding t h e ' .- timing of marriage and t h e s a n c t i o n s f o r d e v i a t i n g from t h e norms a r e a l s o group specific. Furthermore, t h e p r a c t i c e of giving dowry, t h e customs regarding post- m a r i t a l residence, e t c . , a l e 0 v a r y from one subgroup (e.g. e t h n i c group) t o another . 6. F i n a l l y t h e s t r u c t u r e of t h e family u n i t i t s e l f may have i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h e timing of marriape of a family member. The more c h i l d r e n a f a m i l y has, t h e g r e a t e r t h e l i k e l i h o o d that some of t h e c h i l d r e n v i l l marry l a t e . This is p r i m a r i l y because each has t o wait f o r h i e (her) t u r n i n terms of s e n i o r i t y , p a r t i c u l a r l y among females. Also i t is conceivable t h a t an older s i b l i n g may postpone h i s (her) marriage i f h e (she) f e e l s o b l i g a t e d t o help younger b r o t h e r s o r s i s t e r s and b e l i e v e s that g e t t i n g married might s t a n d i n t h e way of meeting those obligations. The f a c t o r s i d e n t i f i e d above a r e l i s t e d below f o r easy reference. (a) P r e f e r r e d a t t r i b u t e s of t h e spouse, and t h e implications thereof with r e s p e c t t o f i n d i n g a s u i t a b l e match. Cb) Problems r e l a t e d t o dowry payment. I rn P (c) Problems r e l a t e d t o meeting requirements such a s t h e arrangement of a n e o l o c a l r e s i d e n c e f o r t h e newlyweds. (d) Education a s a s t o p g a p arrangement, o r f o r human c a p i t a l development. (e) Work p a r t i c i p a t i o n before marriage. - w C (f) Religious a f f i l i a t i o n and e t h n i c group i d e n t i f i c a t i o e , Family s t r u c t u r e , p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e number of b r o t h e r s and s i s t e r s . Family o b l i g a t i o n s .  A l l but t h e f i r s t f a c t o r lLBted above are given a t t e n t i o n in t h e a n a l y s i s r e p o r t e d i n t h e n e x t section. Data p e r t a i n i n g t o F a c t o r (a) vere c o l l e c t e d o n l y frjm never-married males and f e n a l e s . The results of t h e a n a l y s i s of t h a t d a t a are shown . i n t h e ap-dix. -'. RESULTS 08 EMPIRICAL ANALYSES The main focua of t h i s s e c t i o n is on t h e a n a l y s i s of d i f f e r e n t i a l s i n a g e a t marriage. But f i r s t ve b r i e f l y examine t h e t r e n d s revealed by t h e d a t a on hand, - 'Trends. vith D e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t samples s e l e c t e d f o r f e r t i l i t y s u ~ x e y s - the u s u a l e l i g i b i l i t y r e s t r i c t i o n s (e.g., ever married and of a g e 1 2 t o 50) s u f f e r f r m t r u n c a t i o n b i a s w i t h r e s p e c t t o a g e a t marriage, one can g e t a rough i d e a about r e c e n t changes in t h e a g e p a t t e r n of marriage by comparing t h e percent d i s t r i b u t i o n s by a g e a t marriage of r e c e n t marriage c o h o r t s (Table 3). 5 The c o e f f i c i e n t of d i s s i m i l a r i t y betveen t h e d i s t r S b u t i o n s of urmen vho v e r e married v i t h i n f i v e y e a r s of and f i v e t o t e n y e a r s b e f o r e t h e 1975 survey is 15.70, t h e corresponding f i g u r e comparing vamen vho were married f i v e t o ten y e a r s b e f o r e t h e 1975 suntey v i t h t h o e e who vere married t e n t o f f f t e e n y e a r s b e f o r e t h e survey is 11.07. These f i g u r e s i n d i c a t e a tendency f o r t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of a a r r i a g e s by a g e a t marriage t o become i n c r e a s i n g l y d i s s i m i l a r . The 1979 d a t a , however, show a r e v e r s a l of t h i s tendency. The c o e f f i c i e n t of d i s s i m i l a r i t y between t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s of t h o s e vho were married f i v e t o t e n y e a r s sod t e n t o f i f t e G y e a r s b e f o r e t h e 1979 survey is 16.00 (which is of t h e same o r d e r of I '- - a a g n i t u d e >s 15.70, t h e c o e f f i c i e n t of d i s s i m i l a r i t y between tF.e d i s t r i b u t i o n s * - of t h o s e rdp were married w i t h i n f i v e yeare of and f i v e : o ten years before t h e w I 1975 survey). The comparison of t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s of t h o s e vho v e r e married f i v e y e a r s of and betveen f i v e and t e n y e h r s b e f o r e t h e 1979 survey, -~ithin however, g i v e s a c o e f f i c i e n t of d i s s i m i l a r i t y of only 3.00.  There i s t h u s some i n d i c a t i o n that t h e tendency f o r t h e age p a t t e r n of marriage t o change has sloved down. Has any s o c i a l o r demographic grout p a r t i c i p a t e d morn than o t h e r s i n t h i s development? The a n a l y s i s of t h e differentials . x t e d belov shed some l i g h t on t h i s question. Differentiai . Table 4 shows t h e v a r i a t i o n of mean age a t marriage by each of a numb.er of s e l e c t e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , taken one a t a time. Women of a g e 25 t o 49 y e a r s and those of age 25 t o 29 a r e s e p a r a t e l y considered in T a b l e 4. I n both groups o n l y t h o s e who were f i r s t married b e f o r e age 25 a r e included. This l a s t r e s t r i c t i o n and t h e minimum a g e r e s t r i c t i o n together make t h e s t a t i s t i c a l r i s k of f i r s t marriage t h e same f o r t h e m e n compared. The differences i n the p a t t e r n s f o r t h e two age groups i n d i c a t e r e c e n t changes. The h i g h l i g h t s of t h e p a t t e r n s d i s c e r n i b l e in Table 4 include t h e f o l l o v i n g : 1. The mean age a t marriage is about t h e same f o r m e n i n t h e age groups 35 t o 39, 40 t o 4 4 , and 45 t o 4 9 . But t h e mean 2s higher f o r women of a g e 30 t o 34, and s t i l l higher f o r m e n of age 25 t o 2 9 . This r e f l e c t s t h e continued i n c r e a s e i n t h e mean age a t marriage over time, 2. The. d i f f e r e n t i a l s by p r e m a r i t a l work experience shows t h a t w r k p a r t i c i p a t i o n and delayed marriage a r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each o t h e r . This a s s o c i a t i o n warn n o t observed i n t h e lq75 d a t a ( s e e GCFS P L r s t II Report, p. 63) . - A p o s i t i v e a s s o c i a t i o n is d i s c e r n i b l e between education and t h e J ' age a t marriage. - The r e l a M o n s h i p i s c l e a r l y non-linear f o r t h e younger cohort, a n o u t c o n e a f E - dramatic i n c r e a s e in t h e mean a g e I a t marriage of t h e u n e d u c a t d . A s a l r e a d y mentioned, education may a f f e c t t h e age a t marriage i n v a r i o u s ways, and i t may very w e l l be t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e two v a r i a b l e s run3 i n both d i r e c t i o n s , t h e t h i n g of marriage a f f e c t i n g t h e e d u c a t i o n a l a t t a i n m e n t f o r some women and t h e l a t t e r a f f e c t i n g t h e former f o r others.  f n t h e 1979 s u r ~ e yr w p o d e ~ t s v e r e asked whether they were e n r o l l e d in school any time during t h e 1 2 m o n t h preceding t h e i r vedding. Among wctmcn of age 25 t o 49 years, those vho s a i d they v e r e have an average age a t marriage of 18.6 years, vhereas those vho s a i d - they were n o t have an average age of 17.9 years. The p a t t e r n is I r w e r s e d , however, f o r m e n of age 25 t o 29 years. Of course, f o r some vomen who s t a y in school till marriage, school enrollment is a s t o p g a p arrangement v h i l e marriage n e g o t i a t i o n s Jre undetuay- a f o r o t h e r s t h e timing of marriage may be adjusted t o t h e attairnnemt I of a pre-planned lwel of education (e.g., graduation from c o l l e g e ) , 1 I I I t is p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e age a t marriage is lower on t h e average f o r t h e fc?=mer group than f o r t h e l a t t e r . But t h e a v a i l a b l e d a t a do not permit separating t h e two groups. 4. Religious d i f f e r e n t i a l s s h w t h a t Budhists a d Christians have t h e highest, and Phrslims t h e l o v e s t mean age a t marriage. The ethnic- group d i f f e r e n t i a l s p a r a l l e l t h e r e l i g i o u s a i f f e r e n t i a l s . 5- Arranged marrqbges tend t o occur a t a r e l a t i v e l y younger age than do_!lovef marriages. The d i f f e r e n c e is not clear-cut in t h e younger age group, however. e P a r t of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p observed may be . . a t t r i b u t a b l e t o a common antecedent, ramely, education. If t h i s is t h e case, when education i s taken i n t o account t h e rel_ationship - betveen t h e mode of mate s e l e c t i o n and t h e age a t marpiage zmy d i f f a *om what Table 4 r e v e a l s i t t o be. - * 6. Respondents d o reported * * l o v e f marriages were asked wRether p a r e n t s o r other r e l a t i v e s took a y s t e p s i n arranging u a r r i a g e f o r t h e ~~ respondents. The aean age a t marriage f o r those vho said 'yesf and 'no' a r e 19.0 and 18.4 r e s p e c t i v e l y f o r those of age 25 t o 49 - and 19.8 and 1 8 - 5 r e s p e c t i v e l y f o r those of age 25 to 29. This  p a t t e r n is c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e notion t h a t some m a n t a k a ma,tters i n t o t h e i r own haode a f t e r v a i t i n g f o r a time f o r t h e i r p a r e n t s to) a r r a n g e marriage f o r than. - 7. Respondents vho r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e i r r e l a t i v e s v e r e involved i n o n e way o r another i n a r r a n g i n g marriage v e r e asked vhether tvo o r more proposals v e r e considered. Not s u p r i s i n g l y , t h e mean age a t marrhge of t h o s e vho s a i d 'yes' is higher than that of those who s a i d 'no' (18.8 y e a r s v e r t u s 17.6 y e a r s f o r m e n of age 25 t o 49, and 19.4 v e r s u s 18.5 f o r women of a g e 25 t o 29). 8. Those vho s a i d t h a t twa o r more proposals v e r e considered w e r e a s k e d v h e t h e r any proposal was dropped because of dowry-related problems, Those vho answered 'yes' do n o t d i f f e r from t h e rest lespect ~ r r ta mean a g e a t marriage, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e r e i s ~ r o b a b l yno dovry effecz on t h e a g e a t marriage. 9. I n an e f f o r t t o test vhether problems of f i n d i n g a s u i t a b l e n e c l o d p l a c e o f residence a f f e c t t h e age a t marriage, respondents v e r e asked where they r e s i d e d du-ing t h e f i r s t 1 2 months a f t e r t h e i r a a r r i a g a f t was assumed t h a t find%-- a neolocal r e s i d e n c e is probably c i i f f W P : and that consequently t h o s e who succeeded *in having such a r e s i d e m t i d arrangement might have had t o postpone t h e i r marriage. The f i g u r e s i n Tabl? 4, hovever, do n o t bear t h i s hypot esis out. [Women who - r e p o r t e d n e o l c c a l r e s i d e n c e v e r e asked vhether t h e i r marriage v a s . delayed because of any pgoblems i n f i n d i n g a s u i t a b l e residence. Those vho answered t h e question in t h e negative do n o t d i f f e r from t h o s e who s a i d 'yes' Fn mean age a t marriage.] 10. There Ls a sl.'.ght tendency f o r t h e f i n a n c i a l s e c u r i t y c f t h e grocnti-- whether h e bad a regular source of fn&e a t t h e time of rn&rlagc decision-to influence t h e age a t morrlage, p a r t i c u l a r l y among :he younger cohorts. This r e l a t i o n s h i p is probably a t t r i b u t a b l e t o a common antecedent, oanely, t h e groom's age. [Women vhose husbands were r e p o r t e d l y f n good f i n a n c i a l shape were asked whether t h e ~ ~ 2 decision would have been any d i f f e r e n t i f t h e i r husbaads had n o t been i n good f i n a n c i a l shape a t t h e time of t h e decision. A substan minority s a i d t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n w u l d have been delayed o r t h e p r o p dropped i f t h e g r o m ' e f i n a n c i a l position was not s a t i s f a c t o r y . Apparently t h e groom's f i n a n c i a l s r c u r i t y is being given i n c r e a s more importance. I f t h i s i s so, when times a r e bad marriages are l i k e l y t o be delayed more thun vhen times a r e gocd.] ll. A p o s i t i v e a s s o c i a t i o n is discernr*le betveen t h e number of o l d e r brothers and s i s t e r s and t h e age a t marriage, t h i s being t r u e f o r t h e older a s v e l l a e t h e younger cohorts. The corresponding a s s o c i a t i o n involving younger brothers and s i s t e r s is not d i s c e t n f b l however, f o r t h e younger cohort. 12. There is a tendency, although n o t videly prevalent, f o r a . woaan's marriage t o be delayed because of t h e delay in marrying o f f onE of her older s i s t e r s (see t h e p a t t e r n under ' o b l e ' t i o n t o o l d e r sister But t h i s obligation-to-vait e f f e c t i s r.0.; d i s c e r n i b l e f o r t h e yotfnne cohort. - The tendeflcy t o postpone s e l f ' s marriage because of t h e # o b l i g a t i o n t o younger b r o t h e r s and s i s t k s is discern2ble f o r t h e younger cohort a l s o (see t h e p a t t e r x s under o b l i g a t i o n t o younger brother and o b l i g a t i o n t o younser s i s t e r ) .  MultivarFate Analysis. From u n i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s we now t u r n t o m u l t i v a r i a t e aaalyais. Table 5 p r e s e n t s incremerital R"S a t t r i b u t a b l e t o each of a number o f variables. Three s e p a r a t e a n a l y s e s a r e presented i n t h e t a b l e , one f o r m e n of age 25 t o 49, ooe f o r women of age 25 t o 29 and one f o r women of a g e 35 t o 39; i n a11 c a s e s confi-ing a t t e n t i o n t o women whose age a t f i r s t marriage is l e s s 2 than 25 years. Rx, sets of incremental R 's a r e presented i n t h e t a b l e , one s e t 2 2 l a b e l e d D,R ( t h e increment R a t t r i b u t a b l e t o each v a r i a b l e when i t i s entered 2 2 i n rhe order i n d t c a t e d ) and t h e o t h e r set labeled q R (the i n c r a e n t a l R a t t r i b u t a b l e t o each v a r i a b l e when i t is entered l a s t ) . F i r s t considering women of age 25 t o 49, w e n o t e t h a t t h e following v a r i a b l e 8 2 e x h i b i t s i g n i f i c a n t n e t r e l a t i o n s h i p ((4R ) t o t h e a g e a t marriage. 1. Pre-marisal work 2. Education 6 3. Year mar=-Led 4. Mode of mate-selection (whather t h e marriage was arranged by p a r e n t s , by couple themselves, o r a mixture of t h e twj modes) 5. Residence a f t e r marriage (with t h e wife's pareacs, with t h e husband's p a r e n t s , o r neolocal) 6. Economic s e c u r i t y of t h e husband a t t h e time of marriage d e c i s i o n (whether t h e husband had ,a r e g u l a r source of income a t t h a t time) - 7. Staying i n school t i l l marriage (whether t h e wife was e n r o l l e d i n school any time iluring t h e =months preceding t h e marriage) 8. - u b l i g a t i o ~t o s i b l i n g (whether marriage vas postponed on account of * a siblin-r - whether a sibling-older b r o t h e r o r sister-postponed h i s o r her marrihge on account of t h e respondent). . " Fore Religion and Ethnic Group, only + R ~ i s s i g n i f i c a n t . Ethnic Group R.s* some e f f e c t independeat of Religion ( 4 8 2 is s i g n i f i c a n t f o r Ethnic Group when  e n t e t e d in t h e regression after e n t e r i n g Religion), b u t when a l l v a r i a b l e s a r e sFmultaneously e n t e r e d , E t h n i c group is l e f t v i t h no n e t e f f e c t . The m u l t i p l e R~ is .326, i n d % c a t i n g that -thirds of t h e v a r i a t i o n in a g e a t u r r i y p - remains unaccounted f o r . Now comparing t h e younger c o h o r t (of a g e 25 t o 29) v i t h its o l d e r c o u n t e r p a r o (of a g e 35 t o 39). t h e f o l l o v i n g s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s are d i s c e r n i b l e . 2 a. Pre-marital work has a s i g n i f i c a n t g r o s s e f f zct-+R is .- g n i f i c a n t - 2 in b o t h gro.~pa. But t h e n e t e f f e c t (see 4 R ) 13 considerably veaker f o r t h e younger c o h o r t and n e g l i g i b l e f o r t h e o l d e r one. 2 b. Both R e l i g i o n and E t h n i c group shov s i g n i f i c a n t q R a s vell a s 112s2 f o r the younger cohort, b u t f o r t h e o l d e r one only 4 ~ 2 is s i g n i f i c a n t . I 1 Why t h e n e t e f f e c t is s i g n i f i c a n t f o r t h e younger cohort b u t n o t f o r t h e o l d e r one is n o t c l e a r . I c. Both Education and Residgnce a f t e r m a r r i a g e have e i g n i f i c a a r n e t e f f e c t s , I t h i s b e i n g t r u e f o r t h e younger as v e l l a e t h e o l d e r cohorts. d. The l e n g t h of t h e engagement period (whether under one y e a r o r more) shova s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t o n l y f o r t h e o l d e r cohort. e. The node of mace s e l e c t i o n h a s s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t only f o r t h e younger b i r t h cohort. fa Economic s e c u r i t y of t h e bridegroom shove s i g n i f i c a n t n e t e f f e c t c n l y I f o r fae o l d e r cohort. g.. For t t e o l d e r c o h o r t s t h e r e is a = s i g n i f i c a n t obligation-co-wait effect; '2 - - b u t t h a t e f f e c t is a b s e n t f o r t h e younger cohort. C Obligation t o ~ r d 8 younger b r o t h e r s o r sisters h a s db e f f e c t f o r ywnger o r o l d e r c o h o r t s . I m  h. The v a l u e of dowry shovs no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t f o r any of t h e age groups. It is tempting t o s p e c u l a t e t h a t f a m i l i e s view it a s a v i o l a t i o n of t h e norm t o pennit dowry-related problems t a b l o c k marriage arrangements. I t seems t h a t even i f t h e r e a r e d i f f i c u l t i e s i n r a i s i n g t h e money needed t o g i v e t h e u s u a l dovry, t h e f a m i l y v i l l r a i s e i t somehow because of t h e i r c o n v i c t i o n t h a t i t is t h e i r d u t y t o do so. Turning t o t h e parameter estimates ( s e e Table 6 ) . t h e d i s c e r n i b l e p a t t e r n s i n c l u d e t h e following : I a. Women v i t h p r e m a r i t a l w r k experience tend t o marry l a t e . CThe e f f e c t is s i g n i f i c a n t only f o r m e n of a g e group 25 t o 49. When examined s e p a r a t e l y f o r women of age group 25 t o 29 and 35 t o 39, t h e e f f e c t , although shovs t h e same s i g n a s f o r t h o s e i n t h e age group 25 t o 49, is n o t s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . ) b. s a c u r v i l i n e a r e f f e c t f o r young women, b u t more o r lesa a linear e f f e c t f o r o l d e r women. 7 c. The year-of-marriage e f f e c t is positive. d. S h o r t e r engagement period on t h e average s i g n i f i e s marriages at you- age. But t h i s e f f e c t is s i g n i f i c a n t only f o r t h e o l d e r c o h o r t . 0 e. 'Love' marriages occur a t r e l a t i v e l y younger ages ( s i g n i f i c a n t f o r I - women of age 25 t o 4 9 ) . - This is a r e v e r s a l of t h e crude re1ationshS.p I i r e v e a l e d i n Table 4 . , -5 Women'wb (plan to) l i v e v i t h t h e family of o r i g i n tend t c w r r p a t m younger ages. T h i s is t r u e f o r t h e o l d e r cohort. = But f o r - t h e young- of cokarz-,- residence w i t h t h e f a a ~ i l yo r i g i n does not hsve any eEfect A d i f f e r e n t from t h a t of neolocal residence; f o r t h s i t is t h e d e l a y h g e f f e c t of r e s i d e n c e v i t h t h e husband's family t h a t s t a n d s out.  g. Bridegroan's e c o n d c s e c u r i t y s i g n i f i e s r e l a t i v e l y o l d e r age f o r tbe bride. This e f f e c t does n o t p e r s i s t whea examined s e p a r a t e l y f o r b i r t h cohorts. h. Staying i n school t i l l marriage s i g n i f i e s r e l a t i v e l y poungar age for - t h e bride. This e f f e c t a l s o does not p e r s i s t when examined separazeljr f o r b i r t h cohorts. 1. t h e ( p o s i t i v e ) obligation-to-wait e f f e c t is present f o r t h e o l d e r c o h o r t b u t absent f o r t h e younger cohort. The ( p o s i t i v e ) obligation-to-younger- b r o t h e r e f f e c t is p r e s e a t f o r m e n of ages 25 t o 49, but is not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s f g n i f f c a n t when estimated s e p a r a t e l y f o r b i r t h cohorts. I Now, s i n c e e t h n i c group d i f f e r e n c e s a r e very pronou~cedi n r e s p e c t t o age a t marriage and s i n c e i n many r e s p e c t s each e t h n i c group may be regarded a s a 1 population in its own r i g h t , t h e r e is some m e r i t in examining f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g I age a t marriage s e p a r a t e l y f o r t h e major e t h n i c groups i n t h e country. Table 7 I p r e s e n t s t h e incremental R2 ' I a t t r i b u t a b l e t o s e l e c t e d individual regressors. The estimated re i e n t s a r e shown in Table 8. There a r e clear-cut roups in respect t o vhich f a c t o r s e x h i b i t I significant effect. 1. Pre-marital work experience has no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t f o r S r i Lanka ?lobrs, while i t has s i g n i f i c a n t n e t e f f e c t f o r e l l e t h e o t h e r e t h n i c groups (Sin'halese, S r i Lanka Tamils, and Indian Tamils). 2. Education has no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t f o r I n d i a ~amils( n e i t h e r q R2 2 nor 4 R is s i g n i f i c a n t probably _because of low v a r i a t i o n i n education f o r t h e group), buA: i t has highlf s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t f o r a l l the o t h e r e t h n i c groups. 3. The mode of mate s e l e c t i o n is not s i g n i f i c a n t f o r S r i Lanka Tanils; but it i s f o r Sinhalese and India& T a m i l s . For S r i Lanka Hoors n e i t h e r 2 2 $-P nor is s i g n i f i c a n t , but t h e r e g r e s s i o n coef f i c i e n c attached - I -  t o arranged marriage i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from t h a t a t t a c h e d t o . t h e mode of mate s e l e c t i o n i n vhich t h e couple a s well a s t h e i r p a r e n t s a r e involved (see Table 8). 4. Residence a f t e r marriage i s s i g n i f i c a n t f o r Sinhalese only. 5. Economic s e c u r i t y of t h e bridegroom does n o t seem t o matter f o r any e t h n i c group o t h e r than S r i Lanka Tamils. 6. The timing of marriage does not seem t o be s i g n i f i c a n t l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s t a y i n g in school t i l l marriage a s f a r a s Indian Tamils a r e concerned, but t h a t is not t h e c a s e f o r any of t h e o t h e r t h r e e e t h n i c groups. 7. Famlly o b l i g a t i o n does n o t seem t o be a s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r f o r Sinhalese. but i t is f o r a l l t h e o t h e r s . 8. From Table 9 one n o t i c e s among o t h e r t h i n g s t h a t t h e e f f e c t of education-. i s c u r v i l i n e a r , more obviously so f o r S r i Lanka Moors. 1 I t is one thing t o i n v i t e a t t e n t i o n t o such e t h n i c group d i f f e r e n c e s ; b u t i t is q u i t e a d i f f e r e n t matter t o i n t e r p r e t them. Only those who a r e c l o s e l y II f a m i l i a r with t h e c u l t u r a l p e c u l i a = i t i e s of t h e v a r i o u s e t h n i c groups--a which t h i s writer does n o t possess-can familiarity anaver why some f a c t o r s a r e s i g n i f i c a n t f o r some groups b u t n o t f o r others. The r e s u l t s presented so f a r in t h i s s e c t i o n permit only condition& (i.e., . E if-x-then-y type) s p e c u l a t i o n s concerning t h e f u t u r e t r e n d s i n a g e a t marriage. - i Thus one might say t h a t i f higher education became more videspread o r female 9 L d pre-marital w r k p a r t i c i p a t i o n became more c m o n , t h e age a t marriage ~ u l be . pushed upward further; o r i f arranged marriages became unpopular, t h e age a t i s * marriage would be pulled damvard; and so on. But w e have no vay of p t e d i c t i n g how soon higher education o r pre-marital work p a r t i c i p a t i o n would become videspr:ead or how r a p i d l y t h e p r a c t i c e of arranging marriages would g i v e vay f o r 'love' marriages. Hence t h e c o n d i t i o n a l prognosis of t h e type j u s t mentioned a r e not I h e l p f u l f n guessing t h e l i k e l y immediate f u t u r e t r e n d i n t h e age a t marrfage. The preference. people c u r r e n t l y hold regardfng t h e b r i d e ' s and groom's a g e s a r e probably more h e l p f u l in s p e c u l a t i n g v h e t h e r d r a m a t i c changes i n t h e a g e a t f i r s t m a r r i a g e a r e in t h e o f f i n g . PBEFeRE#CES REGARDING AGE AT rURRIAGE D i r e c t d a t a on p r e f e r e n c e s are d i f f i c u l t t o o b t a i n . One can, hovever, g e t a rough i d e a by examining v h a t people regard as i d e a l a g e s f o r boys and g i r l s to e n t e r married l i f e . Table 9 s h w s t h a t f o r females n e i t h e r v e r y e a r l y nor very l a t e marriage i s p r e f e r r e d by t h e respondents. V i r t u a l l y none p r e f e r s marryfng o f f a g i r l a t a g e b e l o v 15, and l e s s t h a n 5 percent c o n s i d e r f i r s t marriage a t ages 26 o r above as i d e a l . The average i d e a l a g e f o r b r i d e s f a l l s betveen 19.5 and 23.5* when w e compare respondents i n t h e v a r i o u s demographic and socio-economic groups ( s e e Table 10). By and l a r g e , t h o s e c u l t u r a l groups c h a r a c t e r i z e d by l o v a c t u a l a g e a t marriage f o r m e n p r e f e r e a r l y f i r s t marriage f o r g i r l s . An example is S r i Lanka Moors. Hwwer, t h e r e i n no w i d e n c e t h a t t h e women consider t h e a g e a t which they themselves e n t e r e d f i r s t marriage a s n e c e s s a r i l y i d e a l under t h e c u r r e n t circumstances. T h i s is c l e a r from t h e Pact t h a t i n Table 1 0 t h e mean i d e a l a g e a t marriage f o r g i r l s i s h i g h e r than t h e mean a c t u a l age a t marriage f o r I r t h o s e married v e r y young and l o v e r f o r those who married o l d e r . - Comparing t h e mean i d e a l age f o r b r i d e s and grooms one n o t i c e s t h h t i n a l l subgroups t h e p r e f e r e n c e ' g s f o r s h e groom t o be f i v e o r sir y e a r s o l d e r than t h e bride. Also, v e r y f a respondents p r e f e r t h e groom t o be above 30 y e a r s of age ( s e e Table 9). * The range w i t h i n which t h e subgroup means of i d e a l a g e f o r g r o a a f a l l is 24.0 t o 23.5 when respondents of t h e v a r i a u s demographic and socio-economic groups a r e compared.  I t is p a r t i c u l a r l y noteworthy t h a t t h e mean i d e a l age f o r t h e b r i d e Ls 22 o r below f o r women married f o r 20 t o 24 years ( s e e Tabla 10). These m e n a r e l i k e l y t o have t h e i r daughters e n t e r i n g marriage market now; hence t h e i r preferences regarding i d e a l age f o r b r i d e s presumably r e f l e c t s what they would -. very much l i k e t o s e e accomplished i n t h e case of t h e i r daughters, namely to marry them o f f when they a r e i n t h e i r e a r l y twenties. T h i s seems t o i n d i c a t e t h a t changes i n age a t marriage t h a t might occur i n t h e near f u t u r e a r e l i k e l y tm r e s u l t from a s h i f t towards moderately higher ages a t marriage (e.g., early twenties) than from a dramatic i n c r e a s e i n t h e proportion of women marrying i n t h e i r l a t e twenties o r a t o l d e r ages, Put d i f f e r e n t l y , marriages below 17 y e a r s of age a r e l i k e l y t o become matters of h i s t o r y soon; few women would postpone marriage beyond age 2 5 ; b r i d e ' s age may b e concentrated i n a s h o r t range c e n t e r i n g  1 mgamoue rulea r e q u i r e m r r i n g e o u t s i d e a group. Thus v i l l a g e exogamy r e q u i r e s l one t o marry o u t s i d e one'r v i l l a g e . 2 Endoganrow r u l e a r e q u i r e marriage wlthin a group, e.g., 3. Neolocal m a n e here s e p a r a t e from both t h e b r i d e ' s and t h e groom's kin. within one's own c a s t e . I 4. It has not been u n u s u l in h i a n c o u n t r i e s f o r t h e new husband t o leave h i s w i f e behind and go back t o vork i n a c i t y , If f i n a n c i a l ' o r o t h e r f a c t o r s make i t d i f f i c u l t t o do othervisa. 5. I f Pil and P 12' i m l , 2, ..., n, a r e two percent d i s t r i b u t l o n s with Pil P 12- 100, t h e c o e f f k i n e t of d l s e i m i l n r i t y Is equal t o one-half of t h e sum of t h e absolute v a l u e s of t h e d i f f e r e n c e s P li - P2i' 1 - 1, 2, ..., n. This f i g u r e r e p r e s e n t s t h e number of individuals who should be r e d i s t r i b u t e d i n order t o - make t h e two distributions similar. 6 See Appendix A f o r a discuseion of the problem of i n t e r p r e t i n this factor. e e Appendix -" * . . . -- .- . -. . ...- .... ~ & * E I . . . m - . .... . , ~ ; z ~ : ~. - .:.. ~ , ; ~ z : .<t,: . . . . .! . .. - ~ . ~ - ... .,, . . -. .. . . . , . - ... . , - . 8 . . I  REFERENCES Cho, L. J. and R. D. Retherford. 1973. Comparative a n a l y s i s of r e c e n t f e r t i l i t y t r e n d s i n Eaet Asia. IUSSP I n t e r n a t i o n a l Conference, Liege. Vol 11: 163-181. Fernando, D.F.S. 1976. F e r t i l i t y t r e n d s i n S r i Lanka and f u t u r e p r o s p e c t s . J o u r n a l of B i o s o c i a l Science 8:35-43. tiajnal, J. 1965. European marriage p a t t e r n 8 i n p e r s p e c t i v e . Pp. 101-143 i n Glass, D.V. and D.E.C. Eversley (ede.) Population i n History. London: Arnold. "./-  Tabla 1 AGE PATTEBPf OF r n R 4 m R I E D HALES AND FEMALES SRI LAXCA 1946 1953 1963 1971 and 1975 15- 19 75.3 75. 7 85.0 89.5 93.2 20-24 29.4 32.5 41.3 53.1 60.6 25-29 11.8 12.8 17.1 24.6 31.9 30-34 6.6 7.5 8.3 10.9 13.7 35-39 4.3 5.4 4.8 5.6 5.8 40-44 4.1 5.0 4.3 4.3 4.6 45-49 3.4 4.4 3.9 3.6 2.1 Singulata Hean Age a t marriage* 20.66 20.81 22.10 23.55 24.81 - Age Yean Age _ - a t marriage* 26.80 27.03 27.66 27.86 28.43 - Source T ~ < X never-married f i g u r e s a r e from Fernando (1975) f o r 1946, 1953, 1963, and 1971 and those f o r 1975 a r e from t h e W F S F i r s t Report S r i la&a f o r 1975. * - fSfngulate i&n age a t marriage f o r t b s e married b e f o r e age 45. Percent s i n g l e I a t age 45 caLculaced by averaging t h e f i g u r e s f o r 40-44 and 45-49. Table 2 . Never-married persons in the household population by age and s e x : World F e r t i l i t y Survey, S r i tanka, 1975. Age Group Female Total '15,543 13,835  Table 3 Percestt distribution cf successive martiage cohorts by age a t marriage: 1975 and 1979 surveys, S r i Lanka Marriage duration Age a t marriage in completed years 415 15 to 17 16 to 21 21 to 26 2% All  Table 3 P e r c e n t d i s t r i b u t i o n cf s u c c e s s i v e marriage c o h o r t s by age a t martiage: 1975 and 1979 surveys, S r i Lanka Marriage d u r a t i o n Age a t marriage I n completed y e a r s 4U 15 t o 17 16 t o 21 21 t o 26 2% - All -- - (1) 1975 survey* 4 5 years 0.25 11.72 25.61 25.31 27.11 100.00 5 t o 9 years 7.59 20.00 25.69 25.38 21.34 100.00 10 t o 16 y e a r s . 13.64 22.82 27.90 19.16 16.49 100.00 15 t o 1 9 p e a r s 12.10 29.01 25.94 19.69 13.26 100.00 20 t o 24 y e a r s 16.46 30.00 25.87 18.81 8.85 100.00 4 5 years 1.18 17.19 29.22 29.32 23.09 100.08 5 to 9 years 2.40 18.61 28.38 29.68 20.43 100.00 10 to 14 y e a r s 7.02 28.99 26.31 22.61 15.00 100.00 15 to 19 years 14.04 27.67 28.21 19.16 10.93 lOO.O(R 20 to 24 y e a r s 18.15 28.74 26.93 19.52 6.66 100.00 * Source WPS S r t Lanka F i r s t Report Tablu 1 . 1. 2. I ** The Figures r e p o r t e d i n this t a b l e a r e based on the f u l l sample, vhich i n c l u d e s r e i n t e r v i e v e d as v e l l a s f i r s t - t i m e i n t e m i e v e d ever-married woaen.. Table a. Nean and Standard Devlation of Age a t :%rriage of Zver-Harrfed Women of Age 25 t o 49 and 25 t o 29 and Yarried 3er'ore Reaching Age 25, by Selected Characeristics: S r i L a n h 1979. P r r m t i t a l votk Xo work Some wrk Education (vifa). Yo education Grades. 1 t o 5 Grader. 6 t o 9 Higher I n school during 12 con& befotm m u r i a g r Yes 278 18.6 3.16 70 18.1 9- 09 Yo 3168 17.9 4.01 714 18.7 k. U XelLgion Sadhbt Hindu %slim Christ Zthnic group S innalase scs ha14 r s L l L 1 - St-i t a n k Lar Xo. of p r o p o s d r considered - 'hro o r =re Only one C-ngagement pariod -C U m a t h > U mnt!! Xesiience a f t e r aarriage Vife' s parents Xusbaad' s parmta Xeolocal Financial shape of 3rideeroom Xegular income Yo regular income Table 4. X u n and Standard Deviation or' Agc a t Marriage of & e v E - of \gm 25 ca 49 and 25 t o 29 and Xarrid Before R e r c h i q Age 25, by r e l a c d C b a r a c t r r b t i c s : S r i Laaha 1979 (concfnmed) 0Ld.r broehas's oblfgatioo .I postpuaed h i s m u . 346 18.3 3.37 82 P9.b 3L4 Xo p o p o p o m m m ~ 1S2O 18.1 4.22 382 L8-& Li3 Nubme o f o l d e r sisters 0 1 2 3 4 o r mm 4 or -re 355 18.l 3.33 86 18-67 L! Obligation to potmgmr brothu R p o s q o o d her zu. 41 19.3 3.00 10 19-9 3L: So p o a q m m ~ t - 2186 18.1 3.97 - 547 LS-Z L : !hmber C L younger s is c e r s 0 us9 17.a 3.68 - 248 I S.? L; 1 902 18.1 6.59 199 Id-2' 62 2 508 17.9 3.17 lo2 19-3 3L: 3 359 18.3 i.51 104 18-9 Li o r =re 318 18.2 3. Lt 93. 13-5 2- : ObLigactou to yollngar sister 9 postponed h e r =tar. 01 18.3 3-31 16 19-1 2,: 50 ~ o 2102 s 1a.r ~ L.LI ~ 520 ~ 18-5 ~ 5-1  Table 5 2 Incremental R a t t x i b u t a b l e t o i n d i v i d u a l r e g r e s s o r s (1) when i n t r o d u c e d i n the r e g r e s a t o n in t h e sequence i n d i c a t e d (ta1R2), and (11) when introduced l a s t ( A@ r m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s o f a g e a t marriage: e v e r married women of s e l e c t e d a g e groups, rnarzi-d b e f o r e reaching age 25: S r i Lanka, 1979. Age (25, 49) Age (25,291 Age (35-39) Regressors Age a t mar. ~ 2 5 Age at mr. <25 Age a t mas- c25 b1a2 A,R~ A ~ R ~ A,R~ A ~ R ~ A# ? r e - m a r i t a l work .02o3 .006~ ,024 3 .OOll .013 3 .all Religiou E t h n i c Group Educacim Year marriea Engagemenr p e r i o d Value of Dmry .OGO .001 .ooo .ooo .001 Residence a Z t a r marriage 3 c n . s e c u r i t y o f husband a t marriage I n school t i l l .marriage O b l i g a t i o n { o l d b r o t h e r ' a) .000 .OOO .OOO .OOO .002 ,WE I. O b l i s e t i o n ( o l d s i s t e r ' a) Obligation ( t o o l d s i s t e r ) .OOO .000 . , ,000 .OOO .OOO .OOO .OD0 .006 2 ,&mi2 -l - O b l i g a t i ~ n( t o young b r a h e r ) .002' .OOll .0@1 'I O b l i g a t i o n (to young s i s t e r ) ,COO .OOO .OOO 2 prob. betweer. .05 and .l; prob. between . 0 1 and .05; prob. below .01.  Tabla 6. P u a m t a f beFP.eus: W t i g l a 8.grusioo U y s i s of &pa ac l&rr%qm: -&-thrried W of S d e c t e d Qa Croup.. Uarried k f o r a Ructring Aga 2 : 5 Sc: Lrnk 1979 ethic trorrp SLnhrl... .9s9 -.ua c Z r i L a k T r i l . 3n 7 C .sm 1adl.a T u i l Sri b ak Xaor (rmt). (I2 . .ans C - B ulfa*. a d u u t l m Hala -2.8% C r d u l t o J -2.860 C d u 6 to 9 -1.843 3igh.r (mf.) T u r wrrird -187 C n g r w c parid *U ~ ~ a t h m - .U3 - mu am- (Smf.1 tbda of u c a s d a c - "Lave* ~ r r k ~ a.723 -t. d .la2 - - (rat.) VdEm or d w r y .002 aft.; h8id.n~. ?rr. U l a vifa'a pararu- .273 With h w b 2 s par. .I72 U a o l d (rat.) ?eosaie rhrpr h t u b d -- *o ia a t rh. tip. of m a y dacisiat b g m l l f LnM. -309 xo tor. i l l e o d m f . ) V: 1a fn school till T u -1.02 : lo (mf.) P Oldar S m r h a r .Yam -001 Ha poscpoaed h+. .1m l o pPIEPQD.IIPZ ( m f .) 0ld.r si3rmr Sau SIu p s c p o a a d hmr .273 - olrri.4. u 7 . xo c o c p o m - d r = f . ) Oldar s t r c a r Sara .M7 3' a *r. ?osc?oaad .536 J o psr;ronememr<rat.) Y - 1 ~ ~ : 5zoch.= sm. -086 a' 3=. posgonsd 1.314 Yo par;roaeasnc(raf.) ':omper s t r c s r none .OL? : A's - l apostponed . o ?osr;ranemarc(rsf - .go2 .)  Table 7 Incremental RL a t t r i b u t a b l e t o i n d i v i d u a l r e g r e s s o r s ( i ) when intx:oduc& +ac the regression i n t h e sequence i n d i c a t e d (AIR;?) and ( i i ) when i n t r o d u c e d la;?ltt (A2R2): M u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s of age a t marriage: ever-married women of age 25 years o r over and married a t age below 25, by e t h n i c group: S r i L a m b , D J ' b9, Sinhalese S r i Lanka Tamil Indian Tamil Srb HQUF Regressors Pre-marital work , 0 2 0 ~ .006 .0l8~ .006 .036~ .02o3 .OO$ ,002 Education .122~ . 0 5 3 ~ .16g3 .05S3 .013 .001 .a72 ,028 3 Year married , 1 0 8 ~ .lo9 .177~ . 16s3 .2463 .24a3 .2& -2~0 1 Engagement period .000 .000 .OOO .OOO .OOO ,000 .OUQ ,OCEO Mate-selection mode .00a3 .006~ .000 .000 .023~ .0212 .OW ,CmT Value of dowry .OOO .OOO .001 .001 .001 .OOO ,000 -a30 Res. a f t e r mar. .0os3 .0os3 .004 .004 .002 .001 .002 ,a02 Econ. sec. of hus. .000 .000 .0og3 .009 .003 .003 .OM Am5 a t marriage Inschooltillmar. .006~ .006~ .004~ .004~ .003 .002 .00$ , Obligation (older brother's) .OOO .OOO .OOO .OOO .003 .004 .O W ,4Bl2 2 %~n (older s i s t e r ' s ) .002 .oo1 .oo3 .002 .on3 .gig3 .om Obligation ( t o old s i s t e r ) .OOO .OOO .OOO .OOO *,, , , * .001 G , UBZ Obligation t o ( L O younger brother) .001 .001 .006~ . 0 0 5 ~ .008 .007 .004 - , f Obligation (to younger s i s t e r ) .000- .000 -001 .001 .003 .003 .005 - -- -i R~ .214 .393 .369 ,372 - i - - E -. ." r -3~4 + Mean age a t w I marriage 18.66 17.73 17.74 16.46  Table 8. P u r r ~ . e ubeinatas: W c i p l e R a g r u s i o o &ulysi?r of Age A t %rr- Ewe- -1.d wo~.o of ~ g 2S a t o 19 and m i r d a t A g . B d o v 25, in Dlfferenc E t a G - Sri l a b . 1979 P r c u t i t a l vork so vork Sol. wrk (rmf.1 Ylfm'r rduutimi Son. Cradu 1 m 5 Crado 6 m 9 Righer (ref. Year mnrrfed &a& shape h u b u d uu la a t tlma OF m8rrl88e d u i s ioo .%*Idat w* Su regular beom. (raf.) UIfc In school till =rti.qa Yes So (ref.) Older brothar Sane Be postponed W. Mr. No p o s c p o n e m t (ref.) Older s i s t e r Sonc She p o s t p a d her p.r. Older s i s t e r Son. a ' s a r . posqmnui Na postpancacpt ( r e f .)  Table 9 I d e a l age f o r b r i d e s and grooms: Ever-married women's responsee: S r i Lanka, 1979 I d e a l age Bride Groom 4 15 y e a r s 0.2 0.0 1 5 t o 16 y e a r s 12.8 0.0 17 t o 18 years U.8 0.5 19 t o 2 1 years 36.1 4.2 22 t o 25 years 43.5 44.2 26 t o 30 years 4.5 46.0 31 t o 35 years 0.0 4.9 > 36 y e a r s 0.0 0.2 Tot a1 99.9 100.0  Table 10 Hean a g e a t f i r s t -age of wives, t h e corresponding f i g u r e f o r h u b a d s , and mean f o r b r i d a ' s and g m m ' s ages considered i d e a l by t h e wives, b y s e l e c t e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : S r i Lanka, 1979 &an a g e a t f i r s t - r~rriaqe I d e a l age f o r . Characteris t i c s - Wif a Husband Bride Gro- Age of w i f e Education (wife) None Grades 1 t o 5 Grades 6 t o 9 Higher Religion Buddhist 18.5 26.1 22.0 26.a Hindu 17.6 25.1 21.1 26.7 Xuslim 16.4 25.7 19.6 26.0 Chris t i a n 18.6 25.6 21.6 26.8 E t h n i r Group Sinhalese 18.5 26.0 22.0 26.7 S r i Lanka Tamil 17.7 25.2 21.4 27.2 . I n d i a n Tamil 17.6 25.0 20.3 25.41 S r i Lanka *or 16.3 25.6 20.0 25.4, B NOTE: The means f o r husband's age a r e based bn s l i g h t l y fewer c a s e s thamm t h e o t h e r means. Data were c o l l e c t e d f o r t h e c u r r e n t husband onXg, - Hence i t was necessary to r e s t r i c t t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s t o c u r r e n t l y married women who have-not been married more than once. Hence the smaller N's. - -r i Table 1 1 . Xeaa Ape .\c F i r s c X a r r i a g e of Wives, t h e Corresponding F i g u r e huskads. a d sun b r i d e ' s and groom's a g e s considered i d e a l by t h e wives. by dure- oC m a = ~ . g e (below 25 years) and wife's age a c P r r t i a g a : S r i Lanka 1979 .. - Curacioa of m8rri.w 40a t f i r r s mama. (wifm) and cho v a r i a b l a of 15 LS co 17 1 8 co 28 2 1 t o Z& FS+ inren8c Under 5 y e a r s Ago a t a u r i a g o : wit. 16.2 18.9 22.2 a z : - Rurbmd L 23.2 24.8 26.S BLO I d e a l ago f o r : 9rido - 20.0 21.1 22.Z 3 Z.2 C m m 24.9 26.2 27.E 2%2 5 t o 9 years I d o d a- for: Bride 21.1 21.3 22.5 2% l C m m 26.2 26.2 27.3 Z7-9 10 t o 14 y e a r s Ago a c mrrlago: Uilm lusbrnd [ d e a l age for: 3rida Cmom 15 co 19 y e a r s I d e a l rgm for: Brida Cmom 20 t o 24 y e a m :.ga a t autiyy: Uifo 13.0 16.0 18.9 22.Z 2% Y Husband 23.8 24.1 26.2 28.4 SEf I d o a l age for: Bride 20.0 11.0 21.5 21.&, 22-0 a~ r m m 25.6 26.6 26.5 26.6 Tbl - Under 5 y e a r s Y u h r qf w e 8 V i m 11 160 ;. 272 2 13 2x5 Hurbrnd. 5 co 9 y e a r s Hive8 11 21 I30 163 - f * 261 253 Zm. 2601 23%5 PI$ Husbsnd. 19 149 2 236 245 . E!S ? LO t o 14 y a a n Yives 55 22 7 206 177' El3 Huabsnda 51 216 196 166 ESP 5 co 19 y e a r s 'Jives LO4 2 05 209 142' 33 Husbands 100 183 196 13% 33 20 t o 21 years 'Jives 120 140 178 l29 && Husbaads LO 4 167 139 L09, N m : !!onen of a l l a3ea a r e included in t h i s cable. *8&se Less than 25 APPENDIX A HUSBANDS In t h e 1979 survey, husbands of a g e 30 t o 39, c u r r e n t l y married and l i v i n g w i t h t h e i r spouses were i n t e r v i e v e d , w i t h a view t o i d e n t i f y i n g t h e f a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e d t h e i r age a t marriage. Reported h e r e i n a r e some of t h e r e s u l t s of t h e a n a l y s i s based on t h e d a t a t h u s c o l l e c t e d . A t t e n t i o n is 1 focused on husbands who have been married o n l y once. T a b l e 1 shows t h e mean and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o r of t h e a g e a t marriage of husbands, by s e l e c t e d s o c i a l and demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . No consistent p a t t e r n i n age a t marriage i s d i s c e r n i b l e by c u r r e n t age. A s for religious d i f f e r e n t i a l s , Hindus, M u s l i m s , a n a C h r i s t i a n s have approximately t h e same mean age a t marriage, w h i l e Buddhists have a h i g h e r mean. Among t h e Ethnic Groups, S r i Lanka Tamils and S r i Lanka *ors have l a v e r age a t marriage, on t h e a v e r a g e , and S i n h a l e s e and I n d i a n Tamils r e l a t i v e l y h i g h e r age a t marriage. The e d u c a t i o n e f f e c t appears t o b e U-shaped. Family-obligations seem t o have an e f f e c t on t h e age a t marriage-some males a p p a r e n t l y postpone t h e i r marriage cor t h e i r s i b l i n g s . on account o f t h e i r ~ S l i g ~ t i t T a b l e 2 s h w s t h e r e s u l t s c f a m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s , i n which a l l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s shown i n Table 1 except age a r e used, along w i t h y e a r of marriage a s e x p l a n a t o r y f a c t o r s . ReligLon s h w s a g r o s s e f f e c t , but no significant net effect. E t h n i c g r o u p , r q t a i n s its e f f e c t even when a l l o t h e r v a r i a b l e s a r e taken i n t o acccunt. I n view of t h e h i g h a s s o c i a t i o n between Religion and E t k n i c Groue, t h e e s t i m a t e d n e t e f f e c t s of t h e s e v a r i a b l e s should '? - b e i n t e r p r e t e d w i t h cautfon. S u r p r i s i n g l y Education s h w s no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t . Among t h e o b l i g a t i o n e f f & t s , only t h e o b l i g a t i o n toward a younger s i s t e r i s I s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant; A cautionary n o t e i s i n o r d e r i n r e s p e c t t o using y e a r of marriage a s an  APPENDIX A 2 as an explanatory v a r i a b l e , -ahen age v a r f a t i o l l Ln t h e data is small. Concept- u a l l y , y e a r of marriage is supposed t o c a p t u r e t h e p e r i o d e f f e c t (i.e., the e f f e c t of t h e socic+rcaoomic c o n d i t i o n s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the time when t h e marriage took place). But, obviously, i f all respondents a r e of t h e same age, t h e i r age a t marriage w i l l b e t h e same as t h e i r y e a r o f marriage, except f o r 9 a n a d d i t i v e constant. (For -- - - - age a t marriage d a t e of marriage d a t e of b i r t h d a t e of n u t r i a g e d a t e of survey + age d a t e of marriage + a c o n s t a n t i f t h e survey d a t e and age a r e c o n s t a n t s f o r a l l t h e respondents.) The I i m p l i c a t i o n of this r e l a t i o n s h i p is tLt when age v a r i a t i o n i s s m a l l in t h e data, y e a r of marriage accouuts f o r a l a r g e proportion of t h e v a r i a n c e i n age a t marriage, even when t h e r e is no p e r i o d e f f e c t . I n t h e p r e s e n t c a s e age o f husband is constrained t o t h e range 30 t o 39. How much overlap t h i s causes between age a t marriage and y e a r of m a r r i a g ~ia d i f f i c u l t t o say. But i t c e r t a i n l y is n o t s a f e to i n t e r p r e t t h e l a r g e proportion o f v a r i a n c e a t t r i - b u t a b l e t o y e a r of marriage as r e f l e c t i n g e x c l u s i v e l y t h e p e r i o d e f f e c t . One o t h e r p o i n t vorth n o t i n g is t h a t because of t h e overlap betveen y e a r married and age a t marriage, t h e u s e of t h e fonner as an independent v a r i a b l e when t h e l a t t e r is t h e dependent v a r i a b l e in a r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s amounts to c o n t r o l l i n g f o r t h e dependent v a r i a b l e , thereby introducing b i a s i n t h e e s t i - n a t e s o f t h e n e t e f f e c t s o f t h e o t h e r independent v a r i a b l e s . A comparison of t h e r e s u l t s presented in Table 2 v i t h those presented i~Table 3 i s of , e C some i n t e r e s t in t h i s connection. Note t h a t t h e education e f f e c t i s s i g n i f i c a n t when y e a r of marriage is ignored (Table 3). but n o t so-when y e a r of marriage i s - -8 one of t h e Fndependent v a r i a b l e s (Table 2). Also n o t e z t h a t t h e n e t e f f e c t of o b l i ~ a t i o ntauard younger s i s t e r s i s h1ahl.l s i g n i f i c a n F when year of m r r i a g e E is i p o r e d (Table 2 ) b u t only barely so when year of =Triage r is i n t h e r e g r e s s i o n (Table 3). The parameter e s t i e a t e s present& i n Table 4 t e l l t h e same story. These differences in the results may be partly due t o the bias mentioned above, and partly due to the associatioa between the time of marriage and the other independent variables brolved.  APPENDIX A TABLE 1 MEAN AND STANDARD DEVIATION AGE AT MARRIAGE OF RUSBANDS OF AGE 30 t o 3 9 , MARRIED 3XLP ONCE AND LIVING GnTR SPOUSE: SRI 1979. C h a r a c t e r i st i c s N Mean S. D. Religion Buddhist Hindu Muslim Christian E t h n i c Group Sinhalese S r i La.tka T a m i l Indian T a m i l S r i Lanka Moor Education None Grades 1 t o 5 Grades 6 t o 9 Higher Marriage d e l a y e d on a c c o u n t o f o l d e r sister . Inapplicable* Delayed Not d e l a y e d M a r r i a g e d e l a y e d on account o f youn er b r o t h e r Icapp l i c a b l e 55 Delayed Not d e l a y e d Marriage d e l a y e d on account o f younger s i s t e r ~napplicable* Delayed Not d e l a y e d *No s i b l i n g s o f t h e s p e c i f i e d t y p e  APPENDIX A TAB= 2 M u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s o f husband's age a t f i r s t marriage: incremental a t t r i b u t a b l e t o r e g r e s s o r s (b1R2 s i g n f f y i n g incremental R2 a t t r i b u t a b l e t o a r e g r e s s o r i f it is m t e r e d i n t h e sequence shovn and ~ 2 t h 2 ~ e corresponding incremental RZ i f t h e r e g r e s s o r i s e n t e r e d 1-t): Husbands, married only once and c u r r e n t l y l i v i n g with wives: S r i Lanka, 195'9 Regressors Religion .0ls3 .00 73 .002 II E t h n i c Group .008~ II Year Married Educa tiol: O b l i g a t i o n t o o l d e r sister .002 .001 II O b l i g a t i o n t o younger b r o t h e r .001 .001 II O b l i g a t i o n t o younger sister .002l .0021 1 p r o b a b i l i t y between -05 and .1 2 p r o b a b i l i t y beween . O 1 and .05 3 probability b e l w . O 1 APPENDLX X TABLE 3 Y u l t i v a r i a c e a n a l y s i s o f husband's age a t marriage: hlit2. t h e incremental ~2 a t t r i b u t a b l e t o a r e g r e s s o r vhere i t is e n t e r e d i n th? sequence i n d i c a t e d and b~~ t h e i n c r e m e n ~ a l~ z ' a t ' t r i b u t a b l et o t h e r e g r e s s o r when i t is entered l a s t : Husbands nrarried only once and c u r r e n t l y l i v h g with v i v e s : S r i tanka. 1979. Religion = !e Ethnic G r o w C b l i g a r i c n r o olCer s i s t e r -006~ -003 O b l i z a t i o n =o younqer b r o t h e r .007~ .002 O b l i g a t i o n t o younger s i s t e r .0103 .0lO3 .- 1 ? r o b a b i l i t y b e t ~ e e n .05 and -1 2 p r o b a b i l i t y berreen .01 . -05 3 p r o b a b i l i t : ~b e l a r - 0 1  APPENDIX A ' TABLE 4 M u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s o f husband's age a t marriage: p a r m e t e r e s t i m a t e s : Husbands of age 30 t o 39, married o n l y once, and l i v i n g v i t h spouse: Regression I i n c l u d i n g y e a r married amung t h e r e g r e s s o r s and Regression If e x c l u d i n g it: S r i Lanka, 1979. Regressors Regression I Regression 11 Religion Buddhis t Hindu Muslim Christ i a n E t h n i c Group Sinhalese S r i Lanka Tamil I n d i a n Tam4i.l S r i Landa Moor Year Harried Education None Grades 1 t o 5 Grades 6 t o 9 Higher Obligation t o older s i s t e r No o l d e r s i s t e r Respondent's mar. delayed No delay O b l i g a t i o n t o younger b r o t h e r N o younger b o r t h e r Respondent' s mar. delayed N o delay O b l i g a t i o n t o younger s i s t e r No younger s i s t e r Recpondent's mar. delayed No postponement .r ... Reference c a t e o r y - Not i n c l u d e d & t h e regression F-  APPENDIX B EXPECTED AGE AT W A G 2 AND TIMING OF MARRIAGE OF SPINSTERS AND BACREIDRS When s t u d y i n g age a t marriage, i t is l o g i c a l t o assume t h a t f o r every b a c h e l o r and s p i n s t e r i n a population t h e r e is an expected age a t marriage. T h i s assumption l e a d s t o t h e q u e s t i o n whether t h e c o v a r i a t e s of t h e expected a g e a t marriage of t h e never-married a r e t k : same as t h o s e of t h e a c t u a l age a t marriage o f t h e ever-married. o t h e q u e s t i o n is yes the;) E f z!.c a - ~ e tr information c o l l e c t e d from ever-mar:L=J r-omen would be s u f f i c i e n t t o shed l i g h t on t h e c o v a r i a t e s of age a t marriage in t h e populat. J n a s a whole. To see whether t h e answer is yes, a small sample of s p i n s t e r s and a s m a l l e r s q l e of bachelors were interviewed i n t h e 1979 survey, along w i t h ever-married men and women. n.is n o t e is based on t h e d a t a f o r the. bacllelors and s p i n s t e r s i n terviewed. Altogether 186 b a c h e l o r s o f age 27 t o 34 and 399 s p i n s t e r s of age 24 t o 34 were interviewed. The s m l l n e s e of t h e samples makes d e t a i l e d analyses of she d a t a problematic. Hence t h e f o c u s h e r e i n is cl simple analyses. The main i n t e r e s t pursued belov i s t h e respondent's i n t e n t i o n t o g e t married and t h e expected timing of marriage. Some a t t e n t i o n is a l s o given t o t h e i s s u e whether the preferences h e l d by t h e never-married regarding t h e v c r i o u s t r a i t s i n t h e i r p r o s p e c t i v e spouses a r e such t h a t t h e supply of s u i t a b l e matches is extremely low in t h e marriage market. Yet a n o t h e r m a t t e r e y m i n e d i s t h e prevalence of I homogamy, i . e . , s i m i l a r i t y between s e l f and p r o s p e c t i v e spouse i n r e s p e c t one o r more t r a i t s (e. g., education). LO - i .2 - L A s f a r a s marriage i n t e n t i o n s are concerned, none of t h e respondents - i n t e n d s t o remain a l i f e t i m e bachelor o r s p i n s t e r . As f o r t h e timing o f marriage, - E 2 1 males and 101 f e d e s r e p o r t e d t h a t they inte.id t o g e t married a s soon a s J possible. S i n c e such a response does n o t y i e l d a unique e s t i m a t e of t h e expected  APPENDIX B aga a t - G a g e , respondents who gave such responses a r e excluded from t h e a n a l y s i s o f expected a g e a t marriage. N w , since t h e expected age a t marriage cannot b e l o v e r than t h e c u r r e n t age, it ia p o s s i b l e t h a t d i f f e r e n t i a l s o f expected age a t marriage by s o c i o - economic f a c t o r s might b e p a r t l y due t o corresponding d i f f e r e n c e s in age composition. With t h i s in mind, two sets of d i f f e r e n t i a l s a r e presented i n 1 Table 1, one s e t i g n o r i n g t h e age e f f e c t , and one a d j u s t i n g f o r i t . For never-married f e d e s , t h e f o l l o v i n g p a t t e r n s a r e d i s c e r n i b l e in T a b l a 1: 1. The education e f f e c t seems t o b e c u r v i l i n e a r (U-shaped) , but the e f f e c t i s n o t s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t (examine t h e t-values). W e return t o t h e education e f f e c t later. 2. &I f o r Religion, Buddhists and Hindus have a i g a i f i c a n t l y higher expected a g e a t marriage than C h r i s t i a n s ; b u t Phralinm do n o t d i f f e r from C h r i s t i a n s i n t h i s r e s p e c t ( t h e t v a l u e f o r t h e Kuslim vs- C h r i s t i a n c o n t r a s t is only 1.29). 3. An o v e r a l l s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t showa t h a t t h e E t h n i c Group e f f e c t is s i g r , i f i c a n t a t t h e 10%l e v e l , b u t tSe 8 c o n t r a s t s in T a b l e 1 a r e n o t s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant. 4. Those uho t h i n k :hat t h e i r marriages w i l l b e arranged by t h e i r p a r e n t s o r o t h e r r e l a t i v e s expect t o g e t married a t a r e l a t i v e l y younger age, compared t o those who a r e n o t s u r e whether t h e i r marriage w i l l b e of t h e arranged type. . 5. Those f o r vhom a s e a r c h f o r mace h a s been made o r i s underway expect t o g e t a a r r i e d a t a r e l a t i v e l y younger age than t h o s e f o r whom a search f o r mate has n o t y e t been launched. 6. Covrp-related problems do n o t s e e n t o matter much. (A s u b s t a n t i a l - C proportion of t h e female respondents r e p o r t e d t h a t no dowry pa*enc is r e q u i r e d t o n a r r y them off. T h e i r expected a g e a t marriage i s , on t h e average, not s i g n i f icancly d i f f e r e n t from t h a t of those f o r uhom dowry p a p e n t is required.  APPENDIX B -3- Also, d i f f i c u l t i e s , i f ar.j, i n r a i s i n g t h e funds needed t o pay t h e dowry d, n o t seem t o a f f e c t t h e expected timing of marriage.) 2 7. Those who b e l i e v e t h a t t h e i r marriage w i l l b e delayed i f no n e o l o c a l r e s i d e n c e can b e arranged beforehand e x p e c t t o g e t married a t a r e l a t i v e l y o l d e r age. 8. The o b l i g a t i o n t o w a i t f o r one's t u r n ( a m n g s i s t e r s ) tend t o d e l a y n a r r i a g e by a s i g n i f i c a n t l e n g t h o f time. As f o r b a c h e l o r s , very few of t h e p a t t e r n s i n Table 1 are s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant. One i n t e r e s t i n g exception i s t h e d e l a y in marriage a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e absence of o l d e r s i s t e r s . h i s p a t t e r n is o p p o s i t e t o t h e wait-for- one's-turn e f f e c t mentioned above f o r s p i n s t e r s . It may b e t h a t t h e family h a s an i n c e n t i v e t o a r r m g e t h e marriage of a son sooner i f h e has o l d e r s i s t e r s t h a n otherwise, because t h e f i n a n c i a l burden a s s o c i a t e d w i t h marrying o f f one o f the s o n ' s o l d e r s i s t e r s could b e eased somewhat u s i n g t h e dowry t h e son's wife brings with her. Y e now t u r n t o t h e d a t a i n Tables 2a and 2b c o n c e n i n g t h e traits respon- d e n t s c o n s i d e r important in t h e i r p r o s p e c t i v e spouses. The i s s u e of interest I s a h e t h e r t h e r e is any tendency t o h o l d on t o unusually high standards thereby making i t d i f f i c u l t to f i n d a s u i t a b l e match. . Table 2a s h w s t h a t never-married females want t h e i r husbands t o be of "good" c h a r a c t e r . -4s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l a t t a i n m e n t , 42 p e r c e n t want t h e i r spouses I I to have "a l i t t l e " o r "some" education, 14 p e r c e n t r e q u i r e "enough e d u c a t i o n t o have a job," - 27 p e r c e n t want 0-level - g r a d u a t e s , w h i l e 6 p e r c e n t a r e looking f o r c o l l e g e graduate.. A r e g u l a r source o f income f o r t h e i r husbands is d e s i r e d by most. A s f a r a s f p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a r e concerned, 6 1 percent a r e s a t i s f i e d * by "ordinary" f e a u r e s , 1 9 p e r c e n t want handsome men, w h i l e 12 percent do n o t c a r e about i t a t a l l . F i n a l l y c a s t e homogamy3 i s d e s i r e d by 85 percent o f =he respondents.  - 4- APPENDIX B mmini t h a t bachelors also look f o r spouaes of to Tabla 2b, w e n ~ t i c a "ggod" ("unblemished", "excellent") character. Education i a not a major con- s i d e r a t i o n in the m i n d s of a s i g n i f i c a n t proportion o f t h e bachelors intervicued, although some do p r e f e r educated women f o r t h e i r spouses ( = r e about t h i s later). S l i g h t l y rmre than a t h i r d of the respondents p r e f e r not t o marry a vorking voman, while almost a f i f t h p r e f e r j u s t the opposite. A s f o r physical characteristics, an st bachelo rs a r e sat i s f l e d v i t h "ordinary" features. I n t e r e s t i n g l y , c a s t e homogamy ir not a consideration f o r almost 30 percent of t h e bachelors, which is in contraat with the preference s t r u c t u r e of s p i n s t e r s ref e r r e d t o above. With respect to homogamocu preference, one matter of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t is vhether better-educated persons p r e f e r t o marry better-educated persons. Tables 3a and 3b show t h a t t h e r e is such a tendency among bachelors as well as spinsters. As f a r a s t h e desired age of t h e spouse i s concerned, t h e r e is some d i f f e r e n c e betueea bachelors and s p i n s t e r s , a s Tables 4a a d 4b show. Spinsters of age 24 t o 26 vant t h e i r mates t o b e of age 30, on t h e average, the corres- ponding figures f o r those of age 27 t o 28, 29 t o 31, and 32 to 34 being . respectively 32, 34, and 36. There is thus a tendency f o r the .gap between s e l f ' s age and t h e preferred age of the prospective husband t o narrow a s one becomes older. The opposite, however, seems t o b e t r u e f o r bachelors. Older vomen a r e . I not prefgrred by o l d e r men. T h i s implies t h a t finding a s u i t a b l e ciatch f o r o l d e r s p i n s t e r s is p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t . - To suanmarize, t h e r e is l i t t l e evidence . - &I t h e d a t a t h a t unusual demands 6 - - a r e being put foraard by never-married men ox vomen a s f a r a s the t r a i t s i n . B t h e i r prospective nates a t e concerned. Of cturse, the p r i n c i p a l ' s preferences in these respects a r e of l e s s consequence than those of the e l d e r s In the f a n i l y who a r e responsible f o r arranging marriages. Unfortunately ve do not have any d a t a on t h e p r e f e r e n c e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e e l d e r s in t h e family. But i t seems s a f e t o assume t h a t i f a son o r a d a u g h t e r is n o t i n c l i n e d t o p u t forward unusual demands, n e i t h e r v i l l b e t h e e l d e r s i n t h e family. One may t h e r e f o r e conclude t h a t t h e timing o f marriage is n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t e d by any d r a s t i c d i s e q u i l i b r i u m betveen t h e t r a i t compositions of t h e supply and t h e demand i n t h e marriage market. F i n a l l y , t h e c o v a r i a t e s of t h e expected age a t marriage i d e n t i f i e d i n t h i s n o t e do n o t seem t o b e much d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e o f t h e a c t u a l age a t marriage i d e n t i f i e d i n the text. But t h i s i n f e r e n c e s h o u l d b e received v i t h c a u t i o n , i n view of t h e p e c u l a r i t i e s of t h e samples of never-married persons used i n t h e a n a l y s e s (small sample size, and narrow a g e r e s t r i c t i o n ) .  APPENDIX B FOOTNOTES 1. To a d j u s t f o r c u r r e n t age, a t v o - f a c t o r a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e v a s . performed, each a n a l y s i s w i n g a g e and a p a r t i c u l a r f a c t o r of i n t e r e s t (e. g., Religion). To avoid too many c e l l s with zero frequencies, age groups r a t h e r than i n d i v i d u a l y e a r s of age were used. 2. The term n e l o c a l r e f e r s t o the p r a c t i c e by which nevly married couples e s t a b l i s h t h e i r own residence s e p a r a t e from both t h e b r i d e ' s and t h e groom's kin. 3. Homogamy r e f e r s t o t h e tendency of most indivi.1uals w i t h given c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t o s e l e c t , as a mate, a person w i t h s i m i l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .  APPENDIX B Table 1 Mean expected age a t marriage by s e l e c t e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and t h e e f f e c t of t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c on t h e expected a g e a t m a r r i a g e when c u r r e n t age i s taken i n t o account: Never-married females and males, S r i Lanka, 1979 Characteristics Never-married females Never-married males N Mean . B (t) N Mean . B (t) Education Under grade 6 Grades 6 t o 9 Grade 10 Higher Religion Buddhist Hindu Mus 1im Chris t i a n E t h n i c Group Sinhalese S r i Landa Tamil I n d i a n Tamil S r i Lanka Moor Work ( P a s t 12 m n t h s ) Worked Did n o t work Mate s e l e c t i o n Arranged "Love" Either Undecided Searchedlmatch f ~ w d n o t y e t searched . match found match n o t found - - ' i  APPENDIX B Table 1 (continued) ICean expected age at marriage by s e l e c t e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and t h e e f f e c t of t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c on t h e expected age a t marriage when c u r r e n t age is taken i n t o account: N e ~ * ? r - ~ t a r r i e d females and males, S r i Lanka, 1979 1 Characteristics Never-married females Never-married males L a N Mean e (t) N Mean B(t) Dowrp required? Yes No Dep ends mvry payment difficultleasy Not required Easy Not-so-easy Difficult Very d i f f i c u l t n e t h e r =triage v i l l be delayed i f neolocd residence not arrangec Yes N o Number of o l d e r brothers 0 1 2 3 4 o r mrx Number of o l d e r sisters 0 1 2 3 4 o r more  APPPWIX B Table 1 (continued) Hean expected age a t marriage by s e l e c t e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and t h e e f f e c t of t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c on t h e expected age a t marriage when c u r r e n t age i s taken i n t o account: Never-married females and males, S r i Lanka, 1979 Characteris t i c s Never-married females Never-married males - N ~ean (t) N Mean i (t) Delay in s e l f 9 s marriage due t o delay i n an o l d e r s i s t e r ' s marriage Not applicable* Yes N o Delay i n s e l f ' 8 marriage due t o responsibility toward a younger brother Not applicab le* Yes No Delay i n s e l f ' s marriage due t o responsibility toward a younger sister Not applicable* Yes No *No s i b l i n g s of the kind in question *.* Sample s i z e too smell - Reference category  APPENDIX B TABLE 2a TRAITS DESIRED I N PROSPECTIVE HUSBANDS: NEVER-MARRIED w.SRI LANKA, 1979 Trait Percent d e s i r i n g t h e t r a i t b Character : "Good" Non-smoking; non-drinking Other; n o t s t a t e d Education: "A l i t t l e " o r "some" 42 Educated enough t o have a job 14 0-level (Grad* 10) 27 College degree 6 Other; not s t a t e d 11 Income : 11 Average" of "some" 15 "Suf f '.dent t o l i v e " 31 Under Rs. 500 26 Rs. 500 o r higher 21 Not a c o n s i d e r a t i o n ; n o t s t a t e d 7 Job: "Ordinary" 30 Government job 28 Other jobs (non-government) 30 Other s p e c i f i c a t i o n ; Don't c a r e ; n o t s t a t e d 12 Physical "Ordinary" traits : Handsome Not a c o n s i d e r a t i o n Other s p e c i f i c a t i o n s ; not s t a t e d Caste: Same Xot. a consideratoa Other; not s t a t e d  APPENDIX B TABLE 2b TRAITS DESIRED I N PROSPECTIVE INSBANDS: NEVER-MARRIED MALES, SRI LANKIL, 1979 Trait Percent d e s i r i n g t h e t r a i t Character : " ~ x c e l l e n t " ; "Unblemished" 72 "Ordinary"; "Good" 17 "Simple" ; "Humble" 7 Other; Not a c o n s i d e r a t i o n ; n o t s t a t e d 4 Education: "A l i t t l e " o r "Some" " W e l l educated" 0-level o r higher Not a c o n s i d e r a t i o n Other; n o t s t a t e d Income : Should have an income Not a c o n s i d e r a t i o n Other; not s t a t e d Job : Should have a job 19 Should n o t be employed 36 Not a c o n s i d e r a t i o n 25 Other; not s t a t e d 20 Physical Very p r e t t y traits: "Ordinary" F a i r , t a l l , slim, etc. Other; not s t a t e d Caste: Same 65 Not a c o n s i d e r a t i o n 30 Other; not s t a t e d 5  APPENDIX B Table 3a & s o c i a t i o n between s e l f ' s educational attainment and d e s i r e d l e v e l of education f o r prospective spouse: Never-married females, S r i Lanka, 1979 Desired l e v e l of education f o r prospective spouse Self's Lif cle Enough College Not a education o r some t o hava 0-level degree consid- Other Total a fob errtion Grade 5 o r b elov Grades 6 to 9 Grade 10 34.1 Lg.9 33.5 7.1 0.0 9.4 100.0 Higher 7.1 21.4 17.9 39.2 0.0 14.3 99.9  APPENDTL: B Table 3b A s s o c i a t i o n between s e l f ' s e d u c a t i o n a l a t t a i n m e n t and d e s i r e d l e v e l of e d u c a t i o n f o r p r o s p e c t i v e spouse: Never-married males, S r i Lmka, 1979 I Desired l e v e l o f e d u c a t i o n f o r p r o s p e c t i v e spouse Self' Y Little Well 0- l e v e l Not con- Other Ic t a f educa t i c m o r scme educated o r degree sidereii Grade 5 or belw Grades 6 to 9 Grade 1 0 (0- l e v e l ) 27.2 9.9 40.7 17.3 4.9 100.0 o r higher  APPENDIX B Tabla 4a D i s t r i b u t i a o f nm-er-rried famalea of d i f f e r e n t age groups by desired age gzoups by desired! agf f o r t h e i r prospective husbands, S r i Lanka, 1979 h a i r e d age for husband - - - Curreat Age 24 ea 26 27 t o 28 25 to 31 32 to 36 ~ l l Tctal 99.0 99.9 100.1 99.9 99.9 Ysan 30 52 33 36 32 X li.5 95 92 47 379 -  APPENDIX B Tabla 4b Disr:ribution o f never-mrried d e s o f d i f f e r e n t age groups by desired age f o r t h e i r prospective wives, S r i L a n k , '9 Current Age Desired age for wife 27 t o 28 29 t o 31 32 t o 34 All Total Mean N  APPENDIX C IMPACT OF CWVGES I N AGE PATTERN OF NUPTIALITY ON FERTILITY Given t h e a g e - s p e c i f i c f e r t i l i t y r a t e s and p r o p o r t i o n n a r r i e d i n v a r i o u s age groups, i t is p o s s i b l e t o e s t i m a t e t h e impact of s h i f t s i n n u p t i a l i t y p a t t e r n on f e r t i l i t y , \:sing a s i m p l e s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n procedure. Table C 1 g i v e s t h e d e t a i l s of t h e c a l c u i a t i o n s . From T a b l e C 1 , one n o t e s t h a t i f d u r i n g 1965 t o 1971 t h e r e was no change i n m a r i t a l f e r t i l i t y , t h e T o t a l F e r t i l i t y Rate i n 1971 would h a v e been I 4.44, i n s t e a d of t h e observed f i g u r e 4.16. Hence 56 p e r c e n t of t h e d e c l i n e f r o m 4.80 i n 1965 t o 4.16 i n 1971 i e a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e marLcal f a c t o r . S i m i l a r l y , :f t h e r e was no d e c l i n e i n m a r i t a l f e r t i l i t y betwiien 1971 and 1974, t h e T o t a l F e r t i l i t y R a t e i n 1974 would have been 3.89 i n s t e a d of t h e observed 3.36, the marital factor thus. a c c o u n t i n g f o r 34 p e r c e n t of t h e d e c l i n e from 4.16 t o 3.36 i n T o t a l F e r t i l i t y Rate d u r i n g 1971 t o 1974.  TABLE C 1 - Estimated impact of changes i n age p a t t e r n of n u p t i a l i t y on f e r t i l i t y i n S r i Lanka d u r i n g 1965 t o 1971 and 1 9 7 1 t o 1974. . , ~ g e - s p e c i fi c f e r t i l i t y r a r e 1 P r o p o r t i o n married2 Expected age-apcei. Age group fertility rate Total f e r t . race 4.80 4.16 3.36 4.44 3.89 1 Sourco: Pop:,; \ t i o n Reference Bureau. 1981. World F e r t i l i t y : A C h a r t . The 1965 and 1971 f i g u r e s a r e based on r e g i s t r a t i o n d a t a , w h i l e t h e 1974 f i g u r e s a r e based on t h e 1975 S r i Lanka World F e r t i l i t y Survey. Note t h a t F i r s t Report of t h e S r i L a n k World F e r t i l i t y Survey shows a g e - s p e c i f i c f e r t i l i t y r a t e s a 3 whole numbers p e r 1000 women; t h e e n t r y z e r o a f t e r t h e f i r s t decimal shovn h e r e i n h a s been i n s e r t e d For t h sake o f u n i f o r m i t y ; it d o e s not r e p r e s e n t r e a l i t y . 2 Source: F i r s t Report of t h e 1975 S r i L a n k World F e r t i l i t y Survey, T a b l e 4.5. * 3 These Eigures were o b t a i n e d by l i n e a r i n t & r p A l a t i o n . 6 XSFR (Proportion a a r r i e d / P r o p o r t i o n married 1965 1971 1965) 5 ASFR ( P r o p o r t i on married'? / P r o p o r t i o n married ) I971 1974 1971  POPOLITION & tlU>NN RESOL'RCZS DIVISION DISCUSSION PAPERS [A * by t h e number i n d i c a t e s t h e p a p e r i s Bank-confidential o r otherwise r e s t r i c t e d . ] . . 81-1 Oey A. Xeesook, "Demographic C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f I n d i v i d u a l s and t h e Measurenent of if e t i n e Income". F e b r u a r y 1981. 81-2 Susan H. Cochrane, "The Economics o f F e r t i l i t y w i t h Examples from Asia". F e b r u a r y 1981. 81-3 Rashid F a r u q e e , " S o c i a l I n f r a s t r u c t u r e and S e r v i c e s i n Zimbabwe". F e b r u a r y 1981. . .4* R i c h a r d S a b o t , A. B e r r y , A. Hazlewood, J. K n i g h t , J . A r n i t a g e a n d M. B o i s s i e r e , " C o g n i t i v e S k i l l s : T h e i r D e t e r m i n a n t s and I n f l u e n c e o n E a r n i n g s i n Two Poor Urban Economies." F e b r u a r y 1981. 81-5 Dean T. J a m i s o n , B a r b a r a S e a r l e , S t e p h e n Heyneman, and K l a u s G a l d a "Improving E l e m e n t a r y Mathematics E d u c a t i o n i n Nicaragua: An E x p e r i m e n t a l S t u d y o f t h e Impact o f Textbooks and Radio o n Achievement". March 1981. 81-6 Rashid F a n i q e e : "Analyzing t h e Impact o f H e a l t h S e r v i c e s : Narangwal and O t h e r E x p e r i e n c e s " . March 1981. 81-7 J . B. Knight and R - H. S a b o t . "Labor Market D i s c r i m i n a t i o n i n a P o o r Urban Economy". Xarch 1981. 81-8 Oey A. Heesook, " I n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s between Cemographic F a c t o r s and Income D i s t r i b u t i o n : Problems o f Measurement, D e s c r i p t i o n a n d I n t e r p r e t a t i o n " . A p r i l 1981. 81-9 Susan H. Cochrane, Nirmala J o s h i and Kalpana Xandwani, "Fertility A t t i t u d e s a n d B e h a v i o r i n t h e Nepal T e r a i " . A p r i l 1981. 81-10 J.B. Knight and R i c h a r d S a b o t , "The R o l e of t h e Firm i n Wage Determination: An A f r i c a n Case Study". A p r i l 1981. 81-11 J . B . Knight and R i c h a r d S a b o t , "The R e t u r n s t o Education: Increasing w i t h E x p e r i e n c e o r D e c r e a s i n g w i t h Expansion?". March 1981. 81-12 J . B . Knight and R i c h a r d S a b o t , "Prom X i g r a n t s t o P r o l e t a r i a n s : Employment E x p e r i e n c e , M o b i l i t y and Wages i n T a a a n i a " . ?larch 1981. '4 81-13 - - A. Berry and R i c h a r d S a b o t , "Uneaployment and ~ c o ' i o m i c Development". A p r i l 1981. + I) 81.-14 Rashid Faruqee and E t h n a Johnson, " H e a l t h , S u t r i t i G n and Family P l a n n i n g : A Survey of E x p e r i m e n t s dnd s p e c i a l ' P r o j e c t s i n I n d i a " . A p r i l 1981. 81-15 F r a n c o i s O r i v e l and Dean T. J a m i s o n , "The C o s t - E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f Distance Teaching P r o j e c t s " . June 1981  81-16 R i c h a r d S a b o t , 'Labor F o r c e C r o v t h , Employment and E a r n i n g s i n Egypt: 1966-1968". khy 1981. . . 81-17 K.C. Z a c h a r i a h , "Anonaly o f t h e F e r t i l i t y D e c l i n e i n K e r a l a : Social Development, A g r a r i a n R e f o r a s , o r t h e Family P i a n n i n g Program". Nay 1981. - 81-18 R i c h a r d S a b o t , A. B e r r y , A. Hazlevood, J. Knight, P. C o l l i e r , I J. A n n i t a g e , H . B o i s s i e r e , " E d u c a t i o n Expansion and Labor S h r k e t Adjustment i n Kenya and T a n z a n i c - A Background Paper". t h y 1981. 81-19 Nancy B i r d s a l l and Oey ?!eesook, "Child ~ c h o o i i n ~ , Nunber of Children and I n t e r g e n e r a t i o n a l T r a n s m i s s i o n of I n e q u a l i t y : A Simulation". May 1981. 81-20 F r a n c o i s O r i v e l , "The Impact o f A g r i c u l t u r a l E x t e n s i o n S e r v i c e s : A Review o f t h e L i t e r a t u r e " . J u l y 1981. Also a v a i l a b l e i n F r e n c h as "L'impact d e s S e r v i c e s d e V u l g a r i s a t i o n X g r i c o l e : Revue d e l a Littgrature" . 81-21 Nancy B i r d s a l l and M. L o u i s e Fox, "Why Slales Earn More: L o c a t i o n , J o b P r e f e r e n c e s and J o b D i s c r i m i n a t i o n b o n g B r a z i l i a n S c h o o l t e a c h e r s " . Nay 1981. 81-22 A l t h e a H i l l , "The Demographic S i t u t a t i o n i n Sub-Saharan A f r i c a : A D i s c u s s i o n Paper". ?iay 1981. 81-23 R. S a b o t , A. B e r r y , . k. Hazlewood, J. K n i g h t , J. Armitage, M. Z o i s s i e r e "Does t h e Expansion o f E d u c a t i o n Conpress t h e S t r u c t u r e o f Wages and Reduce t h e I n e q u a l i t y o f Pay? X P r e l i m i n a r y A n a l y s i s " . J u l y 1981. 81-24* Nancy B i r d s a l l and Dean T. Jamison. "Income and O t h e r F a c t o r s I n f l u e n c i n g F e r t i l i t y and X o r t a l i t y i n China". O c t o b e r 1981. 81-25* Nancy B i r d s a l l , S u l e k h a P a t e 1 and K. C. Z a c h a r i a h , " A l t e r n a t i v e P r o j e c t i o n s o f t h e Chinese Population". J u n e 1981. ,81-26* Dean T. J a o i s o n , T.J. Ho, and F.L. Trowbgidge. "Food A v a i l a b i l i t y and t h e N u t r i t i o n a l S t a t u s o f C h i l d r e n i n China". September 1981. Dean T. Jamison. " C h i l d X a l n u t r i t i o n and School R e t a r d a t i o n i n China". 81-27* September 1981. - - 81-23 Deborah L h a n m X a c u i l l a n . "Language P o l i c i e s f o r A f r i c a n P r i n a r y E d u c a t i o n : Sunnary af t h e Xnglophcne Research L i t e r a t u r e . " J u l y 1981. 81-29 w T a n i a Thevenin. "Les E n p l i c a t i o n s Pedagogiques d e s Po1i:iques d e a I l a n g u e s d a n s l ' e n s e i g n e n e n t e n X f r i q u e : Une revue d e l a l i t t e r a t u r e Francophone". J u n e 1981. Also a v a i l a b l e i n E n g l i s h a s " P e d a g o g i c a l I m p l i c a t i o n s of h n ~ u a g e P o l i c y i n A f r i c a n Schools: A Review o f t h e Francophone L i t e r a t u r e " . V i c e n t e Paqueo. "A Household P r o d u c t i o n Model o f S c h o o l E n r o l l n e n t : A P r o b i t A n a l y s i s o f t h e 1978 B i c o l X u l t i p u r p o s e S u r v e y D ~ t a " . J u n e 1981 Bryan L. B o u l i e r a n d V i c e n t e B. Paqueo. "On t h e Theory and > f e a s u r e m e n t s of t h e Determinants of Nortality". J u n e 1981 Reynaldo H a r t o r e l l . ' N u t r i t i o n and H e a l t h S t a t u s I n d i c a t o r s : . S u g g e s t i o n s f o r S u r v e y s o f t h e S t a n d a r d of L i v i n g i n Developing Countries ". J u n e 1981. R. S a b o t , A. B e r r y , A. Hazelwood, J. K n i g h t , J. Armitage, and y. Boissi.?re. " C o r r e l a t e s o f E d u c a t i o n a l A t t a i n m e n t i n Tanzania". J u l y 1981. S u s a n H. Cochrane. "The D e t e r m i n a n t s o f F e r t i l i t y and C h i l d S u r v i v a l i n t h e Nepal T e r a i " . J u l y 1981. J o a n n e L e s l i e , B.G. Baidya, and K. h'andwani. " P r e v a l e n c e and C o r r e l a t e s o f Childhood X a l n u t r i t i o n i n t h e T e r a i Region of NepaL'- J u l y 1981. R. ~ N a n s e l lP r o t h e r o . " P e r s p e c t i v e s o n P o p u l a t i o n N o b i l i t y i n Yest Africa". August 1981. Timothy King. " P o p u l a t i o n Growth, I n t e r n a t i o n a l Resource T r a n s f e r s , and I n t e r n a t i o n a l X i g r a t i o n " . August 1 9 8 1 Timothy King. " I m m i g r a t i o n from Developing C o u n t r i e s : Some Philosophical Issues". August 1981. R. S a b o t and J. Knight. "Why Wages D i f f e r : Earnings Functions i n a ' Poor Urban Economy". August 1981. J o a o B a t i s t a d e A r a u j o e O l i v e i r a and F r a n c o i s O r i v e l . "In-Service T e a c h e r T r a i n i n g System: Logos I1 i n B r a z i l " . August 1981. R. S a b o t , A. Berry. A. Hazlewood, J. K n i g h t , J. Xrmitage and M. B o i s s i e r e . " C o r r e l a t e s o f E d u c a t i o n a l A t t a i n m e n t i n Kenya". August 1981. P e t e r F a l l o n . "Incomes, P o v e r t y a n d Income D i s t r i b u t i o n i n R u r a l Botswana: A S y n t h e s i s of E v i d e n c e Based on t h e R u r a l Income ' D i s t r i b u t i o n Survey." September 1981. - Eiarbara Watanabe and Eva H u e l l e l . ' A P o v e r t y ~ r o & l ef o r R u r a l Botswana." Forthcoming. Eva H u e l l e r . "The Value and A l l o c a t i o n of Time i n R u r a l Botswana-' Forthcoming. 81-45 Robert E.B. Lucas. "The Distr'bution and Efficiency of Crop production i n T r i b a l Areas .of aotswana. " September 1981. 81-46 Robert E.B. Lucas. "The D i s t r i b u t i o n of Wages and Employment i n S u r a l Botswana." September 1981. 81-47 Dov Chernichovsky . "Socioeconooic and Demographic Aspects o F School Enrollment and Attendance i n Bural Botswana." Forthcoming. 81-43 Dov Chernichovsky. "Socioeconomic C o r r e l a t e s of F e r t i l i t y Behavior i n Rural Botswana." Forthcoming. 81-49 S h e r r i Kossoudji and Eva Wdeller. "The Economic and Demographic S t a t u s of Female Headed Households i n Botswana." Forthcoming. 81-50 Francois Orivel. "La T816vision S c o l a i r e du Se'ne'gal: Zvaluation Economique e t Perspectives." Aout 1981. (Sumary a v a i l a b l e i n English.) 81-51 H i l l a r y Perraton, Dean T. Jamison and Francois Orivel. %ass Media f o r A g r i c u l t u r a l Extension i n >falaui". September 1981 81-52 Thomas I?. Mersick. "The Impact of Access t o Piped Vater on I n f a n t M o r t a l i t y i n t'rban S r a z i l , 1970 t o 1976." August 1981. 81-53 N. Krishqan Namboodiri. "Deteminants of F e r t i l i t y i n S r i Lanka." S e p t m b e r , 1981 81-54 N. Krishnan Namboodiri. "Age a t Xarrtage i n S r i Lanka." October, 1981