The demography of Malawi

PHN Technical Note 86-20 THE DEKOGRAPHY OF NALAWI by Althea Hill May 1986 Population, Health and Nutrition Department World Bank The World Bank does not accept responsibility for the views expressed herein which are those of the author(s) and should not be attributed to the World Bank or to its affiliated organizations. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions are the results of research supported by the Bank; they do not necessarily represent official policy of the Bank. The designations employed, the presentation of material, and any maps used in this document are solely for the convenience of the reader and do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsover on the part of the World Bank or its affiliates concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitations of its boundaries, or national affiliation. PHN Technical Note 86-20 THE MNACP (IATT ABSTRACT This paper (drafted first in 1980 after a mission of one month to Malawi) gives an account of the principal features of the demography of Malawi over the past few decades, based on analysis of data fran the 1966 and 1977 censuses and the 1970-72 Population Change Survey. Population growth, distribution, structure and migration patterns and trends in fertility, mortality, migration and natural increase are analyzed at the national, regional and urban/rural level. The most striking demographic characteristics of Malawi are very high fertility and exceptionally high childhood mortality. The national total fertility rate is estimated at between 7.5 and 8, a value extremely high by world standards and equaled or surpassed only in parts of eastern anid southern Africa and the Middle East. Within Malawi, fertility is highest in Central region (8.5 or nore), lowest in Southern region (7-7.5), and around the national average in Northern region. Urban fertility is only slightly lower than rural (7.5 versus 7.5-8.0). The level of childhood mortality is also among the highest in the morld, with an estimated one-third of children durirg the early 1970s dying before reaching 5 years of age. Only minor declines had occurred over the previous two decades. Such levels are unparalleled in eastern and southern Africa anid are rarely equalled or surpassed even in western Africa, itself the highest-mortality region in the world. Within Malawi, childhood mortality is highest in Central region, with 38 percent of children in the early 1970s dyirg in their first 5 years of life, lowest in Northern region (29 percent) and just below the national average (31 percent) in Southern region. Urban mortality is noticeably lower than rural (22 versus 34 percent). By contrast, adult mortality does not appear to be unusually severe, resemblirg levels in other parts of eastern and southern Africa, anid there is little variation between regions. Expectation of life at birth is estimated at 41 years in the early 1970s, having risen only slightly fran about 37 years in the late 1950s. Little is known of determinants for fertility anid almost nothirg for mortality. What is known concerning fertility is in harmony with the high estimated TFRs; early, stable, mnogamous marriage, no significant problems of pathological sterility ad negligible use of nodern contraception. one interesting clue to the eceptional severity of childhood nortality is the apparent existence of similarly high levels in those regions of neighboring countries which border Malawi, but further confirmation of this pattern is required. In other respects, the demography of Malawi follows normal patterns of eastern and southern Africa. Emigration to other parts of southern Africa, principally South Africa, has been and is important, though probably now declining. Within the country, migration is directed mainly into Central region and the newer urban centers, chiefly the capital Lilongwe. However, the overall level of urbanization is still very low, at only 8.5 percent in 1977. Prepared by: Altbea Hill Population, Health and Nutrition Department May 1986 THE DEMOGRAPHY OF MALAWL 1. Sources of Data Censuses of Malawi (then Nyasaland) were taken in 1911, 1921, 1926, 1931 and 1945, but none satisfied modern conditions of individual enumerition and exact age determination. Malawi's first modern census was held in August 1966 and its second in September 1977. As everywhere in Africa, vital registration hardly exists in Malawi. It is therefore necessary to derive estimates of fertility and mortality from information collected in censuses and special surveys. Several small scale enquiries were carried out between 1920 and the second-World War, but the data collected, though interesting, are generally too limited and too unreliable for any conclusions. No specific information was collected in the 1966 census, though the age distribution can be used to estimate fertility. A national demographic sample survey, the Malawi Population Change Survey (PCS), was therefore carried out between 1970 and 1972. This survey was of the 'dual record' type. After the initial base enumeration of the sample population (in February 1970) a resident registrar was installed in each sample area to pick up and record births, deaths, and moves in or out of the area as they occurred. In addi- tion, interviewers visited sample households every six months and enquired about births, deaths and moves since the previous visit. The two systems of data collection were entirely independent. Then the vital events recorded by each system were individually matched, so that an adjustment (known as the Chandrasekaran-Deming, or CD, adjustment) could be made to the two vital event totals to produce a final total. 1/ The PCS also collected conventional retrospective information from the sample households on the number of children ever born alive and the number of children still surviving,(during the initial enumeration in February, 1970) and on whether the parents of each respondent were still alive (during the second interviewerso visit, i.e. February 1971). These data could therefore be analysed by standard indirect techniques to produce estimates of mortality and fertility that could be compared with the direct estimates available from the PCS. The survey was designed to produce results at national level only. However these were further split into urban and rural. The total sample popu- lation was about 31,000 persons, of which just under half were urban dwellers. Unfortunately, the urban population comprised not much more than 5 percent of the total population, and hence the national sample population was effectively little more than 16 or 17 thousand. The numbers of vital events on which national results were based were thus rather small, particularly in the case. of age-specific deaths, and sampling variability was consequently always a potentially disturbing factor. 1/ Though in fact the reported data were finally published without any adjustment. r2 The 1977 census fortunately collected a wide range of demographic data. Households were asked for numbers of deaths during the year before the census. All respondents were asked if their parents were still alive. Females 10 years of age were asked how many live births they had ever had, how many of those children were still alive, and how many live births they had during the year before the census. These data were tabulated by age, by region and by the urban/rural division, though unfortunately not by district. The information on parity 1/ and child survival was also tabulated by educa- tion and marital'status of mother, but, again unfortunately, not also by age of women, so that no useful analysis could be carried out for these categories of women. As regards migration, Malawi, like the rest of Africa, is not in a position to collect full and reliable information of either internal or in- ternational moves as they occur, except for the relatively unimportant cate- gory of air travel. However, both the 1966 and 1977 censuses collected information on place of birth, which can yield estimates of internal migra- tion, and of immigration from outside Malawi; the 1977 census also asked for place of residence 12 months before the census. Moreover, the 1966 census asked for data on relatives working abroad, from which estimates of emigration outside Malawi can be made; while the 1977 census asked whether respondents had ever worked abroad. Other sources of information are censuses of neigh- bouring countries, and employment data from the South African mine industry. 2. Recorded Population Growth The enumerated populations of 1966 and 1977, together with the national figure from the PCS initial base enumeration in 1970, are given below, together with the accompanying rates of recorded population growth. Table 1 Annual Average Population Enumerated Population Growth Rate 2/ 3/ 3/ 3/ 1966 1970 1977 1966-70 1970-77 -1966-77 Total Malawi 4,039,583 4,119,547 5,547,460 .69 3.89 2.86 Males 1,913,262 1,942,415 2,673,589 .58 4.18 3.02 Females 2,126,321 2,177,132 2,873,871 .80 3/63 2.72 Northern Region 497,491 - 648,853 - - 2.40 Central Region 1,474,952 - 2,143,716 - 3.37 Southern Region 2,067,140 - 2,754,891 - 2.59 1/ Parity in demographic usage means the number of live births .a woman has ever had. 2/ The 1966-70 interenumeration period is taken as 3.5 years; the 1970-77 interenumeration period as 7.58 years; and-the 1966-77 intercensal period as 11.083 years. 3/ The PCS was confined to the African population only (which comprised 99.5 percent of the total population in 1966 and 99.7 percent in 1977). There- fore 1966-70 and 1970-77 growth rates are for the African population only. How reliable are these recorded figures? We first note that all are for de facto populations i.e. the population actually found by the enu- merators at the time of enumeration.l/ Since international and internal migration have been substantial in Malawi this is an important distinction, and the recorded population totals and growth rates should always be evaluated with the migration factor in mind. This will be dealt with more fully later. The completeness of enumeration in 1966 was assessed by means of a Post Enumeration Survey (PES) carried out immediately after the census. A sample of selected areas was re-enumerated by the most experienced enume- ration teams, searching both for missed villages or parts of villages, and for missed persons within dwelling units. The PES results were matched with the census results and differences reconciled by further field visits. The net national undercount was put at 2.6 percent, with 95% confidence limits of 1.2 and 4.0 percent; the regional net undercounts were 2 percent for Northern Region, 1.9 percent for Central Region and 3.2 percent for Southern Region. A PES, even when well-conducted, is likely to understate the actual level of undercounting,partly because it will suffer from the same problems in enumeration as the original count (such as poor communications or lack of cooperation from the population) and partly because the enumera- tors may be less than highly motivated to discover their own deficiencies in the census. 2/ However, an undercount of 2.6 percent may probably be accep- ted safely as a minimum estimate of the true undercount in 1966. No PES was carried out in 1977. However, it is considered likely that coverage did not vary substantially between 1966 and 1977, though a slight improvement in 1977 is quite probable. No major difficulties in administration, communications, or cooperation from the population arose in either census; but communications and levels of education in general improved during the intercensal period, which might have made field operations easier and raised the quality of both interviewing and responses. 3/ We may thus assume with some confidence that 1966-1977 intercensal growth rates do reflect the actual growth in the de facto population, with perhaps a slight upward bias. 1/ Or to be more precise, the population who slept in each visited house- hold on the preceding night in the censuses, and the currently resident members of a household in the PCS. 2/ It is usually necessary to re-use census teams for the PES, because of the difficulty of finding an additional work force of adequate quality. Teams may of course be assigned to re-enumerate other areas than those they themselves counted in the census; but apparently (according to -a personal communication from the commissioner of the NSO) the Malawi 1966 ,PES put teams back into their original enumeration areas. 3/ It is also easier to conduct a census when there is the experience and ground work of previous census of good quality to draw upon, than when it is the first such operaton to be attempted. -4 It is obvioms, however, from Table 1 that the PCS enumeration of 1970 was deficient. This is commonly the case with demographic. surveys, which naturally tend to focus more on extracting accurate information on fertility, mortality and other topics of interest than on a complete enume- ration of the base population. The 1966-70 and 1970-76 growth rates will therefore not be further considered. We are thus left with the 1966-1977 intercensal growth rates of 2.86 percent for Malawi as a whole, 3.02 percent for males and 2.72 percent for females. Normally national intercensal growth between two censuses of comparable quality should be a good guide to the rate of natural increase - the difference between the crude birth rate and crude death rate. This is not necessarily so in Malawi, however, and we must now consider the influence of migration. 3. International Migration For the last 50 years at least, Malawi has experienced heavy net emigration. 1/ Migrants went primarily to South Africa, Zimbabwe and Zambia, and were primarily young adult males in search of wage employment in mines, plantations or private farms. They were usually absent for a few years at a time, sometimes much more, and sometimes no doubt, never returned. In 1974, following the deaths in a plane crash of a consignment of emigrants to the South Africa mines, emigration to the mines was abruptly halted, and there was a mass return to Malawi. However, some degree of outflow to the mines has persisted. Precise data on the volume of international migration are difficult to obtain. A preliminary idea of its level and trend can be got by examining sex ratios in 1966, 1970 and 1977. These are given in Table 2 below. Table 2 Sex Ratio (Males Per Hundred Females) 1966 1970 2/ 1977 Malawi 90 89 93 Northern Region 85 - 89 Central Region 88 95 Southern Region 92 - 92 Malawi Ages 0-14 98 97 99 15-49 81 79 88 50+ 99 103 92 1/ Earlier in the century immigration into Malawi, principally from Mozambique, occurred on a large scale. It does not seem, however, that immigration has been important in recent years, at least between 1966 and 1977. The number of persons born abroad enumerated in 1966 was 295 thousand, falling to 289 thousand in 1977, or 7.3 and 5.2 percent of the total enumerated population respectively. Most came from Mozambique in both years. 2/ For the African population only. It can be seen that a gross deficiency of males existed in Malawi and all its regions in 1966; that this persisted in 1970; and that it had im- proved somewhat by 1977. The slight variations in trend between regions may reflect the varying attractiveness of regions both to their native born populations and to internal migrants from elsewhere in Malawi, with Southern Region having been the most attractive before 1966 and Central Region in 1977. It is also clear that the male deficit exists largely among adults 1/, a strong confirmation that the cause is in fact migration. We can make a rough estimate of the national number of missing males (presumed to be mainly migrants abroad) in 1966 and 1977 by assuming that the 'normal' sex ratio of the population is approximately 100. (This latter assumption is.supported by stable populations generated from the best available estimates of fertility and mortality; given a sex ratio at birth of 103,.the sex ratio of the stable population emerges as 101, while a sex ratio at birth of 100 would yield a population sex ratio of about 98) 2/. Missing males in 1966 would then amount to about 213,000 (falling to f71,000 if the true ratio were 98, rising to 234,000 if it were 101). Similar figures for 1977 would be 200,000,143,000 and 229,000. The implied intercensal gain of males ranges from 5 to 28 thousand. It is clear that the recorded sex ratios imply only a rather modest net return migration of males between 1966 and 1977. Some direct information on migration also is available from the 1966 census, where details were asked of all relatives working abroad, including the dependents of such relatives. The most relevant data are given in Table 3. 1/ This is even clearer in the full distributions by sex and age shown in Appendix Tables A.1:1 to A.1:9. 2/ A sex ratio at birth of 103 is what is usually assumed for African populations, since there is some evidence that the sex ratio is below the usual range of 104-107. No sex ratio at birth as low as 100 has ever been reliably recorded for a large population. Table 3 Total Relatives Working Outside Malawi: 1966 266,000 Male Relatives Working Outside Malawi: 1966 244,000 Female Relatives Working Outside Malawi: 1966 22,000 Total Dependents Living Outside Malawi: 1966 252,000 Dependent Wives Living Outside Malawi: 1966 73,000 Dependent Children Living Outside Malawi: 1966 179,000 Relatives Working in Rhodesia: 1966 139,000 - 52% emigrant relatives Relatives Working in South Africa: 1966 68,000 - 26% emigrant relatives Relatives Working in Zambia: 1966 45,000 - 17% emigrant relatives Relatives Working in Tanzania: 1966 8,000 = 3% emigrant relatives Relatives Working in Mozambique: 1966 3,000 = 1% emigrant relatives Relatives Working in Other Countries: 1966 3,000 - 1% emigrant relatives Relatives from Northern Region 1966 46,000 - 9.2% enumerated Working Outside Malawi: population 1966 Relatives from Central Region 1966 94,000 - 6.4% enumerated Working Outside Malawi: population 1966 Relatives from Southern Region 1966 126,000 - 6.1% enumerated Working Outside Malawi: population 1966 Dependents from Northern Region 1966 68,000 =13.7% enumerated Living Outside Malawi: population 1966 Dependents from Central Region 1966 72,000 - 4.9% enumerated Living Outside Malawi: population 1966 Dependents from Southern Region 1966 108,000 - 5.2% enumerated Living Outside Malawi: population 1966 Households in 1966 reported 266,000 relatives working abroad, 244,000 or 92 percent of them males. These are figures of the same order of magnitude as those derived from consideration of the 1966 sex ratio; moreover, if these relatives are added to the de facto population, the sex ratio of such a de jure population becomes 100. Thus there is some prima facie reason to consider these reported figures as plausible. -7- Further,support can be found in data derived from the censuses of neighbouring countries, given some probable degree of understatement in the country of destination and -of both understatement and inflation by duplication in the 1966 census. The South Africa census of 1960 enumerated about 63 thousand Malawians, nearly 62 thousand of them male, compared with the 68 thousand relatives reported in South Africa in 1966. Unfortunately the South Africa census of 1970 apparently did not tabulate "foreign Bantu" by country of origin. The data on mine contracts, however, (given in Malawi Statistical Year Books) show the number of Malawians in South African mines dropping from 36 thousand in 1964 to 29 thousand in 1966, then rising steadily to 91 thousand in 1970 and to a final peak of 123 thousand in 1973. There can be little doubt, therefore, that the total number in South Africa-was growing for most of the 1960s, and that a figure of 68 thousand for 1966 is quite feasible. The Rhodesian census of 1969 reported 163 thousand Malawians, 123 thousand of them males; quite reconcilable with the 1966 census figure of 139 thousand. The Zambia census of 1969 reported a range of 49-55 thousand Malawians (depending on whether the classification was by citizenship or by birthplace), which again compares reasonably well with the 45 thousand reported in the 1966 census. The agreement with the Tanzanian census of 1967 (which gave 18 thousand Malawians versus the 1966 figure of 8 thousand) and the Mozambique census of 1970 (which gave 700 Malawians versus the 1966 figure of 3,000) is not so good. However, the numbers are relatively unimportant, and in the case of Mozambique, at least, too dubious to worry about. The general reasonableness of the 1966 data on relatives working abroad therefore seems well supported. The rather surprising geographical distribution of these emigrants, with over half reported in Zimbabwe and only one quarter in South Africa, also seems to be confirmed. Apparently the general impression that migrant labout was directed primarily to South Africa, particularly the mines, may have been erroneous. What has happened in recent years, of course, is still unclear, though data from the 1980 round of censuses in Southern Africa may be helpful, when available. Problems remain, however, with the 1966 data concerning the reported dependents living abroad with emigrant relatives. Their nationality was not recorded, and there is hence no way of knowing whether they are Malawian, and thus part of Malawi's de jure population, or wives and children acquired abroad; nor indeed, how accurate the responses to such questioning were. 1/ 1/ If they are included in the de jure population (splitting the children equally by sex), the ratio rises to 97, still appreciably more normal than the de facto sex ration. It is perhaps worth noting that the South African and Rhodesian census data do not suggest very large numbers of females, and hence of dependents, though such data perhaps are particularly doubtful. Data from Malavi for later dates are very few. 1/ As already men- tioned, mine contract figures indicate an increase in emigration between 1966 and 1973. Emigration to other labour markets and other countries could well have risen also. It is believed that about 150,000 persons returned to Malawi after 1974. 2/ This would cover all the emigrants in the mines at least, but there is no information on how emigrants in other parts of the South African economy, or in other countries, responded. Moreover, mine contract data show that after a rapid fall in Malawian contracts from 124 thousand in 1973 to 68 thousand in 974, 2.7 thousand in 1975 and zero in 1976, the number of con- tracts then jumps back to 17 thousand in 1977 and 18 thousand in 1978 (the latest year shown in the latest Malawi Statistical Yearbook); this indicates that emigration restarted to the mines, at least. It may be that many of the emigrants elsewhere either never returned, or left anew before 1977. As regards the movements of dependents, nothing is known. Certainly, an estimated return migration of 150,000 compared with the 1966 reports of relatives abroad, implies that large numbers of workers (at least 116 thousand) still remained abroad. We have seen, however, that the evidence of sex ratios indicate that even smaller numbers of net return migrants we.re still in Malawi by 1977. It is tempting here to look for further evidence of net return in the substantial excess of male over female intercensal growth, by attributing the differential to net immigration of males between 1966 and 1977. If, for example, we assumed that female intercensal growth was equal to female natural increase, and that the rate of male natural increase was about the same as the female rate (the latter at least, normally a fair assumption) we could estimate intercensal male net return migration at 93,000. This value is substantially above the figures derived from sex ratios, but is not incompatible with the estimate of 150,000, provided that some fresh or extra emigration took place. However, such a procedure is not warranted. It is shown in the section on vital rates that most or all of the male advantage in intercensal growth can be accounted for by a male de facto advantage in the rate of natural increase; itself arising from the peculiar, migratory, age and sex distribution of the Malawi de facto population. Indeed, the best available estimates of natural increase are close to intercensal growth rates in the case of both male and female populations, thus strongly supporting the evidence from enumerated sex ratios that the number of net return migrants was rather small by 1977. 1/ The 1977 census collected data on whether respondents had worked abroad, and the years since last return. These are not strictly comparable with the the 1966 data and not as informative. Unfortunately, they were tabulated among the labour force data, which I did not bring back from Malawi. They would be of little help here, in any case. 2/ Personal communication from E.P.D. -9- It is obvious that no very precise, quantified conclusions are possible here. Nevertheless it is clear that Malawi in 1977 still suffered from a substantial male deficit, due to emigration, even though this deficit was somewhat reduced between 1966 and 1977. Both the age structure and the recorded growth of the male population and the total population are distorted by this factor. Important as international migration has been in Malawi, it is a mistake to neglect the significance of internal migration as well. We now turn to the consideration of population mobility within Malawi0s borders. Population Distribution, Urbanization and Internal Migration These topics are obviously all interrelated, and will be treated in the same section. The data on internal migration (namely, cross-tabula- tions of population by place of birth and place of enumeration, as well as, in 1977, by place of enumeration, place of birth and place of residence 12 months before the census), are presented and discussed in full in Appendix 2. Only a summary is given here. We begin with a look at population distribution and mobility at regional level. Tables (4) and (5) below summarize data on regional density, growth, urbanization, and migration in 1966 and 1977. 1/ 'Urban Areas' in 1966 signified all townships, town planning areas and District Centres. The 1977 definition was basically the same. Data were not tabulated by region for 1966. 2/ Native-born here signifies born in the region in question. 3/ Applies to the African population only. Internal migration data were only tabulated for the African population. 上 Table 5 Internal Internal Net Region Migrants Gained Migrants Lost internal Migrants 1966 1977 1966 1977 1966 1977 Northern 33,265 28,701 54,130 73,475 -20,865 -44,774 Central 149,627 152,004 139,961 85,049 + 92 666 +66,955 Southe=r 270,890 98',383 259,691 120,764 +11,199 -22,181 The overall pattern of levels and trends is fairly clearly demon- strated here. Both the thinly populated, lightly urbanized, Northern Region and the heavily settled, relatively highly urbanized, Southern Region have recently been losing population to Central Region, which falls between the other two in density and is actually the least urbanized of all. Northern Reaion has historically been the region most affected by out migration, both internal and external. This is evident in the low 1966 Northern sex ratio and percent of native-born population still resident, both the lowest of all three regions. The 1966 level of in migration was also the lowest in Malawi, and N6rthern was the only Region to record a net loss of internal migrants, which amounted to nearly 21 thousand persons., Between 1966 and 1977 Northern region does not appear to have increased noticeably in attrac- t;Lon. Although the sex ratio did rise, it remained the lowest in Malawi, as did the percent of aative-born population retained (and the level of immigra- tion)*; indeed the percent retained actually declined (counting the population enumerated in Malawi only) while the net internal loss more than doubled, to nearly 45 thousand. Southern region was historically the most attractive of Malawi's regions, bot ' h to 1-migrants from other countries (principally Mozambique) and to internal migrants. In 1966 the Southern sex ratio and .ev6l of immigra- tion was the highest in Malawi, while the percent of native-born population retained was equal to that of Central Region, both being markedly above the Northern level. The net gain of internal migrants stood at just over 11 thousand. By 1977, however, the attraction of Southern Region had waned. The sex ratio remained unchanged from 1966 (suggesting that any return male migration was counterbalanced by male outmigration, either abroad again or elsewhere in Malawi), and the percent of native-born population still resident fell to below the Central Region level, though still above Northern Region. The level of immigration also fell, and the gain of 11 thousand in 1966 was converted into a loss of nearly 23 thousand in 1977. The beneficiary of these changes in other regions was of course Central Region, which between 1966 and 1977 developed from a position inter- mediate between Northern and Southern regions into the major internal attrac- tion for migrants. In 1966 the Central sex ratio and level of immigration lay between the other two regions, though Central retained a similar percent to Southern of native-boru population and Also showed a net gain of internal migrants only a littl4_,lower than the Southern level. By 1977, ;he Central ' Tab1e 6 ' • 0пLеггееоеаlр 5ех 8at1:: �Ueu��e���ilрΡ 1'ere:eeet и( Nutflыe-Boro 1'а�иlаtlам £пмвегвеед 0еь Rе�1оп 0'erгenR о6 Еоьвеевlед ' иlыiг0с¢ Сгомllе Нибе 13Bb�-��77--1��6 5977�n�I. дв!®[lиеs AGrnв жс . Releellvee говд, ЕхсГ. R��еlТеев�А»�� @аРи0вtlии @iвВ0ае-1lоеав Р!е¢ 0п[вгпвl М1У -- . А966 1966 197a ➢966 19�D бб е.1е1а1ы® 0.е 88.6 п8.в 0; 1э 85 92 84 ю ее - 26ар� -, Ci:eiua,gи а.9 88.3 Ч9.1 аЗ ]а В7 9; 86 82 аб ir DS11(1 $ Р1&Веаlл Uдр а.0 ®З.8 9U.9 20 26 7] 89 э9 81 aD - ASS; -,' 6lмир1�0 a. D 82.6 д7.0 1U 11 75 8G 7; 78 д$ + 423 - е,а1е:1�л а.5 8й.б 9U.1 22 29 - еа 116 8Э 92 88 -арбlб -х B1urtlteBn 8eg1u1e а.$ 85.9 Я9.7 З9 а4 fl6 94 89 9а 9П -20P6S -4 8С:ьыиаigи б.б ®а.р 1дэ.а 12 25 flЗ 9l 88 77 54 +ВПб27 +Ъ W�1�okв Bcuta ].а ®б.р 97.5 15 22 а8 88 8; Ар 74 �+ 02А4 . + tь1ь1�1в1 а.5 87.; 9г.t 4р s] В2 8е в8 92 РР - з4рЪ -в � (�им.е 2.® 9G.4 95.6 56 81 81 85 82 41 Р7 g47.p9 -D � S:е10иа ].9 84.0 94.р 44 бр ®4 90 85 ВЗ В5 � 90R1 +1 1.llиер;ыи 3.2 92.6 98.р 81 1l; 9l 95 88 86 W1 +7?('19' i4 !пleleej0 5.У8 9р.0 0р2.9 2б 4а ®D 92 9р 82 Ь(4 �4 6aS +х 1кеlzа a.D 8].2 85.2 б; 82 D4 9В 8Ъ 9р й9 - 7158 -7 • fдсВееи 2.9 8U.] ВS.б 4В 6b 75 82 78 8$ 82 -05'д1W -г LeЧtrюL dteglи,е ].4 88.3 95.U 42 60 � 91 97 96 9З 9р i� 96йб tA. гl.engoo{ь1 а.; 8и.в е4.4 ]а 48 г9 es 8z аб 8р -tA822 -а Вtлсl,lпgю , З.® ®].б 85.5 I8 57 8; 9! 88 ël iD +269В<Р +4 '%webr 2.р 91.6 92.6 110 1Э7 79 . 81 78 b7 т8 - А54 -) ::lilraJa�ьlu а.р 8и.8 'вб.в аеь 2]р в1 7б 7а 8а 87 -а$N6S -и � В10пиlуак , 5�.fl1 1р9.8 108.6 02Ь ар] 7@ 58 +н � э б ' 8 В � б; �$]8р]Sa Ебм:епги 4.9 BS.B 89.5 1В 3В 8] 7З - 'F1eyulo а.0 97.4 55.5 0$® 188 87 ' 88 ®$ а9 ®8 iF браб �- имlл�ьае ' в.б 91.7 еч.0 01ь 0эа es 9► ®® @у ае - 88]е -]� 1:1е11сыимт 2.3 97.J 96.; ]0 41 8D . 9] ®б 69 д0 +1,766В 81 lleaeeje .а 87.ь 89.г 5х sь 68 а$ бь 8в 80 -а:lаSрь -1 Suutбenь Reг,tuu 2.6 9г.4 9z.] 65 вэ 90 9а 9� 81в 9р 4t1199 -х ' . 1 в'8'юkееь бгит tЬе В97] S:eeeeu® 1te1,o[R, They �овеllис® Canlllcб ы1бh 8roseCla гл[er саlси0лНед дlгесб0у troe 41,е 1977 ееоаив , f-� _ lolwHлlАт,ы aoJ ВВке 1956 Сееевии BleporB 4вЬ:�в. Af Aes ввеиrеS 11,0® 0е дые fo bauod®гр s1,r,ngee ае,д thaC [1,е 1977 lteport N 1lgueas. тге е:ипесб. ` ' а ' ` ь � а ь � , , f. . 13 region sex ratio was the highest in Malawi and the net internal gain of migrants had jumped from less than 10 thousand to nearly 67 thousand., It is reasonable to suppose that many of the return migrants from Northern and Southern regions elected to move to the attractions of Central Region'rather than remain in their home region. We now examine the data at district level, in order to gain a clearer picture of these patterns and trends of movement. Table 6 summ rizes the rele- vant data for each district. Clearly, district patterns are considerably more dramatic and more variable than regional patterns. They are considered in detail in Appendix 2; here we notice only a few of the most striking features. First, there are the intercensal changes in sex ratios. These rose in all districts of Malawi except for a cluster of Southern districts, compris- ing Zomba, Chiradzulu, Blantyre, Thyolo and Mulanje. This cluster forms the core of the densely populated Shire highlands, the most heavily settled, urbanized and developed part of Malawi. Their attraction had begun to dwindle even by 1966, however, and in 1977 all except Blantyre were experiencing a net loss of internal migrants. Presumably any return male migrants either departed again, or were redirected to other parts of Malawi; or were more than counter- balanced by outflows of internal migrants. The general distribution of sex ratios is also interesting. In 1966 only one district, Blantyre (which, of course, contained Malawi's only large town then) reported a sex ratio of over 100; and only two other districts, Zomba and Thyolo,' reported sex ratios of over 95. By L977 Blantyre had been joined by Kasungu and Mchinji (both areas of heavy development in plantation agriculture), while districts with sex ratios over 93 now comprised Dowa, Lilongwe, Thyolo and Chikwawa, but no longer Zomba. The districts which in- 1966 showed particularly low sex ratios (less than 85) were Nkhata Bay, Rumphi, 1,42imba, Salima, Dedza, Utcheu, Mangochi and Machinga; these formed an almost continuous zone around the lakeshore and over the upper Shire valley, interrupted.only by Karonga (88) and Nkhotakota (86). In 1977, after the general rise in sex ratios, the lowest values (all under 88) were to be found in Rumphi, Dedza, Ntcheu, Mangochi, Machinga and Chiradzulu; the southern end of the lake and upper Shire valley evidently still constituted a core area of male out migration. In general one may characterize the entire,Northern Region as an area of relatively stable and consistent low sex ratios; the Central Region as a developing area where the sex ratio has shot up or remained relatively high, except for the two Southernmost provinces where sex ratios have remained low; and the Southern Region as an amalgam of areas where the sex ratio has remained low and areas where it has been falling from previously high or relatively high levels. This is consistent with the previous evi:dence of continuing lack of attraction in the North, and the reversal of the dominant migratory flow from SouLhern to Central Region. The migration data presented in Table 3 are not complete; they in- clude no figures on emigration ab-,oad for 1977, and none on immigration for either 19 ' 66 or 1977 (for lack of space, and because the counterbalancing emigra- tion data are not available for 1977). However the information on internal 14 migration is sufficient4y striking and in general shows a consistent picture. The district flows evident in 1966 are by and large intensified in 1977. Northern districts consistently lose internal migrants except for the con- tinuing small gain in Karonga; so also do the Central districts of Dedza, Ntcheu, Ntchisi and Dowa, while the remaining districts of Kasungu, Nkhotokota, Salima, Lilongwe and Mchinji consistently gain. In Southern region Mangochi, Zomba, Chiradzulu, Mulanje and Nsanje consistently show net internal losses, while Blantyre, Chikawa and (somewhat anomalously, Machinga) show continuing gains. In all Malawi, only Rumphi and Thyolo show a reversal of net flow between 1966 and 1977, both from net gain to loss, but neither involves very large numbers. How much of this movement is within regions and how much between regions? Table 7 presents the relevant data. Table 7 Northern Central Southern Malawi No. Percent No. Percent No. Percent No. Perce 1966* Internal Outmigrants from Districts 54,130 100 139,961 100 259,691 100 453,782 1 Internal Outmigrants from Region 29,096 54 46,969 34 40,057 15 116,122 Total Moving Within Region 25,034 46 92,992 66 219,634 85 337,660 Internal Immigrants into Districts 33,265 100 149,627 100 270,890 100 453,782 1 Internal Inmigrants into Region 8,231 25 56,635 38 51,256 19 116,122 Total Moving Within Region 25,034 75 92,992 62 219,634 81 337,660 1977 Internal Outmigrants from Districts 118,883 100 302,870 100 481,934 100 903,687 1 Internal Outmigrants from Region 73,475 62 851049 28 120,764 25 279,288 Total Moving Within Region 45,408 38 217,821 72 361,170 75 624,399 Internal Inmigrants into Districts 74,109 100 369,825 100 459,753. 100 903,687 -1 Internal Inmigrants 2 into Regions 28,701 39 152,004 41 98,583 21 279,388 Total Moving Within Region 45,408 61 217,821 59 361,170 79 624,399 * African population only. - 15 - Two points emerge clearly from Table 7. First, that the population of Malawi has grown considerably more internally mobile over the intercensal period. The total number of internal migrants just about doubled between 1966 and 1977 (while the total population increased by only 37 percent); the in- crease was more marked for interregional migrants (140 percent), than for in- traregional migrants (85 percent). The causes of this increased mobility are no doubt to be found in the continuing development of the economy and improve- ment of communications, together, perhaps, with some degree of substitution for external emigration. Second, that the bulk of internal migration is between districts in the same region in both years. However, a slight rise in the proportion of interregional migrants occurred, from 26 percent 1966 to 31 percent in 1977. Again, no doubt, the aforementioned causes are responsible for this trend. Considerable variation by region appears. In Northern region, in both years, less than half the outmigration was contained within the region. The tendency for migrants to leave the region intensified between the censuses, with the proportion of interregional migrants rising from 54 to 62 percent. In both Central and Southern regions, on the other hand, the bulk of outmigration was confined to other districts in the same region in both pars; however the intercensal trend differed, with the proportion leaving the region falling from 34 to 28 percent in Central region, and rising from 15 to 19 percent in Southern Region. The bulk of inmigration is intraregional in all three regions in both years. However the proportion of intraregional inmigrants falls everywhere between 1966 and 1977, with the drop-being quite sharp in Norther region (from 75 to 61 percent), but only two or three percentage points in Central and Southern regions (62 to 59 percent and 81 to 79 percent respectively). This universal drop no doubt reflects the general increase in mobility. The overall picture is interesting, and generally consistent with previously noticed pattens. There is a constant seepage out of the North which still outweighs an increasing number of interregional inmigrants. Central region was and is the greatest attraction to interregional migrants; its pro- portion of intraregional outmigrants has also improved between the censuses. Southern region consistently shows the highest proportion of both intraregional outmigrants and intraregional inmigrants; the Southern population appears to be the most closed of all these regions in both years, though net movement has changed from inmigration into the region to outmigration out of the region during the intercensal period. Finally, we briefly examine the growth of migration to urban areas. 1/ The relevant data are given in Table 8 following on the next page. The total population of urban areas more than doubled between the censuses, rising from 202,067 persons in 1966 to 470, 658 in 1977, or from 5.0 to 8.5 percent of the total population. The intercensal annual urban growth rate 1/ We use the figures for urban areas published in the 1979 Malawi, Statis- tical Year Book for both years. They exclude urban areas of less than 200 persons, which is probably sensible. 16- Table 8 Percent of Total Urban Average Inter- Urban Area Population Population censal Growth Rate (Percent) 1966 1977 1966 1977 1966-1977 Blantyre 109,461 219,011 54 47 6.3 Zomba 19,666 24,234 10 5 1.9 Lilongwe 19,425 98,718 10 21 14.7 Mzuzu 8,490 16,108 4 3 5.8 Other Urban Areas 45,025 112,587 22 24 8.3 Total 202,067 470,658 100 100 7.6 was hence 7.6 percent, far above any conceivable rate of natural increase, and obviously produced largely by migration from the countryside into towns. The implied minimum number of intercensal migrants, assuming a maximum natural increase rate of 4 percent is 156 thousand; conversely a minimum rate of 2.5 percent 1/ would imply 204 thousand intercensal migrants. The average annual number of rural to urban migrants would be in the range of 14-18 thousand. How do these figures compare with overall internal migration? Table 7 shows that internal migrants increased from 454 thousand to 904 thousand between the censuses; a total increase of 450 thousand and an average annual increment of about 41 thousand. Thus roughly 35-45 percent of intercensal internal migration was directed to urban areas. For a closer look at urban growth we examine the figures for Blantyre, Zomba, Lilongwe and Mzuzu towns. These four urban areas in fact, although none of them are large by global standards, contained just over three quarters of total urban population in both 1966 and 1977 and are certainly the only towns which approach what is normally thought of as an urban character and way of life. Here the trends and changes between 1966 and 1977 have been quite varied. Blantyre has grown steadily, though not spectacularly; its share of total urban population dropped somewhat, but it still contains close to half of all urban dwellers. Zomba grew more slowly than any other of the main towns, and its share of total urban population halved from 10 to 5 percent; the observed growth rate of about 2 percent is probably less than natural in- crease, implying net emigration from the town between the censuses. Lilongwe, on the other hand, quintupled in size between 1966 and 1977 and doubled its share of total urban population, from 10 to 21 percent. The vast bulk of this growth must be due to inmigration. Mzuzu also grew fast, doubling in size 1/ No firm estimate of urban natural increase is possible-yet. It appears that both fertility and mortality are lower in urban areas, but no urban life table, and hence age specific and crude death rates, has been cal- culated. However a minimum of 2.5 percent and a maximum of 4 percent are pretty safe. - 17 - between the censuses, a1though its share of total urban population actually dropped somewhat: again much of this growth must be migratory. We note also, as relevant to the future course of urbanization in Malawi, that the other urban areas also grew very fast; more rapidly, in fact, than any of the major towns except Lilongwe. This is perhaps a sign that rural to urban migration, thcugh still at a relatively low level in Malawi, may spread more rapidly in future, even outside the present dominant centres. Age And Sex structure of the Population Some aspects of the distribution of the population by sex have already been discussed. The overall age and sex structure of the population in 1966, 1970 and 1977 are shown below in Table 9. Certain features (in addition to the general rise in sex ratios between 1966 and 1977) are at once obvious. Table 9 Malawi: Comparison of Age and Sex Distributions 1966, 1970, 1977 (1970 for African Population only) Age Percent Distribution: Percent Distribution: Group Males Females Sex Ratio 1966 1970 1977 1966 1970 1977 1966 1970 1977 0-4 19.1 17.1 19.7 18.0 15.8 19.2 95.8 96.8 95.8 5-9 15.5 14.9 15.3 14.2 13.7 14.5 97.9 96.7 98.1 10-14 11.4 13.6 11.0 9.9 12.3 9.6 102.9 98.8 106.2 15-19 10.0 9.4 9.8 9.9 9.2 9.8 91.4 91.3 93.1 20-24 7.1 7.4 7.3 8.4 9.9 8.8 76.2 67.0 76.6 25-29 6.7 5.8 7.6 8.2 6.6 8.1 73.3 78.4 87.4 30-34 5.3 5.9 5.4 6.2 7.0 5.6 76.6 74.8 90.1 35-39 5.6 4.8' 4.9 6.3 5.3 5.1 79.7 80.2 90.8 40-44 3.6 4.7 3.5 4.0 5.4 3.8 81.7 77.0 86.9 45-49 4.4 3.7 3.9 4.6 3.8 3.9 85.0 87.8 92.9 50-54 2.9 3.5 2.5 2.7 3.5 2.8 95.6 88.5 81.1 55-59 2.5 2.8 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.3 2.3 118.9 96.9 60-64 1.7 ) 1.8 1.6 ) 1.9 100.2) 105.9 89.1 65+ 4.3 ) 4.6 3.7 ) 4.4 103.0) 96.9 NS --- --- .2 -- -- .2 ---- 86.9 116.3 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 90.0 89.2 93.0 0-14 46.0 45.6 46.0 42.1 41.8 43.3 98.2 97.4 98.9 15-49 42.6 41.6 42.4 47.6 47.1 45.1 80.7 78.8 98.9 50+ 11.4 12.8 11.3 10.3 11.1 11.4 99.3 102.8 -91.7 20-35 19.1 19.1 20.3 22.8 23.5 22.5 75.3 72.5 83.8 18 First, the age/sex structure in 1970 is rather different to the- other two, and very much more irregular, most notably in the age distribution of adult females. This might be due to the small numbers involved, or perhaps (as in the case of total enumeration) to a relative lack of emphasis on accu- rately securing the characteristics of the base population as compared with vital events. In view of its deficiencies, the 1970 distribution will not be considered further here. Second, there are important changes in age structure between 1966 and 1977. The population becomes younger, with the recorded child population growing faster than the total population. As would be expected, given some degree of intercensal return migration of adult males, this rejuvenation is most marked for females. There was also particularly high recorded growth among women over 50. These features (together with the expected high growth of young adult males) are even more clearly displayed in Table 10 below, which shows intercensal growth rates by age group. Table 10 Intercensal Growth Rates 1/ Age Group Male Female 0-4 3.3 3.3 5-9 2.9 2.9 10-14 2.7 2.4 15-19 2.8 2.6 20-24 3.2 3.2 25-29 4.2 2.6 30-34 3.3 1.8 35-39 1.9 .7 40-44 2.8 2.2 45-49 2.1 1.3 50-54 1.6 3.1 55-59 2.8 2.8 60-64 3.5 4.5 65+ 3.6 4.2 Total 3.02 2.72 0-14 3.04 2.97 15-49 2.99 2.24 50+ 2.92 3.64 20-35 3.61 2.63 1/ Intercensal period taken as 11.083 years (i.e. 11 years, 1 month). 1.9 Increases in proportions of both children and elderly females are quite commonly observed over time, and over series of censuses, in other parts of Africa. Part of both increases may be due to improved complete- ness of reporting; young children and elderly women being both groups par- ticularly liable to omission. Changing patterns of age reporting/misreport- ing are another possible factor. High child population growth may of course also be due to either a decline in child mortality or a rise in fertlity, or both. However it will be shown later that the likely size of fall in child mortality could not account for all the observed change, while the -available fertility data do not conclusively show any rise in fertility in recent years. The causes of the rejuvenation of the population cannot therefore be finally determined. The age distribution will be considered again in detail in the fertility section. We note here only that the population is young, but not excessively so, particularly given the continuing deficit of male adults. The percent under 15, for example, stands at 46 for males and 42-43 for females, giving 45.0 for both sexes, rather than the 47-50 range which is common in Eastern African populations and produced by a combination of very high fertility and low to moderate child mortality; prominent examples are Zimbabwe, Kenya and Uganda. The implication is that Malawi experiences either relatively lower fertility or higher child mortality than such poulations. Regional age distributions and intercensal growth rates are shown in similar detail in Appendix Tables A.1:1-10. We summarize a few main-, points. Central region in both years shows a distinctly younger population than the rather similar other two, indicating some regional differences in fertility or mortality. All regions show rather similar age patterns of intercensal growth, except that in Central and Northern male populations, child growth rates are overshadowed by adult growth rates. Since earlier net male emigration (hence return migration) was heaviest in these regions, and since, in addition, Central region has attracted substantial internal immigration, this is not surprising. Mortality The amount of mortality data available for Malawi is unusually ample by African standards. The information includes child survival for 1977 and 1970; parental survival for 1977 and 1971 (when it was gathered from households on the third visit of the PCS interviewers); current deaths from the PCS in 1971-72 1/ and for the year before the 1977 census; and the census enumerations of 1966 and 1977 which can yield estimates of intercensal survival for the population aged 11 and over in 1977. An account of the examination, analysis, evaluation and adjustment of all these mortality data is given in Appendix 3. It is necessary to summarize here. 1/ The numbers of vital events recorded in the first year of the PCS, according to the Report, were less accurate, and were therefore not published. 20 Childhood Mortality 1/` The obvious and most easily available measures of infant, child and childhood mortality come of course from the recorded deaths in 1971-72 and 1976-77. Taking infant mortality first, the conventional infant mor- tality rate can be computed from recorded infant deaths combined with similarly recorded births during 1971-72 and 1976-77. This rate stands at 142 in 1971-72 and 130 in 1976-76; the figure of 142 was used in the pre- paration of the PCS Survey Report Life tables. Unfortunately, the current death and birth data appear to be deficient in both years, with omissions of births and omissions or age misattributions of both infant and child deaths and infant and child populations. In particular, the separation of infant and non-infant deaths and population seems to have been faulty. Table 11 below shows the problem: it gives, for both years, the reported death rate for age groups 0-1, 1-4, 0-4 and 5-9, together with the implied expectation of life at birth (eO), and implied infant mortality rate (ql), from a suit- able model life table system (Coale-Demeny South model family). The recorded infant mortality rate is also given. 2/ Table 11 Age Group Recorded Death Children Rate Implied eo (CD South) Implied q1 (CD South) 1971-2 1976-7 1971-2 1976-7 1971-2 1976-7 0-1 378 140 22 51 302 128 1-4 68- 92 32 25 226 277 0-4 104 103 34 34 210 209 5-9 16 14 22 26 298 270 Recorded Infant Morta- lity Rate 142 130 Clearly, the reported infant mortality rates as they stand are incon- sistent with the reported deaths for every other childhood group; and even with the infant death rate in 1971-72, no doubt because of under-enteration or age misreporting of the infant population in the PCS. They must therefore be abandoned. Clearly alsd, overall reported mortality in childhood is ex- tremely high in both years, with implied infant mortality rates of over 200. 1/ Here and elsewhere the term "childhood mortality" is used to signify the mortality of children in general, of all ages between birth and adoles- cence. "Child mortality" denotes the mortality of children between the first and fifth birthday (i.e. aged 1-4 years). "Infant mortality" denotes the mortality of babies between birth and first birthday (i.e. aged 0-1 years). 2/ Note the difference between the infant mortality rate and infant death rate. The infant mortality rate is a measure of the probability of dying between birth and first birth day (q) and is approximated by dividing annual infant deaths by annual births. The infant death rate is the number of annual infant deaths divided by the mid year population of infants i.e. children aged 0-1 years. 21 - We turn now to retrospective data on child survival. Table 12 first presents the raw data, namely the average proportion of children dead out of all children born alive as reported by Malawian women in 1970 and 1977. For reference, similar data are presented for other countries of Eastern Africa from the latest available national census or survey. Table 12 Proportion Dead Of All Children Born Alive Age Group Of Women Malawi Zambia Zimbabwe Botswana Tanzania Kenya Uganda 1970 1977 1969 1969 1971 1967 1978 1969 15-19 .356 .247 .146 .106 .096 .191 .101 .135 20-24 .327 .274 .168 .125 .122 .201 .130 .162 25-29 .343 .310 .191 .141 .149 .222 .144 .192 30-34 .345 .340 .216 .159 .162 .254 .157 .226 35-39 .385 .362 .247 .178 .173 .284 .174 .255 40-44 .403 .383 .287 .199 .198 .316 .189 .305 45-49 .429 .408 .311 .218 .221 .355 .236 .348 Clearly Malawi women are reporting very high levels of mortality among their children, that are quite exceptional in Eastern Africa, at national level at least. (Appendix 3 presents evidence that this high child mortality area may extend into neighbouring parts of Zambia, Mozambique and Tanzania, and hence may be a product of geographical or cultural factors not confined to the national boundaries of Malawi.) When these reported proportions dead are converted by standard tech- niques into conventional life table measures, smoothed, and located in time (as detailed in Appendix 3), the following estimates of mortality in childhood result: Table 13 Proportion Dying Before Age X (qx) Age X 1962-1967 1970-1975 1 (Infant Mortality Rate) .202 .191 2 .285 .268 3 .323 .304 5 .355 .334 10 .384 .361 In other words, out of every 100 babies born in Malawi during the early 1970s 19 percent died during their-first year of life, 33 percent dur- ing their first five years of life, and 36 percent during their first ten years of life. In the mid 1960s these figures were 20 percent, 36 percent and 38 percent, respectively. 22 These levels of infant and child mortality are by no means an evolu- tionary maximum, nor are they unprecedented among West African countries, even in recent years. I/ They are, however, still shockingly high in themselves, and far above normal peacetime levels over most of Eastern Africa. They sug- gest the existence of some particular problem or problems of child health which are not present to the same degree in other countries around. Of course, some improvement may already have occurred since the early 1970s, given the immunization campaigns and expansion of health facilities that have since been initiated; nevertheless, careful monitoring and further exploration of the health status of Malawian children, together with investigation of the deter- minants of child health in Malawi, are urgently indicated. Regional differentials in child mortality are relevant here. Table 14 gives, for each region and for urban and rural populations, the reported proportions of dead children in 1977, and the final estimates of corresponding life table measures for the early 1970s. 2/ Table 14 Proportion Dead Among Children Ever Born Alive Age of Women Northern Central Southern Urban Rural 15-19 .214 .274 .235 .184 .252 20-24 .235 .307 .256 .182 .283 25-29 .268 .346 .290 .204 .320 30-34 .291 .378 .317 .221 .349 35-39 .309 .402 .337 .250 .370 40-44 .331 .421 .363 .279 .390 45-49 .365 .444 .387 .315 .412 Infant Mortality Rate 169 212 178 136 196 Percent Dying Before Age 5 29.2 37.5 31.0 22.0 34.4 Percent Dying Before Age 10 31.6 40.5 33.5 23.6 37.2 Two features are at once obvious. First, that childhood mortality in urban areas is very much lower than in the rural population. This finding, universal in modern times both in Africa and elsewhere, is no doubt due mainly to the better medical facilities available in towns. Second, that Central region records substantially higher childhood mortality than either Northern or Southern, with Northern region showing a somewhat lower level than Southern. The reasons for such a striking and unexpected pattern need further investiga- tion. Possible influencing factors include fertility level, which-is also substantially higher in Central region than elsewhere (see the following 1/ Both Gambia in 1973 and Sierra Leone in 1974 report similar levels, for example. 2/ Urban and rural figures from the PCS are not given here, but show similar differentials. - 23 section); I educational level, rticularly of women (which is much higher in Northern region than elsewher; general level of development in the economy, communications, medical facilities, urbanization etc. (in which Southern region has been leading); and various climatic, geographical and cultural features which cannot be so easily quantified and measured. One might hazard a guess that Central region represents the "normal" level of childhood mortality in Malawi, which is pulled down in Northern region by the favourable level of education (particularly female education) and in Southern region by the favourable level of general development and urbanization. However, again further investigation is needed. Data on child survival (as well as fertility and perhaps current deaths for the child population at least), tabulated by district, might be very useful here, despite the small numbers involved. Tabulations of fertility and child survival by age of women as well as by their education and marital status would certainly be essential to any further study of differentials. Consideration of financing for such extra tabulations might be appropriate as a first step in closer investigation of the problem. What .ends in childhood mortality can be inferred from the avail- able data? On -ie internal evidence of both PCS and 1977 data, as well as comparison of the two sources, childhood mortality has been declining very gradually in Malawi over the observable past, i.e. from around 1960 to around 1975. This decline is particularly marked and sharp for the urban population; however it is difficult to say how much of this is an actual decline in urban areas, and how much merely reflects migration of women during their reproductive lifetime from the higher-mortality countryside to lower-mortality urban areas. The declines in the regions do not differ greatly in pace and timing, though there is some suggestion that the fall in the Northern region is slightly less pronounced than the average. Given that there has probably been some steady, though very gradual, mortality decline throughout the country over the recent past and tha-t progress in education,general development and provision of medical facilities has continued since, it seems likely that some further decline has occurred since the early 1970s. Adult Mortality Again, the obvious starting point is the information on current deaths from the PCS, and deaths in the previous year from the 1977 census. Table 15 below gives the reported death rates for 1971-72 and 1976-77. It also shows, for each age-specific death rate, the corresponding expectation of life at birth in a suitable model life table system (Coale-Demeny South family). 2/ 1/ Though the direction of causality is often debatable here. High fertil- ity and high childhood mortality may be linked because mothers cannot care as adequately for very large families, or because early child deaths put an end to lactation (and also to any customary sexual abstinence) and thus hasten the next birth. 2/ It is not implied that this model life table is mecessarily a close fit to Malawi age-patterns of mortality. The irregularities and discrepan- cies observed here, however, are so great as to be ascribable only to flaws in the data. 24- rable 15 Reported Death Rate Implied eo Age Group (Coale-Dameny South) 1971-72 1976-17 1971-72 1976-77 Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 0-4 118.9 89.3 109.9 96.9 31 38 33 36 5-9 13.6 18.4 15.3 13.4 25 21 22 29 10-14 .3 7.0 5.1 5.1 72 29 31 37 15-19 5.5 16.5 3.0 3.1 39 <20 51 54 20-26 3.5 4.6 3.0 2.7 55 51 58 59 25-29 8.5 6.4 2.2 2.2 39 47 62 64 30-34 4.7 7.8 2.7 2.4 53 43 62 64 35-39 7.9 8.4 Z.5 2.0 45 43 65 68 40-44 12.8 13.7 4.0 2.7 37 36 63 68 45-49 10.1 12.1 4.0 2.3 51 37 69 73 50-54 14.1 15.5 6.9 3.8 50 39 68 73 55-59 12.7 10.1 6.4 3.1 65 62 >74 >78 60-64 14.0 33.2 11.2 5.2 >74 >78 >74 >78 65+ 5.8 8.2 >74 >78 Total 28.7 24.5 27.3 22.9 The data on adult deaths seem, from Table 15, to be as flawed as those on child deaths. In the case of the PCS, the adult death rates are extremely irregular (no doubt due partly at least to the very small numbers of events concerned) and those for the over 55 age groups 4re so low as to be unbelievable; they imply a remaining expectation of life greater than any to be found in modern developed countries. The adult rates reported for 1976-77 are much lower than those recorded by the PCS, and become steadily lower with increasing age, relative to model life tables; they are frankly unbelievable. The explanation must be that adult deaths have been substan- tially underrecorded in the PCS,.and even more so in the 1977 census. Such underrecording is not uncommon in surveys and censuses both in Africa and elsewhere. It would seem likely, moreover, that the level of underreporting increases with age and is lowest (or non-existent) for child deaths, highest .or deaths in old age. 1/ One feature, however, is so strongly marked that it is probably not accounted for simply by variations in completeness of death reporting. This is the contrast between very,high mortality in childhood (supported by the child survival data, as we have seen) and a substantially lower level of mortality at adult ages. This pattern may reflect (even if rather-distortedly) the genuine age pattern of mortality in Malawi. 1/ Though exaggeration of age, a dommon feature of age misreporting for the middle-aged and elderly, may also be a factor here, by inflating the size of the base population at the oldest ages. 25- Techniques have been developed for evaluating and correcting recorded adult deat.s, based on the recorded age structure of deaths and of the base population. 1/ They are described briefly in Appendix 3, together with the results of their application to the Malawi data of 1971-2 and 1976-77. These results were very disappointing, being always either inconsistent or highly improbable, and no reliable correction factors could be derived. However , it is worth briefly noting here two points that emerge from the analysis. First, that with the exception of male deaths in 1971-1972 (where estimated complete- ness varied between 50 and 100 percent) the estimated mean coverage of deaths for all ages always fell below 50 percent. Second, that contrary to normal findings, child deaths appear to be more completely reported than adult death, although the differential is not great enough to more than soften the already noted contrast of very heavy child mortality and rather light adult mortality. This pattern is puzzling, and remains unaccounted for. Possibly the prevalence of adult emigration makes complete reporting of adult deaths more unlikely (if male deaths occur abroad or if deaths of female household heads dissolve the households); or possibly the sheer weight of child deaths renders them more liable to recall and report. Another obvious approach to estimation of adult mortality is through intercensal survival. Persons aged (say) 20-24 at the second of two enumera- tions can be considered the survivors of persons aged 10-14 at the first count 10 years earlier, and hence direct measures of mortality can be derived from comparison of the two censuses. This simple approach, however, is in practice often hampered by intercensal migration, severe age-misreporting in either or both counts, or even quite minor differences in the completeness of enumeration between counts. Of these three factors, the first two at least were present in the case of Malawi, while Wafortunately little is known of the third. It is not surprising, therefore, that the results (again presented in detail in Appendix 3) were disappointing. They are summarized briefly in Table 16 below, which shows the expectation of life at birth implied by survivorship ratios; first for each 5 year age group of females, and second, for the entire female popula- tion over a series of given ages. 2/ Again the Coale-Demeny South model life table system is used as a standard, though the results would be similar with any other reasonable model. 1/ It is usually assumed that child (particularly infant) deaths are more liable to om ion than adult deaths; and indeed this normally is found to be so. erefore correction factor are usually derived from, and applied to adult data otly, even through all data are studied. 2/ Results for only the female population are shown in order to minimize the disturbance of migration. 26 Table 16 Age Group Survivorship Implied Age Group Survivorship Implied:- in 1966 Ratio e in 1966 Ratio e0 0-4 705 22 0+ .866 less than 40 5-9 .902 26 5+ .899 51 10-14 1.170 - 10+ .888 54 15-19 1.081 - 15+ .844 40 20-24 .878 29 20+ .786 less than 40 25-29 .810 less than 20 25+ .786 less than 40 30-34 .805 less than 20 30+ .763 less than 40 35-39 .826 22 35+ .763 51 40-44 .925 52 45-49 .663 less than 20 50-54 .922 68 55-59 .808 56 60-64 .804 70 The distortions caused by massive age misreporting, particularly the attraction to young adult ages and the tendency to exaggeration of age among the middle-aged and elderly, are clearly evident here. Improved coverage of elderly women may also have contributed to the unrealistically high survivor- ship ratios at advanced ages. Obviously no safe estimates of mortality levels among adults can be obtained, even from the smoother, less erratic, sequence of ratios from the cumulated population. Finally we turn to the information on parental survival collected in the PCS and the 1977 census. These data can be transformed into survivorship ratios by standard techniques, which are described in Appendix 3, together with details of the applications to 1971 and 1977 data. The results are summarized in Table 17 below, which shows the values of expectation of life at birth implied (again using the Coale-Demeny South model life-table system) by reported parental survival in each age group of respondents. 1/ The special tables used for these calculation did not go below an e of 40. 27 - Table 17 Age Group of Respondents Expectation of Life at irth Implied by Reported Parental Survival Males (Paternal Survival) Females (Maternal Survival) PCS (1971) Census (1977) PCS (1971) Census (1977) 5-9 54 58 59 60 10-14 56 57 59 59 15-19 53 53 58 56 20-24 50 50 54 52 25-29 46 47 46 49 30-34 45 47 46 46 35-39 44 50 44 46 40-44 52 56 43 48 45-49 - - 49 52 50-54 - - 51 52 These results are similar in pattern to those obtained elsewhere in Africa. Survival is improbably high for parents of children and adolescents, perhaps reflecting the so-called 'adoption effect' whereby relatives caring for orphaned children are recorded as the true, and of course surviving, parents. Survival is also relatively high for parents of middle-aged respondents, per- haps due to faulty memory, genuine ignorance or inaccurate reporting (as with parity and child survival reports) or to some degree of selection effect (whereby those who survive to middle age are also more likely to have parents surviving to old age). The implied e0s bottom out, however, in the respondent age-range of roughly 20-45, and are reasonably consistent and credible in that range. It is common practice to accept the results from this range, and they will be taken here as giving some indication of the level of adult mor- tality. When smoothed and located in time, they yield the expectations of remaining life at age 25 (e 25) for the periods 1955-60 and 1962-67, shown below in Table 18. Table 18 Date e 25 Derived from Parental Survival Reports Males Females Both Sexes 1/. 1955-1960 39.3 40.5 39.9 1962-1967 40.2 41.5 40.8 1/ On the common assumption that the sex ratio at birth of an African population is 103 males per 100 females. 28 When these estimates of adult mortality are compared with those for childhood mortality previously described, the substantial difference in levels is again noticeable. In terms of the Coale Demeny South family (the model system with the greatest excess of childhood over adult mortality) childhood mortality for the period 1962-67 is equivalent to level 7.5 (e* - 36), while adult mortality corresponds to level 12 for females and level 13 for males (e* = 46, 49 respectively). This is.in accord with the indications from all other evidence on mortality, and suggests that the health problem (whatever it be) that is responsible for the high childhood mortality in Malawi does not afflict adults to the same degree. The level of adult mortality, in fact, is very much in line with estimates from other parts of Eastern Africa; 1/ apparently it is only with respect to childhood mortality that Malawi is so unfortunately different from other Eastern African countries. Information on parental survival was tabulated by region in 1977 and by urban/rural areas in both the PCS and the 1977 census. The latter data, however, are not useful, since evidently there can be no guarantee that the parents of urban dwellers were themselves urban dwellers. Differentials in adult mortality can therefore be studied by region only, and for one point in time; and even here it must be remembered that internal migration may exert some bias on the results. However, the regions do not in fact differ very greatly with regard to reported parental survival, either in age pattern or level of results. Details are given in Appendix 3: here we present only the final estimates. of mortality level, in Table 19 below. Table 19 Date and Region e 25 Derived from Parental Survival Reports Males Females Both Sexes 2/ 1962-67: Northern 41.0 41.8 41.4 Central 40.6 41.8 41.2 Southern 40.2 41.5 40.8 1/ See, for example, JGC Blacker: 'The Estimation of Adult Mortality in Africa from Data on Orphanhood': Population Studies 31:1, March 1977 and Hill et al: The Demographic Situation in Sub-Saharan Africa. Background paper to the forthcoming World Bank Paper on Population Strategies in Sub-Saharan Africa. 2/ Assuming, as before, a sex ratio at birth of 103. - - 29- Northern Region shows the lowest adult mortality and Southern the highest, with Central in between. The differences are very small, however. It is interesting, nonet,heless, that the regional ranking differs from that of child mortality. While Northern Region is apparently the lowest in both cases, Central Region does not show the clear excess of adult mortality that it does for child mortality. This provides further indication that Malawi's particular health disadvantage is confined to the child population. Establishment of Life Tables Once estimates of the levels of childhood and adult mortality have been arrived at, the final step is to combine them in life tables which will give a complete picture of mortality for the population concerned; this is usually summarized by the expectation of life at birth. There are many methods of achieving this amalgamation; all require the use of model life tables in some way or other, and all will give slightly different results. The approach adopted here is to express both childhood and adult mortality levels in terms of the Coale-Demeny South model life table system, and then to splice the two levels together. Details of the procedure are given in Appendix 3, together with national life tables for the periods 1955-60, 1962-67, and 1970-75, and regional life tables for 1970-75. The resulting expectations of life at birth are shown in Table 20 below: Table 20 Date and Region Male e0 Female e0 e0 for Both Sexes 1/ National 1955-60 36.9 37.9 37.4 1962-o7 38.4 39.5 39.0 1970-75 40.5 41.8 41.1 Northern Region 1970-75 43.5 45.1 44.3 Central Region 1970-75 37.8 39.2 38.5 Southern Region 1970-75 42.1 43.6 42.8 1/ Again assuming a sex ratio at birth of 103. eo for both sexes is calcu- lated from the original life table figures, not the rounded-off values given here. - 30 Naturally, not all the details of these life tables should be taken too seriously. Moreover, some parts are weaker than others, because founded on less reliable information. The life table for 1955-60, for example, must be somewhat specu- lative because the childhood mortality estimates are based on information from older women about events rather far back in time. Conversely, adult mortality in the 1970-75 life tables is less securely based than for the other two time periods; it relies partly on cohort parental survival data (i.e., comparison of parental survival between a given age group in 1971 and the corresponding group 7 years older in 1977), and partly on extrapolation from the trend between 1955-60 and 1962-67. Sex differentials in childhood mortality are also rather specu- lative, since child survival data were not collected separately for each sex. Here the standard Coale-Demeny South split has been used, faute de aieux. This split r1rees roughly 1/ with the reported sex differentials in childhood current deaths data. Sex differentials in adult mortality are supported by a little more information. They come directly from reported parental survival, and also are roughly 1/ consistent with the rather irregular sex differentials observed in current deaths death. However, it must be remembered that esti- mates frm paternal survival are less secure than those from maternal survival on both theoretical grounds (because of ignorance of male age patterns of fertility, which determine the length of exposure to risk of mortality), and practical grounds (because the substantial migration of males in Malawi may introduce unknown sources of bias and misreporting). Finally, it must also be remembered that in general estimates of childhood mortality from child survival are far more robust and well-proven than estimates of adult mortality from parental survival. Nevertheless, given the available data, it is considered that these life tables give as good an approximation as is reasonable to the level, trend, age pattern and regional differentials of mortality in Malawi over the recent past. The overall picture is of heavy childhood mortality, very gradually declining over time; and of much lighter adult mortality, also very gradually declining over time. Females have a slight overall advantage, founded on lower mortality in infancy and older ages, not quite offset by some slight disadvantage between infancy and middle age. Among the regions Central clearly shows the highest overall mortality, and Northern the lowest, with Southern not too far below Northern; this ranking is largely determined by the excess of child mortality in Central Region and by the advantage of Northern region over all ages. 1/ More than rough agreement is not possible for any age range of sex dif- ferentials in mortality since (as shown in Appendix 3) the PCS and 1977 data are both very irregular and mutually inconsistent. - 31 - No data are yet available for the later 1970s and early 1980s. However, given that overall mortality has apparently been falling gradually since the 1950s at least, and that progress in general development and in provision of medical services has continued since 1975, it is exceedingly likely that a further decline in overall mortality has occurred. Fertility There are three types of data available for fertility estimation in Malawi. The first is births recorded in 1971-72 (as part of the PCS), and reported to have occurred in 1976-77, the year previous to the census in 1977. The second is information collected from women in 1970 (during the base enumeration of the PCS) and in 1977 (in the census questionnaire) on the number of live births they have ever had. The third is the age distribution reported in the 1966 and 1977 censuses, which, with the aid of mortality estimates, can be used to estimate fertility. Detailed tables and print-outs are given in Appendix 4. We begin with the two types of specific fertility data. Table 21 gives reported age specific fertility rates (ASFRs) and average numbers of children ever born alive (mean parities) from 1970 and 1977. Table 21 Age of Women ASFR Mean Parity 1971-72 1976-77 1970 1977 15-19 .132 .132 .28 .50 20-24 .259 .280 1.66 1.99 25-29 .296 .275 3.43 3.56 30-34 . .234 .241 4.73 5.03 35-39 .216 '.196 6.06 6.05 40-44 .109 .126 6.52 6.65 45-49 .086 .069 6.88 6.88 50-54 7.35 7.01 55-59 7.00 7.06 60-64 ) 7.07 65+6.94 7.13 Total Fertility Rate 1/ 6.65 6.59 1/ Calculated from ASFRs expressed to 3 places of decimals. - 32 It is obvious that Malawian fertility is extremely high. Older women are normally expected to understate their true number of live births, for such reasons as failing memory, difficulty with large numbers, unwillingness to mention dead children or omission of children no longer living with them. Yet in both 1970 and 1977 they are reporting around 7 births apiece. Current fertility (births during a given year) is at a somewhat lower level; yet the reported total fertility rate is still over 6.5 in both years. There are several discrepancies and oddities in the data as they stand, however. Current fertility is reported as lower in 1976-77 than in 1971-73, and with a slightly different age-pattern. This difference in level could be accounted for by the more complete recording of births, and lesser difficulties in locating births correctly within the reference period, to be expected in a continuing vital event survey than from retrospective questioning during a census; the difference in pattern could be explained by sampling varia- tion or by differences in age patterns of completeness of birth reporting. More serious is the noticeably lower level of parity reported by younger women-in 1970 than in 1977, though the older women report very similar numbers in both years; the two populations report ve. r similar numbers of dead children, with the discrepancy lying in the numbers of living children (hence the very much higher levels of child mortality reported by young women in the PCS than in the census). Various explanations are possible, such as sampling variation, temporary dip in fertility in the second half of the 1960s (accompanied by a temporary rise in child mortality), overreporting of parity by young women in 1977, or under-reporting of parity by young women in 1970. The last explanation is perhaps the most likely. An even more substantial discrepancy, however, is found between current fertility and retrospective parity reports. In both years the reported total fertility rate 1/ is markedly below the parity reported by women at or past the end of the reproductive years, despite probable understatement by the latter. The differences can be seen even more clearly if the cumulated current age specific fertility rates (F) are shifted, by means of a model fertility schedule, to refer to the same ages as the mean parities (P) 2/, and P/F ratios are calculated for each age group. The P/F ratios for 1970 and 1977 are shown below in Table 22, and the full analysis is given in print-out form in Appendix There is clear evidence here of substantial underreporting of current fertility in both 1971-72 and 1976-77. Further support for such understatement comes from the reported sex ratio of current births, which stands at 95'in 1971-72 and 90 in 1977. Such a low sex ratio is not only quite unparalleled in countries with complete birth registration (which show a range of about 104-107, with 105 or 106 by far the most common); but is also inconsistent 1/ Excluding reported births to women under 15 and over 49, most of which are probably due to errors. 2/ For each 5 year age group of women, the cumulated reported ASFRs refer to around the end point of the age group, while the average parity refers to the mid point of the age group. The two values therefore cannot be compared directly, except graphically. 33 - Table 22 Age Group of Women P/F Ratios 1970 1977 15-19 .96 1.67 20-24 1.18 1.34 25-29 1.20 1.23 30-34 1.14 1.21 35-39 1.15 1.16 40-44 1.11 1.12 45-49 1.05 1.06 with.the reported sex ratio of children in the 1966 and 1977 censuses (96 for the 0-4 and 97 for the 0-9 age groups in both years) except on the highly unlikely hypothesis of a very heavy female disadvantage in mortality from birth onwards throughout childhood. The implication is that at least some male births may have been omitted.1/ More confirmation of understatement of current fertility comes from comparison of 1976-77 current data for first births only, coupled with the 1977 proportion of women in each age group who report ever having had a live birth, 2/, in exactly the same way as for all births and mean parities. Such data ought to be even more reliable, since first births, being important events, are less likely to be omitted; while the classification of 4omen as fertile or infertile is easier and more likely to be correct than the estimation of how many live births they have ever had. The resulting P1/F1 ratios are shown below in Table 23, and the detailed analysis, in print-out form, in Appendix 4. Table 23 Age Group of Women PI/Fl Ratio 15-19 1.57 20-24 1.31 25-29 1.18 30-34 1.16 35-39 1.15 40-44 1.14 45-49 1.14 Again there are clear indications of substantial underreporting of current fertility. The probable reason in 1977 is misperception of the time period meant by the year before the census (together, perhaps, with some omissions), though this factor should hardly apply in the case of the PCS. 1/ Though of course it is also possible that male births were misreported as female; this seems less likely, on the whole. 2/ Unfortunately all the necessary data were not published in the PCS report, and therefore a P1/F1 analysis was not possible for 1971-72. 34- W. Brass has suggested that if the P/F ratios form a consistent and plausible series, then the ratio for younger women (usually the 20-24 or 25-29 age groups, or a combination of 20-24 and 25-29, or of 20-24, 25-29 and 30-34 age groups) can be used as a correction factor for the current ASFRS. The reasoning here is that underreporting and mistiming of births ought not to vary by age of women, so that the age pattern of current fertility should be acceptable; while the level of fertility reported by young women ought to be reasonably reliable, since the events concerned are few and recent, and their level of education also should be higher than for older women. Such a procedure is full of difficulties here, however. As is commonly the case with Eastern African census data, the 1977 P/F ratios are not consistent, and vary so substantially as to provide an alarmingly wide range of estimates. The PCS ratios seen at face value to be more consistent and hence more reliable, but this appears to be due mainly to the suspiciously low parities reported for younger women in 1970, which depress the P/F ratios at those ages. It is interesting here to note that the PI/F1 ratios for 1977 show much the same pattern as the 1977 P/F ratios, suggesting that it is not an inflation of true parity levels that is responsible for the P/F ratio irregularities in 1977. P/F corrections thus appear rather doubtful in the case of Malawi in either year. However, it is perhaps worth noting what such corrections would be. Using a variety of factors from the P/F ratios of the younger ages, estimates of the total fertility rate in 1971-72 would range from 7.6 to 8, and in 1976-77 from 8.0 to 8.9. As already noted, the lower level of the PCS estimates relative to those from the census stem from the lower parities reported by the younger (though not the older), women in the PCS. For 1977-, it is possible to derive a kind of minimum estimate from the P1/F1 ratios for the 45-49 age group, when any disturbance in the ratios caused by changes in timing of first births (e.g. through changes in age at at marriage) should have disappeared and the gap between current and retrospec- tive fertility would be hence the most reliable indicator of understatement. This yields'a total fertility rate of 7.5. The -true level of the TFR could be expected to be somewhat higher if the asstmption that first births are more completely reported than all births is correct. To sum up the results of this examination of national fertility data, it appears that the total fertility rate in Malawi must have been at least 7 in recent years. The 1977 data suggest a rate of over 7.5; the PCS data are more ambiguous, though they do indicate a lower level of fertility than in 1977. What differentials in fertility can be observed? It is unfortunate that the 1977 census tabulations classify fertility data by education and marital status of women, but not also by age of women, so that no, thorough analysis of differentials by female education or marital status is at present possible. However the necessary data are available by region and by urban/ rural areas. In the PCS only the urban/rural split was possible. We first consider urban/rural differentiats in fertility. Table 24 below presents the relevant data and results of the analysis from both the PCS and the 1977 census. Full details are given in print-out form in Appendix 4. - 35 - Table 24 Urban Population Rural Population Age of ASFR Mean Parity ASFR Mean Parity Women 1971-72 1976-72 1971-72 1976-77 1971-72 1976-77 1971-72 1976-77 15-19 .170 .116 .29 .40 .128 .133 .28 .50 20-24 .322 .272 1.80 1.80 .251 .281 1.64 2.01 25-29 .332 .273 3.32 3.33 .291 .275 3.44 3.58 30-34 ,296 .241 4.74 4.78 .227 .241 4.73 5.05 35-39 .226 .194 6.01 5.81 .215 .196 6.07 6.07 40-44 .110 .113 6.35 6.33 .109 .127 6.53 6.67 45-49 .089 .065 6.74 6.41 .086 .069 6.89 6.91 50-54 - - 6.49 6.28 - 7.29 7.04 55-59 - - 6.68 6.09 - 7.01 7.09 60-64 - - ) 6.16 ) 7.10 6.81 6.96 65+ -- ) 6.34 -- ) 7.15 Total Fertility Rate 1/ 7.73 6.37 6.53 6.61 Urban P/F Ratios Rural P/F Ratios P1/Fl Ratios 1977 1971-72 1976-77 1971-72 1976-77 Urban Rural 15-19 .77 1.55 .97 1.68 1.49 1.57 20-24 1.00 1.30 1.21 1.35 1.32 1.31 25-29 .96 1.20 1.23 1.23 1.21 1.17 30-34 .94 1.18 1.17 1.21 1.20 1.16 35-39 .95 1.14 1.17 1.16 1.19 1.15 40-44 .92 1.10 1.13 1.12 1.18 1.14 45-49 .88 1.02 1.07 1.06 1.16 1.13 Urban Population Rural Population 1971-72 1976-77 1971-72 1976-77 P/F Range of Estimates of TFR 7.3-7.8 7.6-8.3 7.7-8.0 80-8.9 P1/Fl Minimum Estimate of TFR - 7.4 - 7.5 1/ Calculated from ASFRs to 4 places of decimals. 36 Some interesting points emerge. Every set of fertility data except for PCS current births, shows generally lower fertility in urban than in rural.areas, although the difference in the FCS reported parities is very light, and in fact goes the other way for the youngest age groups. The higher urban current fertility in the PCS could be easily attributed to more complete recording of births; while the dxcess of urban over rural parities at the youngest ages in the PCS is perhaps connected with the suspicious deficit already mentioned, which shows up only in the rural data, not in the urban data. Indeed, the failure of this feature to appear among the presumably better-educated and more modernized urban women tends to support the view that deficiencies in the data are responsible for the deficit. The results of the P/F analysis also suggest that the quality of data is better in urban than in rural areas. P/F ratios are lower and more regular for the urban population; indeed they are close to I in the PCS for the younger age groups. The range of estimates for the urban TFR is hence much smaller, and a value of around 7.5 can probably be accepted with some confidence. Rural fertility emerges from the analysis as distinctly higher than urban fertility in both years, and must be close to the national level. It is usual in Eastern Africa (though not always in Western Africa) to find lower fertility in urban populations. The reasons are not entirely clear, though of course the towns do contain most of the educated elite who normally show much-lower fertility levels than the rest of the population. We turn now to regional differentials, available, of course, for 1977 only. Table 25 sets out a matching set of data and results for the regions Full details are given, in print-out form, in Appendix 4. 37 - Table 25 Age of ASFR Mean Parity Women Northern Central Southern Northern Central Southern 15-19 .124 .133 .132 .40 .49 .53 20-24 .298 .307 .255 1.96 2.09 1.92 25-29 .296 .308 .248 3.65 3.77 3.39 30-34 .263 .272 .211 5.12 5.36 4.75 35-39 .19M .222 .173 6.11 6.50 5.66 40-44 .116 .143 .115 6.59 7.22 6.22 45-49 .047 .076 .069 6.66 7.41 6.56 50-5- 6.60 7.50 6.77 55-59 - 6.52 7.50 6.87 60-64 6.46 7.48 6.95 65+ 6.47 7.43 7.06 Total Fertility Rate 6.70 7.31 6.02 P/F Ratios P1/Fl Ratios - Northern Central Southern Northern Central Southern 15-19 1.46 1.65 1.75 1.30 1.54 1.67 20-24 1.31 1.33 1.35 1.27 1.33 1.31 25-29 1.21 1.20 1.25 1.16 1.18 1.18 30-34 1.16 1.17 1.24 1.15 1.17 1.16 35-39 1.11 1.12 1.19 1.14 1.16 1.15 40-44 1.06 1.10 1.16 1.13 1.15 1.14 45-49 1.00 1.03 1.10 1.13 1.14 1.13 P/F Range of Estimates of TFR 7.8-8.8 8.6-9.8 7.5-8.2 P1/Fl Mini- mum Estimate of TFR 7.6 8.4 6.8 It is clear from every part of Table 25 that fertility in Central region is substantially higher than elsewhere in Malawi. Reported mean parity for women just past childbearing reaches 7.5; while the reported current total fertility rate, which is shown by the P/F analysis to be understated, is 7.3. Comparable measures for Northern Region are 6.7 and 6.7, for Southern Region 6.9 and 6.0. The minimum estimate of the total fertility rate from P1/F1 ratios is 8.4 for Central, compared with 7.6 for Northern and 6.8 for Southern; while the P/F ratios yield a range for Central in which the lowest point (8.6) barely overlaps the highest point for.Northern (8.8) and is well above the highest point for Southern (8.2). 38 There can therefore bc no doubt that Central Region experiences extremely high fertility, unmatched in the rest of Malawi, with the total fertility rate probably in the neighbourhood of 8.5, if not more. Data for the other two Regions are somewhat more uncertain. Northern Region appears to have somewhat higher fertility than Southern at present, to judge by the current fertility data and the parity data for women still in the reproductive years; the Northern total fertility rate is probably in the range 7.5 - 8.0 while the Southern rate can be set in the range 7 - 7.5. The parity data for women past 50, however, show rather curious features. It is normally found in Africa (and in similar areas elsewhere) that reported parity reaches a peak at the end of the reproductive span, say 45-55 years, and then remains stationary (as would be expected, if fertility is stable) or declines with advancing age; any such decline is usually attributed to increasingly faulty reporting in old age. Exceptions are generally found only in populations where there is other good evidence that pathological infertility has become a problem in recent years and that fertility has been declining from this cause. Northern and Central Regions are no exceptions to the normal pattern. Southern Region, however, shows steadily rising parity with increasing age of women right up to the over 65 group which reports a parity of 7.1, higher than any Northern value. There is thus some indication that fertility has fallen in Southern Region in the recent past, while remaining essentially stable elsewhere in Malawi. Few data are available on the determinants of this regional fertil- ity pattern. It is natural to suppose that the suggested decline in Southern. Region may be connected with the relatively high level of urbanization in that area, since urban fertility has already been shown to be lower than rural fertility at national level, and is in fact lower in every region as well (see Appendix 4). However examination of mean parities for urban and rural popula- tions of Southern Region separately (given in Appendix 4) reveals that the rise among older women is almost entirely absent in the urban population (being manifest only for women over 65 and then only very small) while remaining very pronounced in the rural population. The apparent decline is thus a rural phenomenon.. Examination of the full parity distribution for Southern rural women shows no very dramatic changes over age 50; just a slight increase of the percentage of women reporting the highest parities and a slight decrease of those reporting 0-4 live births. As regards the overall variation in fertility levels, it is also useful to look at the full parity distributions (given in Appendix 4) and particularly at the incidence of infertility by regions (i.e. the percent of women who report never having borne a live child. This information is shown in Table 26. - 39 - Table 26 Age Group Percent Reported as Infertile ( Parity 0) of Women Northern Central Southern Malawi 15-19 70.1 64.7 60.3 63.2 20-24 15.1 13.2 15.8 14.8 25-29 5.3 4.6 7.0 5.9 30-34 3.4 3.0 5.1 4.1 35-39 '3.1 2.6 4.4 3.5 40-44 3.4 2.6 4.6 3.7 45-49 3.3 2.9 4.6 3.8 50-54 3.8 3.1 4.7 4.0 55-59 3.6 3.3 4.6 4.0 60-64 4.0 3.1 4.8 4.1 65+ 3.6 3.3 4.5 3.9, The incidence of infertility at the youngest ages is usually closely tied to marital patterns, and provided that it is consistent with marriage data (as is the case in Malawi), is not of great interest. However the pro- portions infertile at'ages over about 30 (when most African women have been married for some years) are usually considered good indicators of the pre- valence of pathological-sterility (and hence of possible causative diseases, such as venereal infections) in a population. 1/ Two points are immediately clear here. First, that the level of reported infertility is everywhere extremely low, probably close to the physiological minimum. The implication is that there exists no serious problem of sterility, or of the diseases that usually produce sterility, in Malawi. Second that nonetheless there are slight but consistent regional differences that agree with the overall parity differentials. Central region shows the lowest proportion infertile, and Southern the highest, at all ages over 30, indeed over 20; Northern proportions lie betwoen. It is worth noting here that the entire parity distribution (shown in Appendix 4) of women under 50 supports this ranking, with Central showing the greatest proportions of higher parities add lowest proportion of lower parities, Southern the reverse, and Northern in between. Among women over 50, however, Northern and Southern change places with respect to the highest parities, a reflection of the Southern rise in mean parity and the Northern slight fall. It is helpful now to look at the 1977 marriage data by region. The most relevant features are summarized below in Table 27. 1/ In some populations voluntary infertility through birth control could be considered as another explanation of reported infertility. This is exceedingly unlikely to be the case in any African population. 40 - Table 27 Northern Central Southern Malawi Age by which 50% women are married 18.3 17.7 16.9 17.4 Percent women aged 25-29 ever married 97 98 98 98 Percent women aged 30-34 divorced 3 5 12 8 or separated Percent women aged 30-34 widowed 2 1.5 2 2 Percent women aged 30-34 currevtly married 93 92 84 88 It will be observed that, though female marriage is early and almost universal throughout Malawi, Northern region exhibits the latest age at marriage and Southern the earliest, with Central in between. In contrast, Southern Region shows a substantially higher incidence of marital instability than the other two rather similar regions. These features fit in well with observed parity, which in Northern Region is depressed at the youngest ages and in Southern Region fails to maintain an early lead over the other two regions; they suggest that some at least of the observed regional differe4- tials may be due to variation in marriage patterns. It is also possible that the observed Southern decline may be connected with a rise in marital instability, but the marital data for women over 50 are too ambiguous for any certainty. A final note on the prevalence on polygyny. Polygyny appears to be most popular in Northern Region, where between one quarter and one third of enumerated men aged over 40 report more than one wife. It is least popular in Southern Region, with a corresponding proportion of polygynists of 10-15 percent. Central Region falls between, with figures of a fifth to a quarter. 1/ In the absence of full tabulations of fertility by education and marital status, little more can be conjectured of the determinants of fertility variation in Malawi. However, since educational levels are often tied to fertility differentials, we may note that levels of female education (as well as male education) are much higher in Northern Region than else- where, with 55-70 percent of younger women having received some education and more than 40 percent of women reporting some schooling even at the highest ages. Southern Region reports the lowest levels ot education for both male and female education, with the percent of women aged over 20 with some schooling never rising above 36 percent at younger ages, and falling to less than one fifth at the highest ages. Central Region again falls between, with roughly 40-45 percent of younger women having received some educationt falling to the 20-25 percent level for the older women. Percentages of women with secondary education are everywhere low, the maximum value being 1/ One must remember, however, that absent males may.not necessarily show the same level and pattern of polygyny as those enumerated in 1977; hence these figures should not be taken too seriously. 41 around 5 percent for Northern women aged 20-24; but Northern levels are almost always highest, with Central lowest, and Southern in between. Such general information, however, does not appear to help very much in accounting for regional variation. in fertility. 1/ Having examined the specific fertility data, we now turn to the other source of fertility estimation, which is the age structure reported in the 1966 and 1977 censuses. If it can be assumed that the population is approximately stable, i.e., with no significant migration, unchanging fertility, and mortality either unchanging or only very gradually declining, than fertility can "be estimated (by standard methods of stable population analysis) from the age distribution coupled with some estimate of either mortality level or rate of growth. The first of these conditions does not, of course, hold good for Malawi males; it seems, however, to be a feasible assumption for females, and this method of estimation will therefore be confined to females only. The second condition can be provisionally taken to hold good. Even if the suggested fertility decline in Southern Region (which, because Southern Region comprises nearly half the total population, also appears, somewhat attenuated, at national level) did occur, it seems to have been very slight, and sufficiently long ago to exert but little influence on the age distribution in recent years. It is true also (by contrast) that some of the fertility data from the PCS suggest a somewhat lower level of fer- tiilty than those from 1977; but the indications are too doubtful for any certainty on this point. The third condition appears, from all the available information on mortality,-to be satisfactorily met in Malawi. Stable population analysis is usually carried out with the aid of sets of model stable populations produced by Coale and Demeny and others. In the case of Malawi, however, the contrast between childhood and adulthood mortality is far greater than in any available model life table, and hence none of the available model stable populations are suitable. The approach adopted, therefore, was to generate stable population age distributions for 1966 and 1977 from the life tables already prepared for these approximate dates (given in Appendix 3) together with a range of total fertility rates varying from .7 to 8. These stable age distributions were then compared with the observed figures for 1966 and 1977 to find the best fit, and hence the best estimate of fertility. Full details are given in Appendix 4. It must be confessed that the results were not entirely satis- factory. No very acceptable fit could be achieved for either 1966 or 1977, with the latter being even more refractory than the former, The implied levels of fertility in both cases, moreover, (though more so for 1977) were below what is indicated by the specific fertility data. The problem may be summarized in Table 22 below, which shows, for ages cumulated to suc- cessive 5 year stages, the TFR implied by the observed age data (i.e. obtained by interpolation in the set of stable age distributions): 1/ One possible factor to be borne in mind, of course, is the regional var- iation in childhood mortality. High childhood mortality may be linked to high fertility (as already mentioned in the mortality section), and this may be a contributing factor here. However there is insufficient information to determine the existence, or the nature, of such a link at present. =42- Table 28 Percent of Female Population Implied Total Fertility Rate under the age of 1966 1977 5 7.07 7.64 10 . 7.50 7.89 15 7.11 7.26 20 7.20 7.24 25 7.10 7.35 30 7.35 7.61 35 7.35 7.47 40 7.69 7.43 45 7.54 7.19 50 7.96 7.23 55 7.76 7.00 60 7.60 less than 7.00 65 7.04 less than 7.00 Average for ages up to 20 7.22 7.51 Average for ages up to 40 7.30 7.49 Average for all ages 7.41 - It will be seen that the 1966 age distribution is yielding a total fertility rate of roughly 7.2-7.4-,while the corresponding 1977 estimate is around 7.4-7.5, implying a slight rise in fertility between the censuses. This is due to the already noted rise in the proportions of children between 1966 and 1977. The two series of TFRs, however, show rather different patterns by age, indicating marked changes in all parts of the age distribu- tion. In particular, the contrast between the rise in implied TFRs at older ages in 1966 and the steady fall in the 1977 arises from the previously noted increase in the proportions of elderly women between 1966 and 1977. How.valid are the estimates of fertility obtained in this way? It is impossible to give a satisfactory answer here. It cannot be conclusively determined, for instance, from the available data, whether the intercensal increase in proportions of children was due to improved completeness of enu- meration or to a genuine rise in fertility; nor whether the increase in pro- portions of elderly women was due to improved counting or to changes in,age reporting/misreporting. It is, moreover, not absolutely impossible that female migration may have been more important than usually assumed. Nor can the possibility be ruled out that the life tables used for constructing the stable populations are in error. Though the childhood mortality estimates are the best that can be done with the reported data on child survival, and though these data appear by all the available checks to be consistent and of good quality, they ultimately depend on the accuracy of women's reports, If, for example, women had systematically somewhat understated their child losses (by no means an unlikely hypothesis) childhood mortality would actually be heavier than the levels used in the life tables,'and hence implied fertility would be underestimated. It is perhaps worth noting that current death rates for the 0-4 and 5-9 age groups do show heavier mortality than corresponding levels from reported child survival. It is, moreover, rather interesting to see (as shown in Appendix 4) that the best, and quite acceptable, fit for the recorded 1977 - 43 1977 age distribution is to be found in a combination of the 1962-67 life table with a TFR of 7.75. To sum up the problem here, the recorded age distributions of 1966 and 1977 are not entirely consistent with the specific data on mortal- ity and fertility. From the rigorous analytical point of view, the best that can be done by way of reconciliation is to take the TFR as lying somewhere between 7.5 and 8, and to consider the estimated levels of childhood morta- lity very much as minimums. The question of how reliable the census age dis- tributions are, and whether there has been any intercensal rise in fertility, must be left undetermined. From the practical point of view, however, decisions must be made. We adopt a compromise total fertility rate of 7.75. We retain the life tables as they are, since estimated child mortality is already sufficiently severe to indicate a substantial health problem in Malawi (and also, to some extent, in border areas of neighboring countries) and to point the need for attention to this problem. We assume that on balance fertility has remained more or less constant. Consequently we assume that the female age distribution has been too affected by various disturbing factors such as underenumeration, age-mis- reporting and migration, to be taken as altogether reliable. Population Vital Rates, Natural Increase, and Population Projections Once schedules of of mortality and fertility have been established, vital rates (i.e., crude birth rate, crude death rate and rate of natural in- crease) can be computed by applying age-specific death and birth rates to the age distribution. The problem always arises, at this point, of whether to smooth the age distribution, since extensive distortions caused by age-misreporting can seriously affect the computation of vital rates. For Malawi, of course, there is the added difficulty created by migration, which also distorts the age dis- tribution and vital rates, but in a real, not spurious, way; any irregulari- ties due to this factor should not be smoothed away. Accordingly, two approaches were used. First, the selected mortal- ity and fertility schedules were applied to the unsmoothed enumerated age distribution of 1966 and 1977.. Secondly, they were applied to the stable age-distribution generated from those schedules. The two set of results were then compared. Naturally, in the case of the male population at least, the stable rates are quite unrealistic, since male migration is so important in IMalawi; however they provide some idea of the extent of the distortion caused by migration. In the case of the female population, for whom migration is not thought to be important, the stable distribution can be regarded as a kind of smoothed version of the recorded age distribution. For 1977, the procedures were quite straightforward. The census population was combined with the fertility schedule recorded for the previous year, rated up to a total fertility rate of 7.75, and with the already 44 described male and female life tables for 1970-75; 1/ stable vital rates were obtained from the stable population generated by these schedules. The inter- censal growth rate (for the period 1966-1977) is also given for reference. The results are given below in Table 29: Table 29 Estimate of Vital Rates Recorded Age Distribution Stable Population Recorded Inter- Plus Estimated Mortality Generated From Es- censal Growth and Fertility timated Mortality Rate (Percent) and Fertility 1966-77 Natural Increase Males 1977 3.13 2.83 3.02 Females 1977 2.75 2.83 2.72 Total 1977 2.93 2.83 2.86 Crude Birth Rate Males 1977 59.1 53.2 - Females 1977 53.4 52.2 - Total 1977 56.2 52.7 - Crude Death Rate Males 1977 27.9 24.8 - Females 1977 25.9 23.9 - Total 1977 26.9 24.4 - Figures may not add exacly to totals, due to rounding. Table 1 clearly demonstrates the importance of the age distribution in estimation of vital rates, and the distortion caused by migration. It is reassuring, however, to find that the estimates of mortality and fertility previously arrived at do yield rates of natural increase that are broadly.con- sistent with intercensal growth (except in the understandable case of the male stable population)., The rates for 1977 are in fact higher than the intercen- sal rate, but this ',:ld be expected if growth rates had been rising (as is normal) between 1.166 avd 1977. One other very important point also emerges. The difference in the intercensal growth rate of males and females may be largely, possibly even entirely, attributed to differences in natural increase rates; these 1/ Strictly speaking these life tables do not quite match in time, being for a few years earlier than 1977. However, extrapolation of mortality trends did not seem justified here, particularly since these life tables probably represent a minimum estimate of mortality levels, and since mortality change in Malawi appears to be extremely gradual in any case. *45 differences themselves are caused by the distortion of the population age structure by male migration. There may therefore be no basis for inferring return migration from variation 1in growth rates by sex. The evidence, dis- cussed in the migration section, that the net amount of return migration has been rather modest between 1966 and 1977, 1/ thus receives further support. The application of these procedures to 1966 is not quite so straight- forward. The problem here is the difference in age structure between the 1966 and 1977 census populations and the related uncertainty over the level of fer- tility in 1966. The use of a fertility scLhedule that would match the recorded age distribution (i.e. the aforementioned schedule rated up to a TFR of 7.5) implies acceptance of the age structure as correct and of a genuine rise in fertility. The use of the same TFR as for 1977 (7.75) creates a basic anomaly between fertility and age structure which will affect vital rates, in this case inflating the crude birth rate and deflating the crude death rate because the child population is understated; and if this is to be accounted for by relative underenumeration of children, implies all sorts of queries about the size of the population in 1966 and the true level of intercensal growth. As a test, both levels of fertility were tried. The results are presented in Table 30. Table 30 Source of Estimates of Vital Rates Recorded Inter- censal Growth TFR = 7.75 TFR - 7.5 Rate (Percent) Recorded Stable Recorded Stable 1966-77 . Ages Populations Ages Populations Natural Increase (percent) Males 1966 3.43 2.66 3.04 2.54 3.02 Females 1966 2.91 2.66 2.57 2.54 2.72 Total 1966 3.15 2.66 2.79 2.54 2.86 Crude Birth,Rate Males 1966 63.5 53.3 59.6 51.9 Females 1966 55.5 52.4 52.1 51.1 Total 59.3 52.9 55.7 51.5 Crude Death Rate Males 1966 29.2 26.7 29.2 26.5 Females 1966 26.4 25.9 26.4 25.7 Total 1966 27.8 26.3 27.8 26.1. -- Figures may not add exactly to totals, due to rounding. 1/ This does not necessarily imply that there was not a mass return in the mid 1970s, but simply that, if there was, it was largely balanced by reemigration of the returnees, or increased emigration by the rest of the population; or of course, that further substantial emigration had occurred between 1966 and 1974. The problems are well illustrated here. The use of TFR of 7.75 with the recorded age distribution produces a rate of natural increase sub- stantially higher than both the 1977 rate and the intercensal growth rate of either males or or females, which is unacceptable; if, however, the cor- responding stable age distribution is used (i.e. adjusting for the defects in the 1966 age structure implied by adopting this level of fertility) the rate of natural increase for females reduces from 2.91 to 2.66. This is much nearer to the rates obtained with a TFR of 7.5 using either the recorded or the stable age structure (2.57 and 2.54 respectively).. It does not seem that the question of whether fertility did rise can be conclusively settled in this way either. We are now in a position to make estimates of intercensal natural increase (by averaging rates for 1966 and 1977) that can be compared directly with the recorded intercensal growth rates. Table 31 shows the results. Table 31 Source of Estimate Natural Increase/Growth Rates (percent) 1966-77 Male Female Total Recorded ages 1966 & 1977 (TFR = 7.75, 7.75) 3.28 2.83 3.04 Recorded Ages 1966 & 1977 (TER - 7.50, 7.75) 3.08 2.66 . 2.86 Stable Ages 1966 & 1977 (TFR = 7.75, 7.75) 2.75 2.74 2.75 Stable Ages 1966 & 1977 (TFR 7.50, 7.75) 2.69 2.68 2.69 Stable Ages 1966 & Recorded Ages 1977 (TFR - 7.75, 7.75) - 2.71 - Recorded Intercensal Growth Rate 3.02 2.72 2.86 It appears that, with the exception of the unsatisfactory esti- mates using the 1966 census age distribution and TFR of 7.75, the estimates of natural increase are broadly consistent both internally and with recorded intercenal growth as far as the fenale populadon is concerned. The stable estimates for males (and hence for the total population) of course, are not to be taken seriously, but the esti=ates derived from census age distribu- tions, using 7.50 and 7.75 respectively, also conform well to intercensal growth; and confirm that the substa-atial sex differential in growth is due maithly to the effects of male migration on the age distribution, and not necessarily attributable to return cale migration. -47- Obviously it would be rash to select any one of the estimates shown here as correct. However, it seems safest to conclude- that the recorded intercensal growth rate did not differ greatly from the intercensal rate of natural increase. This can be estimated as lying between 2.8 and 2.9 percent for the period 1966-1977. The rate at the time of the 1977 census may be set at around 2.9 percent, the product of a crude birth rate in the neighborhood of 56 and a crude death rate of around -27. Both crude rates were inflated by the abnormal shortage of adult males and would have been perhaps 2 or 3 points lower if all Malawian males had then been resident in Malawi; the rate of natural increase would probably be little different, however, because of the compensating inflation in both components of natural increase. Having established base fertility, mortality and growth estimates for the latest available period, we are now in a position to proceed to projections. We first estimate a base total population figure for 1975, by projecting the census figure back in time to mid 1975; for this back projection we can use the observed intercensal growth rates since they appear to be reasonably celiable. The next question to arise concerns the age distribution of the base population. The recorded distribution of 1977 is obviously irregular and faulty for both males and females. It can of course be replaced by the stable distribution generated from the 1970-75 life-table and a TFR of 7.75 in the case of the female population; while an analogous adjusted stable distribution can-be constructed for males by subtracting emigrants from the stable structure. 1/ This was tried; but the smoothing.is rather drastic and had quite a substantial effect on projected total population size and growth. It seemed unwise to stray so far from the recorded age structure; yet no more mechanical, less radical type of smoothing is satisfactory for the highly migratory male population of Malawi. Finally it was decided to retain the recorded age distribution as the least risky course. 1/ This procedure was carried out as follows. First,.an estimate of total male migrants abroad was made, and this number was added to the 1977 male census total. The stable age distribution was then computed for this total. Then the migrants were distributed by age, roughly according . to the age distribution of migrants reported in 1966. The numbers in each age group were then subtracted from the stable population numbers. The percent distribution of the remaining males could then be calculated (they add up, of course, to the enumerated male total of 1977) and compared with the enumerated age distribution. It was found that a reasonable fit could be achieved using a total number of migrants of 200,000. APPENDIX 1 Base Age/Sex Distribution Tables Table A.1.1: Malawi 1966 Census: Age & Sex Distribution: Northern Region ------Percent Distribution----- Age Group Males Females Total Males Females Total Sex Ratio 0-4 45541 47254 92795 19.88 17.60 18.65 96.4 5-9 37186 37809 74995 16.24 14.08 15.07 98.4 10-14 28836 29386 58222 12.59 10.95 11.70 98.1 15-19 .23914 26578 50492 10.44 9.90 10.15 90.0 20-24 16813 22554 39367 7.34 8.40 7.91 74.5 25-29 13117 18638 31755 5.73 6.94 6.38 70.4 30-34 11434 16371 27805 4.99 6.10 5.59 69.8 35-39 9392 14123 23515 4.10 5.26 4.73 66.5 40-44 7200 10728 17928 3.14 4.00 3.60 67.1 45-49 7901 12406 20307 3.45 4.62 4.08 63.7 50-54 . 7071 8865 15936 3.09 3.30 3.20 79.8 00 55-59 6180 7393 13573 2.70 2.75 2.73 83.6 60-64 4928 5318 10246 2.15 1.98 2.06 92.7 65+ 9531 11024 20555 4.16 4.11 4.13 86.5 TOTAL 229044 268447 497491 100.00, 100.00 100.00 85.3 0-14 111563 114449 226012 48.71 42.63 45.43 97.5 15-49 89771 121398 211169 39.19 45.22 42.45 73.9 50+ 27710 32600 60310' 12.10 12.14 12.12 85.0 20-35 41364 57563 98927 18.06 21.44 19.89 71.9 Table A.1.2: Malawi 1966 Census: Age & Sex Distribution: Central Region ------Percent Distribution----- Age Group Males Females Total Males Females Total Sex Ratio 0-4 138263 144408 282671 19.99 18.43 19.16 95.7 5-9 106847 110324 217171 15.45 14.08 14.72 96.8 10-14 80735 77687 158422 11.67 9.92 10.74 103.9 15-19 69331 74326 143657 10.03 9.49 9.74 93.3 20-24 49363 68102 117465 7.14 8.69 7.96 72.5 25-29 46424 66824 113248 6.71 8.53 7.68 69.5 30-34 37467 48544 86011 5.42 6.20 5.83 77.2 35-39 37638 47617 85255 5.44 6.08 5.78 79.0 40-44 23025 29495 52520 3.33 3.77 3.56 78.1 45-49 28342 34987 63329 4.10 4.47 4.29 81.0 50-54 17272 19604 36876 2.50 2.50 2.50 88.1 55-59 15735 17507 33242 2.28 2.23 2.25 89.9 60-64 10505 11749 22254 1.52 1.50 1.51 89.4 65+ 30625 32206 62831 4.43 4.11 4.26 95.1 TOTAL 691572 783380 1474592 100.00 100.00 100.00 88.3 0-14 325845 332419 658264 47.12 42.43 44.63 98.0 15-49 291590 369895 661485 42.16 47.22 44.85 78.8 50+ 74137 81066 155203 10.72 10.35 10.52 91.5 20-35 133254 183470 316724 19.27 23.42 21.47 72.6 Table A.1.3: Malawi 1966 Census: Age & Sex Distribution: Southern Region ------Percent Distribution----- Age Group Males Females Total Males Females Total Sex Ratio 0-4 182329 190430 372759 18.37 17.72 18.03 95.7 5-9 151585 153855 305440 15.27 14.32 14.78 98.5 10-14 107970 104321 212291 10.88 9.71 10.27 103.5 15-19 98482 108966 207448 9.92 10.14 10.04 90.4 20-24 69782 87829 157611 7.03 8.17 7.62 79.5 25-29 68245 88780 157025 6.88 8.26 7.60 76.9 30-34 51948 66820 118768 5.23 6.22 5.75 77.7 35-59 59471 71814 131285 5.99 6.68 6.35 82.8 40-44 39491 45094 84585 3.98 4.20 4.09 87.6 Ln 45-49 47086 50668 97754 4.74 4.72 4.73 92.9 50-54 30876 29308 60184 3.11 2.73 2.91 105.4 55-59 25807 24206 50013 2.60 2.25 2.42 106.6 60-64 17795 16088 33883 1.79 1.50 1.64 110.6 65+ 41779 36315 78094 4.21 3.38 3.78 115.0 TOTAL 992646 1074494 2067140 100.00 100.00 100.00 92.4 0-14 441884 448606 890490 44.52 41.75 43.08 98.5 15-49 434505 519971 954476 43.77 48.39 46.17 83.6 50+ 116257 105917 222174 11.71 9.86 10.75 10.98 20-35 189975 243429 433404 19.14 22.66 20.97 -78.0 Table A.1.4: Malawi 1966 Census: Age & Sex Distribution: National Level ------Percent Distribution----- Age Group Males Females Total Hales Females Total Sex Ratio 0-4 366133 382092 748225 19.14 17.97 18.52 95.,8 5-9 295618 301988 597606 15.45 14.20 14.79 97.9 10-14 217541 211394 428935 11.37 9.94 10.62 102.9 15-19 191727 209870 401597 10.02 9.87 9.94 91.4 20-24 135958 178485 314443 7.11 8.39 7.78 76.2 25-29 127786 174242 302028 6.68 8.19 7.48 73.3 30-34 100849 131735 232584 5.27 6.20 5.76 76.6 35-59 106501 133554 240055 5.57 6.28 5.94 79.7 40-44 69716 85317 155033 3.64 4.01 3.84 81.7 Ln 45-49 83329 98061 181396 4.36 4.61 4.49 85.0 50-54 55219 57777 112996 2.89 2.72 2.80 95.6 55-59 47722 49106 96828 2.49 2.31 2.40 97.2 60-64 33228 33155 66383 1.74 1.56 1.64 100.2 65+ 81935 79545 161480 4.28 3.74 4.00 103.0 TOTAL 1913262 2126321 4039583 100.00 100.00 100.00 90.0 0-14 879292 895474 1774766 45.96 42.11 43.93 98.2 15-49 815866 1011264 1827130 42.64 47.56 45.23 80.7 50+ 218104 219583 437687 11.40 10.33 10.83 99.3 20-35 364593 484462 849055 19.06 22.78 21.02 75.3 Table A.1:5: Malawi: Age & Sex Distribution: Populatioti Change Survey Initial Questionnaire: February 1970 ------ Percent Distribution---- Age Group Males Females Total Males Females Total Sex Ratio 0-4 33135-3 342180 673533 17.11 15.77 16.40 96.8 5-9 288349 298040 586389 14.89 13.73 14.28 96.7 10-14 263359 266591 529950 13.60 12.29 12.91 98.9 1519 181257 198498 379755 9.36 9.15 9.25 91.3 20-24 143224 213841 357065 7.40 9.85 8.70 67.0 25-29 112694 143714 256408 5.82 6.62 6.24 78.4 30-34 113626 151889 265515 5.87 7.00 6.47 74.8 35-59 92214 114971 207185 4.76 5.30 3.05 80.2 40-44 90530 117517 208047 4.68 5.42 5.07 77.0 45-49 71743 81747 153490 3.71 3.77 3.74 87.8 50-54 67599 76370 143969 3.49 3.52 3.51 88.5 55-59 54178 45547 99725 2.80 2.10 2.43 118.9 60+ 126049 119047 245096 6.51 5.49 5.97 105.9 NS 6240(.3%) 7180(.3%) 13420(.3%) 86.9 -NS 1936175 2169952 4-106127 100.00 100.00 100.00 89.2 TOTAL 1942415 2177132 4119547 89.2 0-14 883061 906811 1789872 45.61 41.79 43.59 97.4 15-49 805288 1022177 1827465 41.59 47.11 44.51 78.8 50+ 247826 240964 488790 12.80 11.10 11.90 102.8 20-35 369544 509444 878988 19.09 23.48 21.62 72.5 Table A.1.6: Malawi 1977 Census: Age & Sex Distribution: Northern Region ------Percent Distribution----- Age Group Males Females Total Males Females Total Sex Ratio 0-4 .59676 61945 121621 19.47 18.13 18.77 96.3 5-9 49718 49639 99357 16.22 14.53 15.33 100.2 10-14 39397 38341 77738 12.86 11.22 12.00 102.8 15-19 33691 37104 70795 10.99 10.86 10.92 90.8 20-24 22200 27818 50018 7.24 8.14 7.72 79.8 25-29 18179 22594 40773 5.93 6.61 6.29 80.5 30-34 13746 18389 32135 4.49 5.38 4.96 74.8 35-59 13241 16687 29928 4.32 4.88 4.62 79.3 40-44 10471 13720 24191 3.42 4.02 3.73 76.3 45-49 10457 13187 23644 3.41 3.86 3.65 79.3 50-54 7383 10365 17748 2.41 3.03 2.74 71.2 55-59 7185 8833 16018 2.34 2.59 2.47 81.3 60-64 6144 7315 13459 2.00 2.14 2.08 84.0 65+ 14961 15676 30637 4.88 4.59 4.73 95.4 NS 415(.1%) 376(.1%) 791(.1%) 110.4 -NS 306449 341613 648062 100.00 100.00 100.00 89.7 TOTAL 306864 341989 648853 89.7 0-14 148791 149925 298716 48.55 43.89 46.09 99.2 15-49 121985 149499 271484 39.81 43.76 41.89 81.6 50+ 35673 42189 77862 11.64 12.35 12.01 79.8 20-35 54125 68801 122926 17.66 20.14 18.97 78.7 Table A.1.7: Malawi 1977 Census: Age & Sex Distribution: Central Region -----Percent Distribution----- Age Group Males Females Total Males Females Total Sex Ratio 0-4 211914 221909 433823 20.32 20.22 20.27 95.5 5-9 153663 158280 311943 14.74 14.42 14.57 97.1 10-14 110757 102882 213639 10.62 9.37 9.98 107.7 15-19 101590 104775 206365 9.74 9.54 9.64 97.0 20-24 79571 96676 176247 7.63 8.81 8.23 82.3 25-29 82010 87618 169628 7.87 7.98 7.93 93.6 30-34 59736 63052 122788 5.73 5.74 5.74 94.7 35-59 54399 57697 112096 5.22 5.26 5.24 94.3 40-44 38352 42025 80377 3.68 3.83 3.76 91.3 45-49 41844 42094 83938 4.01 3.83 3.92 99.4 50-54 24218 29430 53648 2.32 2.68 2.51 82.3 55-59 24704 24526 49230 2.37 2.23 2.30 100.7 60-64 16416 19406 35822 1.57 1.77 1.67 84.6 65+ 43499 47373 90872 4.17 4.32 4.25 91.8 NS 1648(.2%) 1652(.2%) 3300(.2%) 99.8 Total-NS 1042673 1097743 2140416 100.00 100.00 100.00 95.0 TOTAL 1044321 1099395 2143716 95.0 0-14 476334 483071 959405 45.68 44.01* 44.82 98.6 15-49 457502 493937 951439 43.88 45.00 44.45 92.6 50+ 108837 120735 229572 10.44 11.00 10.73 90.1 20-35 221317 247346 468663 21.23 22.53 21.90 89.5 Table A.1.8: Malawi 1977 Census: Age & Sex DistribuLion: Southern Region -----Percent Distribution- Age Group Males Females Total Males Females Total Sex Ratio 0-4 256960 267712 524672 19.47 18.72 19.08 96.0 5-9 205263 208750 414013 15.56 14.59 15.06 98.3 10-14 143694 135577 279271 10.89 9.48 10.16 106.0 15-19 125535 138139 263674 9.51 9.66 9.59 90.9 20-24 93032 129655 222687 7.05 9.06 8.10 71.8 25-29 103635 123027 226662 7.85 8.60 8.24 84.2 30-34 71604 79640 151244 5.43 5.57 5.50 89.9 35-59 63941 70605 134546 4.85 4.94 4.89 90.6 40-44 45860 53255 99115 3.48 3.72 3.60 86.1 1 L 45-49 53021 58060 111081 4.02 4.06 4.04 91.3 50-54 34167 41281 75448 2.59 2.89 2.74 82.8 55-59 32815 33449 66264 2.49 2.34 2.41 98.1 60-64 26260 28050 54310 1.99 1.96 1.98 93.6 65+ 63779 63101 126880 4.83 4.41 4.61 101.1 NS 2838(.2%) 2186(.2%) 5024(.2%) 129.8 Total-NS 1319566 1430301 2749867 100.00 100.00 100.00 92.3 TOTAL 1322404 1432487 2754891 92.3 0-14 605917 612039 1217956 45.92 42.79 44.29 99.0 15-49 556628 652381 1209009 42.18 45.61 43.97 85.3 50+ 157021 165881 322902 11.90 11.60 11.74 94.7 20-35 268271 332322 600593 20.33 23.23 21.84 80.7 Table A.1.9: Malawi 1977 Census: Age & Sex Distribution: National Level ---Percent Distribution--- Age Group Males Females Total Males Females Total Sex Ratio 0-4 528550 551566 1080116 19.81 19.22 19.50 95.8 5-9 408644 416669 825313 15.31 14.52 14.90 98.1 10-14 293848 276800 570648 11.01 9.65 10.30 106.2 15-19 260816 280018 540834 9.77 9.76 9.77 93.1 20-24 194803 254149 448952 7.30 8.86 8.11 76.6 25-29 203824 233239 437063 7.64 8.13 7.89 87.4 30-34 145086 161081 306167 5.44 5.61 5.53 90.1 35-39 131581 144989 276570 4.93 5.05 4.99 90.8 40-44 94683 109000 203683 3.55 3.80 3.68 86.9 45-49 105322 113341 218663 3.95 3.95 3.95 92.9 50-54 65768 81076 146844 2.46 2.83 2.65 81.1 55-59 64704 66808 131512 2.42 2.33 2.37 96.9 60-64 48820 54771 103591 1.83 1.91 1.87 89.1 65+ 122239 126150 248389 4.58 4.40 4.48 96.9 NS 4901 4214 9115 116.3 -NS 2668688 2869657 5538345 100.00 100.00 100.00 93.0 TOTAL 2673589 2873871 5547460 93.0 0-14 1231042 1245035 2476077 46.13 43.39 44.71 98.9 15-49 1136115 1295817 2431932 42.57 45.16 43.91 87.7 50+ 301531 328805 630336 11.30 11.46 11.38 91.7 20-35 543713 648469 1192182 20.37 22.60 21.53 83.8 Table A.1.10: Intercensal Growth Rates by Age and Sex: Malawi 1966-1977: Southern, Central & Northern Regions GR 1966-77 Southern Region GR 1966-77 Central Region GR 1966-77 Northern Region Age Group Males Females Tota Males Females Total Males Females Total 0-4 3.12 3.10 3.11 3.88 3.91 3.89 2.46 2.46 2.46 5-9 2.76 2.77 2.76 3.30 3,28 3.29 2.64 2.46 2.56 10-14 2.60 2.38 2.49 2.87 2.55 2.72 2.84 2.42 2.63 15-19 2.21 2.16 2.18 3.47 3.12 3.29 3.12 3.03 3.07 20-24 2.61 3.54 3.14 4.34 3.19 3.69 2.53 1.91 2.18 25-29 3.80 2.97 3.34 5.17 2.46 3.67 2M97 1.75 2.27 30-34 2.92 1.60 2.20 4.24 2.38 3.24 1.67 1.06 1.32 35-39 .66 - .15 .22 3.35 1.75 2.49 3.12 1.52 2.19 40-44 1.36 1.51 1.44 4.64 3.22 3.87 3.40 2.24 2.72 45-49 1.08 1.24 1.16 3.54 1.68 2.56 2.55 .56 1.38 50-54 .92 3.11 2.05 3.07 3.69 3.41 .39 1.42 .98 55-59 2.18 2.94 2.56 4.10 3.06 3.57 1.37 1.62 1.51 60-64 3.54 5.05 4.29 4.06 4.56 4.33 2.00 2.90 2.48 65+ 3.85 5.02 4.41 3.19 3.51 3.35 4.10 3.20 3.63 NS - - - -- - - - - TOTAL 2.61 2.61 2.61 3.75 3.08 3.40 2.66 2.20 2.41 0-14 2.87 2.82 2.85 3.45 3.40 3.42 2.62 2.45 2.54 15-49 2.25 2.06 2.15 4.10 2.63 3.30 2.79 1.89 2.28 50+ 2.73 4.08 3.40 3.49 3.62 3.56 2,30 2.34 ' 2.32 20-35 3.14 2.83 2.97 4.61 2.72 3.56 2.44 1.62 1.97 -58 - APPENDIX 2 DISTRICT DATA General Description Boundaries: District names and district boundaries have changed frequentiy during the 20th century. Table A.2.1 lists name changes, and those boundary changes which consisted of splitting up or amalgamating whole districts. The general trend has been towards an increasing number of smaller districts. Minor alterations in boundaries are much more difficult to track, and are not listed here. Between 1966 and 1977 one major and one minor change appears to have occurred. The major alteration was the splitting of Blantyre district into Blantyre and Mwanza districts. Fortunately, the 1977 census tabulations provide 1966 figures for total population, male population and female popula- tion for these two new units, so that intercensal total, male and female growth rates can be calculated for them. However, no comparable 1966 figures for the age distribution of the populations of Blantyre and Mwanza are given, nor indeed for any other characteristics. Intercensal comparisons for age groups, migration patterns etc., must therefore be made only for the two. new districts combined, or else suffer from some lack of comparability. The minor change is some alteration in the boundary between Chikwawa and Thyolo. This is not mentioned specifically in the 1977 census report Volume I, but emerges from the 1966 district figures given in the tables of that report. The 1966 totals for males, females and the entire population differ from those given in the 1966 Census Report itself; so, consequently, - 59 - do the implied intercensal growth rates. Details are shown below: Intercensal Growth 1966 Total 1966 Male 1966 Female Rate of Total Population Population Population Population With 1966 As Given As Given As Given As Given As Given As Given Population From in 1966 in 1977 in 1966 in 1977 in 1966 in 1977 1966 1977 Census Census Census Census Census Census Census Census Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Report Thyolo 245,824 256,605 121,388 126,625 124,436 129,980 2.44 2.05 Chikwawa 158,145 147,364 76,514 71,277 81,631 76,087 1.86 2.50 Total 403,969 403,969 197,902 197,902 206,067 206,067 In this report the 1966 figures given in the 1977 census tables have been used. However, again no comparable figures for breakdown by age or other characteristics are available, and for these the 1966 Census Report has necessarily been used. In such cases it must be remembered that the 1966 and 1977 district populations of Chikwawa and Thyolo are not entirely comparable. Language/Ethnic Groupings: It is of interest to examine how far district boundaries conform to linguistic/ethnic/cultural boundaries. The 1966 census collected data on mother-tongue (language spoken in the home) for all persons'at least 5 years old. Figures A.2.2a,b,c show for each district what percentage of the enumerated population aged 5 and over speak a given language in the home. Only percentages of 1 or over are specified, and languages that do not constitute more than 5 percent in any district (namely Ngoni, Nyakyusa, Swahili and English) are omitted. The category of - 60 - 'Other' (not specified) languages generally includes less than 5 percent of any district's population; exceptions are Chitipa (10 percent), Karonga (5 percent), Mchinji (7 percent) and Chikwawa (5 percent). The overall picture is interesting. Within the Northern Region the Tumbuka language is nearly universal in Rumphi and Mzimba, fading off to still quite substantial minorities of between 20 and 40 percent in the rest of the region, as well as Kasungu in Central Region. The very isolated districts of Chitipa and Karonga show a mix of languages not found elsewhere in bialawi, without any one dominating element. Nkhata Bay constitutes a clearly marked enclave of Tonga speakers, which spreads only slightly south- wards into Nkhotakota in Central Region. Southern Region also shows considerable linguistic diversity; here no district shows any language with more than an 80 percent share, and usually considerably less. In the north, Yao speakers dominate in Mangochi, form a bare majority in Machinga, and extend southwards to minorities of about one quarter in Zomba, Blantyre and Chiradzulu districts; somewhat smaller minorities appear northwards also, in the Central Region lakeside districts of Dedza and Salima. In the east, Lomwe speakers constitute two-thirds of Mulanje district, and large minoritles of between 20 and 40 percent in the surrounding districts of Zomba, iachinga, Chiradzulu and Thyolo. In the extreme south an enclave of Sena speakers dominates Nsanje and constitutes a third of Chikwawa district. And finally, spreading from the northwest, Chichewa speakers form a small majority in Blantyre and Chikwawa and Thyolo, and make up between 10 and 20 percent of all other southern districts. - 61 - Central Region, by contrast, is much more linguistically homogeneous than the other two provinces, and appears as the well-defined heartland of Chichewa.speakers, The core districts of Ntchisi, Dowa and Lilongwe, together with Ntcheu, are almost universally Chichewa-speaking. The surrounding dis- tricts of Kasungu, Mchinji, Dedza, Salima and Nkhotakota show substantial Chichewa majorities, but with admixtures from north and south of Tonga, Tumbuka and Yao which range from 10-40 percent. Chichewa in its turn, of course, extends both northwards into Nkhata Bay and southwards into Blantyre and Chikwawa and, to a lesser extent, throughout the rest of Southern Region. Interdistrict migration since 1966 may have modified the picture somewhat, nevertheless the overall features are probably still broadly applicable. Population Distribution: Population size in 1977 and population density per square kilometer for 1966 and 1977 are.shown in Table A.2.2 and Figure A.2.3. It is apparent that population is very unevenly distributed within Malawi. In 1977 three out of the 24 districts, Lilongwe, Blantyre and Mulanje, contained nearly 30 percent of the total population: all had populations of over 400 thousand aid Lilongwe had nearly three-quarters of a million. Other large populations of over one-quarter of a million are found in Mzimba, Dedza, Mangochi, Machinga, Zomba and Thyolo. At the other extreme,'populations of under 100 thousand are found in Chitipa, Rumphi, Nkhotakota, Ntchisi and Mwanza. Relative rankings of district by size changed somewhat between censuses, as can be seen in the diagram below: -62- Ranking 1966 1977 1 Lilongwe Lilongwe 2 Mulanje Mulanje 3 Zomba Blantyre 4 Thyolo Zomba 5 Blantyre Machinga 6 Mangochi Thyolo 7 Dedza Mangochi 8 Mzimba Mzimba 9 Machinga Dedza 10 Dowa Dowa 11 Ntcheu Ntcheu 12 Chikwawa Kasungu 13 Chiradzulu Chikwawa 14 Nsanje Chiradzulu, 15 Kasungu Mchinji 16 Salima Salima 17 Mchinji Nsanje 18 Nkhata Bay Karonga 19 Karonga Nkhata Bay 20 Ntchisi Nkhotakota 21 Nkhotakota Ntchisi 222 Chitipa Chitipa 23 Rumphi Mwanza 24 Mwanza Rumphi - 63 - Dramatic rises in ranking occurred for Machinga (from 9th to 5th) and Kasungu (15th to 12th); less dramatic rises were shown by Blantyre (from 5th to 3rd) and Mchinji (17th to 15th). A substantial fall was recorded for Nsanje (from 14th to 17th); a fall of two places occurred for Thyolo (4th to 6th) and Dedza (7th to 9th). Three pairs in the lowest rankings, Nkhata Bay and Karonga, Ntchisi and Nkhotakota, and Rumphi and Mwanza, changed places;-all other districts either remained constant or fell not more than one place. These changes will be further illuminated by data on growth and migration. The density figures point up even more clearly the unevenness of population distribution in Malawi. The overall pattern is much the same in both 1966 and 1977. The heaviest densities (ranging in 1977 from 137-230 persons per km ) are found in the clearly defined group of districts that make up the Shire highlands, namely Blantyre, Zomba, Chiradzulu, Mulanje and Thyolo. In both years Chiradzulu is substantially the most heavily settled; but all are very sharply demarcated from the districts that ring them (Machinga, Mwanza, Chikwawa and Nsanje), which show 1977 densities ranging only from 31 to 57. Another core of relatively heavy settlement is apparent in the southern highlands of Central Region, namely Lilongwe, Dowa and Dedza dis- tricts. These show 1977 densities ranging from 81 to 114. To the east and south, in Ntchisi, Salima and Ntcheu, they are bordered by somewhat lower 1977 densities of 53-66; to the north and west, from Mchinji to Chitipa, densities are very low, ranging only from 11-32, except for 47 in Mchinji. The lowest densities in all Malawi are now found in the Northern highlands of - 64 - Rumphi and Chitipa; in 1966, densities of Kasungu and Nkhotakota fell very much in the same range, but these 2 districts have since pulled somewhat ahead. Intercensal Growth and Changes in Age/Sex Distribution: Inter- censal average annual growth rates for total, male, female and child populations of districts are shown in Tables A.2.2, A.2.4 and Figures A.2.4 a, b. Considering total district growth rates first, a great diversity in growth is immediately obvious. Growth rates range from .65 percent in Nsanje to 6.23 percent in Kasungu. Certain broad features stand out, however. First there is the extraordinarily high growth of Kasungu and Mchinji (6.23 percent and 5.61 percent respectively), both these districts have been and are thinly populated and not traditional cores of settlement. Second comes the almost as spectacular growth in Blantyre and Mwanza (4.89 percent and 4.79 - percent); this, no doubt, is largely a function of the growth of Blantyre city and general urban area. Other areas of high growth (over 3 percent) are Lilongwe, Machinga and the two contiguous lakeside districts of Nkhotakota and Salima. -Northern Region shows uniformly moderate to low growth, ranging from 1.76 percent in Chitipa to 2.88 percent in Karonga. The remaining areas of Central Region show moderate growth in the range 2.31-2.87 percent. In Southern Region, low growth of around 2 percent is found in the Shire highland districts, excepting Blantyre; elsewhere Mangochi and Chikwawa show moderate growth (2.36 and 2.50 percent respectively), while Nsanje shows the lowest growth in all Malawi, at .65 percent. -65- When growth rates are considered separately for males, females, and children under 10 years of age, this overall pattern remains much the same. It is true that, in general, district differentials in growth for females and for children are somewhat less extreme than for males, reflecting the greater propensity of adult males to migrate, particularly in search of cash employment. However, all groups still display the most striking features of spectacularly rapid growth in Kasungu, Mchinji, Blantyre, and Mwanza, and the lesser, but still high, growth in Nkhotakota, Salima, Lilongwe and Machinga. These areas must have grown not just through economic in- migration but also through some combination of migration by whole families and favorable rates of natural increase. At the other extreme, the abnormally low growth of Chitipa and Nsanje is also manifested in every sub-group, implying that in addition to economic out-migration there has been some combination of whole families migrating and relatively low rates of natural increase. Many of the moderate-growth districts again show relatively small differentials in growth by sub-group, presumably for similar reasons. There are some exceptions however. The low-growth Shire highland districts (excepting Blantyre) show noticeably more 'normal' rates of growth for children and/or the female population than for males, suggesting that economic out-migration has been the dominant influence on intercensal growth in that area. 1/ The Northern districts of Karonga and Mzimba also 1/ It should not be forgotten, of course, that some or all of these differentials could be due to greater completeness in the enumeration of children in 1977 than in 1966. This question is discussed elsewhere; unfortunately no firm final conclusions are in general possible. -66- si6 tewoth ciffer hes between child and total growth; the growth rates of children are over 3 percent, while those for total, male and female populations are under 3 percent, suggesting that labor out-migration has been important in depressing high natural increase there. Further clarification of the characteristics of intercensal growth comes from Table A.2.5 and Figures A.2.4c and A.2.5 a,b, which show the excess/ deficit of chid, growth-over total growth, and levels and changes in sex ratios. The 3avel and pattern of sex ratios by district which can be considered a -an index of male labor migration, have certainly changed in many ways betwee 1966 and 1977. In 1966 only one district, Blantyre (which contained the major urban area of Malawi) had a sex ratio of over 100; the only areas wh4re sex ratios -even rose to the 90s were one group of southern Central Region dLstrict( (Lilongwe, Mchinji and Dowa), and another group in or around the Sire highlands (Zomba, Mulanje, Thyolo and Chikwawa). By 1977 "Kasungu and Mcbinji had jiined Blantyre as districts with excesses of males, while Kasonga, Mzimba, Nkhata Bay, Nkhotakota, Salima, Ntchisi and Mwanza had tncreased their sex .atios to between 90 and 99. The area immediately south of the lake, however, comprisilg Dedza, Ntcheu, Mangochi and Machinga, remained marked by the lowest sex-ratios in Malawi (excepting Rumphi) in both years, alth u the level of the ratios did rise slightly. There was in fact some increase in sex ratios everywhere in Malawi, except for the core Shire highland districts of Blantyre, Zomba, Chiradzulu, MulMihje and Thyolo, where small decreases of between one and five percent were recorded, I,this heavi? 'settled area, where land shortage has developed, male labo4, out-,migration' ir doubt is responsible for the decrease. Elsewhere the size of inc eases ,rar.tes widaly. A huge rise of 23 percent occurred in - 67 Kasungu, and other substantial rises of 15 and 12 percent in Mchinji and Salima respectively; these are without doubt attributable to male labor in-migration. Increases of between 6 and 9 percent occurred in Mzimba, Nkhata Bay, Nkhotakota and Ntcheu, and of 4-5 percent in Rumphi, Dowa, Ntchisi, Lilongwe, Mangochi and Mwanza; causes here are more difficult to assign, and the combination of higher male natural increase (resulting from a migratory age/sex structure), male labor in-migration, and some degree of male return migration from abroad, probably varies from district to district. In the remaining districts, however, (namely Chitipa, Karonga, Dedza, Mangochi, Chikwawa and Nsanje) where sex ratios rose by less than 3 percent, male labor in-migration or return migration can safely be considered unimportant; and indeed such small rises are compatible with some degree of male labor out-migration. The relation of child growth rates to total population growth rates can also be considered an index of the prevalence of labor migration (of both sexes); it can also be affected, however, by changes in age differ- entials in census under-enumeration or age mis-reporting, as well as by changes in mortality and fertility. The excess/deficit of child growth varies considerably by district, 1/ and the interpretation of differentials is not always clear. It is likely that the substantial excesses in Nsanje, Mulanje, Zomba and Dedza are at least partially due to adult labor out-migration, since 'these districts also show decreases or low increases in sex ratios and relatively low overall intercensal growth. Similarly large excesses in Karonga, Rumphi, Nkhata Bay, Nkhotakota,.Ntchisi, Salima, Lilongwe are 1/ We omit consideration of Chikwawa and Thyolo here since, as noted earlier, the child and total growth rates are not entirely comparable for these districts. -68- less unequivocal since they are coupled in these cases with either relatively high growth rates or substantial rises in sex ratios. Again, the deficit in child growth in Kasungu and Mchinji can be confidently attributed to high adult labor in migration, which is clearly indicated also by the spec- tacular intercensal growth and rise in sex ratios; but similar deficits in Chitipa, Mzimba and Chiradzulu, as well as negligible excesses in Dowa and Ntcheu, (all distinguished by either or both low overall growth and slug- gish sex ratios) are less easily explained. This topic will be further explored later, after we have examined migration. Migration: Data and indices of internal and external migratory flows are presented in Tables A.2.6, A.2.7 and A.2.8, and in Figures A.2.6a,b, A.2.7a,b and A.2.8a,b. We take outflows first. In the 1966 census (and in fact in the 1945 census also 1/) data were collected on relatives abroad by district. Unfortunately similar information was not asked for in 1977; but since the 1966 pattern of emigration by district closely resembles that found in 1945, as well as that indicated by scattered anecdotal evidence 1/ from the earlier 20th century, it may be that the geographic distribution of emigrants has remained rather constant even today. There appears to be wide variation by district in the propensity to emigrate abroad. By far the highest percentage (17.4) of emigrants 2/ is 1/ Given in R.R. Kuczynski: "Demographic Survey of the British Colonial Empire" Vol. II, Oxford University Press, 1949. 2/ It should be borne in mind that these percentages are of the total native-born district population. Since almost all of the emigrants are adult males, who normally constitute something around one quarter of the total population, the percentages should be multiplied by four to appreciate the true scale of the propensity to emigrate. -69- reported in 1966 in Nkhata Bay; the next highest (ranging from 8-11 percent) are found in Rumphi, Kasungu, Nkhotakota, Mchinji, Salima, Mangochi and Machinga. The lowest (3.8 percent) is found in Lilongwe, the only district with a percentage of less than 5. In general, the people of Shire highland areas and the core southern highlands of Central Province were the least prone to emigrate; and those of the districts in the eastern central highlands, along the lakeside and straddling the upper Shire valley were the most prone to emigrate. This general pattern is found in 1945 also, including the distinctively high rate of emigration in Nkhata Bay. District variation in the propensity to move elsewhere in Malawi follows a somewhat different pattern both in 1966 and 1977. In 1966 Chiradzulu and Nsanje are the districts with much the highest percentages of internal outmigrants (24 and 26 percent respectively); then follow Rumphi, Ntcheu, Blantyre/Mwanza and Zomba, all with percentages between 16 and 19. Other districts with percentages over 10 are Mzimba, Nkhata Bay. Nkhotakota, Dowa, Ntchisi, Mangochi and Thyolo. Lilongwe again shows the lowest propensity to migrate out, with 5 percent. In 1977 the rate of internal out-migration had increased every- where, but the relative pattern is still rather similar. Rumphi is now close to Nsanje and Chiradzulu (with percentages of 26, 34 and 28 respectively) and Nkhata Bay and Ntchisi-have disproportionately increased in their propen- sity to migrate out, lying now in the range 21-23 together with Ntcheu, Blantyre and Zomba; other districts with percentages over 15 include Chitipa, Mzimba, Nkhotakota, Dowa, Mangochi, Mwanza and Thyolo. Lilongwe, though no longer the very lowest, is still among the lowest group, - 70 - For 1966 it is also possible to examine the total propensity to migrate out of the home district, whether abroad or to elsewhere in Malawi. This pattern again is dominated by Nkhata Bay (primarily emigration) and Nsanje and Chiradzulu (primarily internal out-migration) with percentages - of 27, 32 and 29 respectively. Other districts with high losses (mostly from a mixture of external and internal migration) include Rumphi, Nkhotakota., Mangochi, Ntcheu, Zomba and Blantyre/Mwanza; they all lie in the range 21-25 percent. Remaining districts all lie between 12 and 20 percent, except for Lilongwe, where the total loss is only 9 percent. Rates of migration into districts show a rather different distri- bution. The 1966 percentages of immigrants from abroad are highest in Mangochi (19 percent), followed by Chikwawa (14 percent), Nsanje (15 percent), Nkhata Bay (11 percent), Mulanje (11 percent) and Mchinji and Machinga (10 percent each). The lowest rates (of under 1 percent) are not surprisingly found in the inland districts of Ntchisi and Dowa; other particularly low rates (of under 3 percent) are found in Mzimba, Lilongwe and Salima. 1977 percentage of immigrants are generally lower than in 1966, but follow a rather similar pattern, with the highest rates in Mangochi and Chikwawa as well as Mwanza (11, 11 and 13 percent respectively) followed by Nsanje (10 percent), Nkhata Bay (9 percent), Mchinji (8 percent). The lowest rates are still to be found in Ntchisi and Dowa, (still under 1 percent), followed by Lilongwe and Chiradzulu (under 3 percent). When we turn to rates of in-migration into districts from elsewhere in Malawi, very much higher percentages of in-migrants become common, and the pattern differs yet again. In 1966 the highest percentage of internal inmigrants by far (28 percent) was found in Blantyre; no doubt, as in 1977, -71- the rate was much higher in the urbanized Blantyre portion than in the Mwanza portion of the district, and probably well above 30 percent there. The next highest percentages, ranging from 15-20 percent, occur in Rumphi, Kasungu, Machinga, Zomba and Chikwawa; except perhaps in Zomba, most of this move- ment must have been rural to rural. Other districts with in-migrants con- stituting more than 10 percent of the enumerated population are Karonga, Nhkotakota, Salima, Lilongwe and Thyolo. 11 Very low percentages (under 5 percent) are found in Chitipa, Mzimba, Mangochi and Nsanje. As in the case of internal outmigration, percentages of in-migrants have generally risen by 1977, and the pattern by district is rather similar. The highest percentage districts (now ranging from 15-40 percent) still include Blantyre (though not Mwanza), Karonga, Rumphi, Kasungu, Nhkota- kota, Salima, Lilongwe, Machinga,,Zomba and Chikwawa. 1/ However, they have been joined by Mchinji, which is how third highest at 24 percent; and the distribution at the top has changed, with Kasungu now on a level with Blantyre at 37 percent. Again the spectacular growth, and flow of population into, Kasungu and Mchinji stands out: unlike the case of Blantyre it is'presumably almost entirely non-urban in direction. At the other extreme, Chitipa, Mzimba, Mangochi and Nsanje are still in the lowest percentage group (now 5-10 percent), together with Dedza and Mulanje which also showed relatively low percentages in 1966. 1/ Interpretation of all these percentages must be cautious. High per- centages may not always signal particular attractions in a district, but rather that so many of the native-born population have moved out that in-migrant percentages are inflated by a very low base population. - 72 - We can now examine the totai percentage of enumerated district populations who were born elsewhere, in both 1966 and 1977. In general, the same pattern is discernible in both years. The districts with constant relatively high proportions of foreign-born inhabitants are Karonga, Rumphi, Nkhata Bay, Nkhotakota, Salima, Kasungu, Mchinji, Machinga, Zomba, Blantyre/ Mwanza, Thyolo, Chikwawa and Nsanje. In both years Lilongwe, Mangochi, Mulanje, Chiradzulu, and Ntcheu show either moderately high or high percen- tages also. The districts with relatively low proportions of foreign born inhabitants are the same in both years: namely Chitipa, Mzimba, Ntchisi, Dowa and Dedza. However, the mix of internal/external migrants into districts varies greatly. There are also differences in the.trends between 1966 and 1977: the percentage foreign-born fell in Mangochi, Zomba, Chiradzulu, Mulanje, Thyolo, Chikwawa and Nsanje (i.e., in every Southern district but Machinga) and rose everywhere else. The only really spectacular trend, however, occurred in Kasungu and Mchinji, where percentages of 23 and 18 rose to percentages of 41 and 32 respectively. It is perhaps worth noting, at this point, just how mobile the Malawi population is. By 1977, 25-40 percent of the people enumerated in 9 out of 24 districts did not belong to those districts by birth; and in a further 8 districts, the gain was between 15 and 25 percent. Correspondingly, in 1966, 3 districts had apparently lost between a quarter and a third of their native-born populations, while another 15 had apparently lost between 15 and 25 percent. Since internal out-migration rose substantially between 1966 and 1977, while emigration abroad may have suffered but little net change, losses were probably even higher by 1977. -73- Finally, the net results of all internal migratory movements can be expressed as the net flow of internal migrants in or out of each district. These are .shown in Tables A.2.6a,b and Figures A.2.8.a,b,c,dc A rather fragmented pattern emerges in both 1966 and 1977. In 1966 large net inflows (27-38 thousand) are shown for Lilongwe, Machinga and Blantyre/Mwanza. Moderate net inflows of 11-18 thousand occur in Chikwawa and Kasungu; and small net inflows of 5-6 thousand in Salima .and Thyolo. Large net outflows of 20-26 thousand are shown for Mzimba, Chiradzulu and Nsanje; moderate net outflows of 14-19 thousand for Nkhata Bay, Dowa, Ntcheu and Mangochi; and small net outflows of 7-9 thousand for Dedza and Mulanje. The remaining districts of Karonga, Rumphi, Nkhotakota, Mchinji, Chitipa, Ntchisi and Zomba ahowed very small net flows (all under 5 thousand and 3 under 1 thousand),with the first four being positive and the last three negative. To sum up, the Northern Region either lost heavily or was relative- ly stable; the Central Region lost in the inner core and the southern end of the lake, but gained in the periphery (heavily in Lilongwe); the Southern Region lost around the lake, the eastern Shire highlands and Nsanje, but gained heavily elsewhere. The same pattern, a little modified, can be discerned in 1977, though the size of the flows has generally increased. The large net inflows (now 26-81 thousand) are still found in Lilongwe, Machinga and Blantyre, but this group has been joined by Kasungu (now the second largest after Blantyre) and Mchinji; moderate net inflows of 11-13 thousand occur in Chikwawa and Salima, and a small net inflow of 7 thousand in Nkhotakota. The largest net outflows (now 29-35 thousand) are still shown for Mzimba, Chiradzulu and Nsanje, but Mulanje has also joined the group; moderate net outflows (15-25 thousand) still occur for Dowa, Ntcheu and Mangochi, but now joined by Dedza, Ntcheu and Zomba; and small net outflows (6-11 thousand) appear for Chitipa, Nkhata Bay and Thyolo. The remaining districts with a net flow of less than 5 thousand now include only Karonga and Rumphi, with Mwanza added (negative, positive and negative respectively). The only changes in the direction of net flow have been for Rumphi and Thyolo (both from in to out). Generally speaking, the Northern Region is still either losing heavily or relatively stable; the Central Region retains the same losing core and lake-end area, but the western periphery now gains very heavily all round; the Southern Region pattern is very similar to 1966 except that losses in the Shire highlands are now more extensive and much heavier. Age Structure: Finally, we consider indices of age structure by district, using the female population only, to minimize the effects of age-selective migration. Specifically, we examine the proportions of the female population aged 0-4 and 5-9 years 1/; levels of both are given in Table A.2.3 and A.2.4, with the percent under 5 and under 10 shown in Figures A.2. 9a,b, and changes are shown in Table A.2.5 and Figures A.2.10 a,b. 1/ Conventionally, "children" include the whole under 15 age group. However, the female population is usually particularly prone to mistatement of age across the under 15-over 15 line, due to the common belief that married girls must be, or should be, over 15; characteristically the proportion aged 10-14 is very low. Therefore only the under 10 group is considered here. Of course the possibility of changes in age mistatement across the under 10-over 10 boundary must always be borne in mind. - 75 - Normally, if age-selective migration is unimportant, the proportion of young children in a population is a good guide to fertility levels; child mortality will exert some influence (reducing the proportion of children if very heavy, and raising it if very light) but will not radically change the basic shape of the population.- Of course even the female populations of districts will probably be distorted to some degree in both 1966 and 1977 by age-selective migration. If, for example, female adults migrate alone, the percentage of female children would be deflated in districts of net female adult in-migration, and inflated in districts of net female adult out-migration. It must also be remembered that migratory flows may change the fertility (and hence after some time lag, the age structure) of both sending and receiving populations if the migrants differ in fertility from the host population or the non-migrants in the sending population. There remains also the potential bias of the degree of complete- ness of enumeration of children, and patterns of age reporting/misreporting in childhood. The former is normally expected to improve over time and over a series of censuses. The latter can change in unpredictable ways from survey and census to census. Despite all these disturbing factors, it is still worth examining district age structures; partly as a check on other information (such as on growth and migration);. partly because we have no other source of data on levels of fertility at district level (since specific fertility data were unfortunately not tabulated by district); and partly as a means of further investigating the apparent rejuvenation (and hence rise in fertility) observ-. able at national and regional level between 1966 and 1977. -76- It is at once noticeable from Table A.2.4 and Figures A.2.9a,b that all districts show high proportions of children under 10 in both years. The implied levels of total fertility rate (from model stable populations) all fall roughly in the range 6-9. However two other striking features are also obvious; first, that there is a good deal of variation by district, with the pattern of differentials not entirely constant betw4een 1966 and 1977, and second, that there has been a general rise in the reported percentages of children during the intercensal period. Taking children under 5 first, in 1966 the district percentages ranged from 16.1 to 19.8, with only 4 districts above 19 percent and 12 below 18 percent. In 1977 the range had shifted upwards to 17.3-20.8 percent, with 13 districts above 19 percent (indeed 7 above 20 percent) and only 3 below 18 percent. The regional pattern was rather unclear in 1966, but generally speaking, the lake-side and upper Shire valley areas, together with Rumphi, Zomba and Chiradzulu, showed relatively low proportions of children under 5, with a range of 16.1-17.4 percent. The Northern/Central highlands and southern Shire highlands showed relatively high proportions, with a range of 18.0-19.8 percent. The lowest percentage appeared in Nkhata Bay and the highest in Dowa.- This general pattern in fact also held good for the entire female child population under 10 years of age. Eleven years later, in 1977, regional distinctions are much clearer and regions more homogeneous. Northern Region is now remarkably so; except for the striking exception of Nkhata Bay (which is still, at 17.3 percent, the oldest district in Malawi) all Northern districts fall in the range 18.1-18.4 percent. Central Region now appears as a block of exceptionally youthful populations, though the pattern of higher child percentages in the highlands - 77 - than by the lake-side is still discernible; the range runs only from 19.6 to 20.8 percent. However, again one striking exception appears; namely Ntcheu, with 17.9 percent, which has, as before, one of the oldest populations in halawi. Southern Region still remains rather varied; and the 1966 zones of youthful age structures in the southern Shire highlands and middle and lower Shire valley (range 18.5-19.6 percent) and older age structures in the upper Shire valley, plus Zomba and Chiradzulu (range 17.4-18.5 percent), are still perceptible. Again, the general pattern of variation also holds good for the entire age-group under 10. The causes of these changes in level and pattern deserve investiga- tion, particularly since the rise in percentages of children appears at both national and regional level., As previously noted, the possible factors involved 1/ consist of trends in fertility, changes in data quality, and (for some if not all districts) age-selective or fertility-selective female migration. In the absence of specific fertility data we must derive what clues we can from closer study of the changes. First, we examine the pattern.by district of percent increases in the proportion of children aged 0-4 in the female population (shown in Table A.2.5 and Figures A.10 a,b). Increases in the 0-4 age groupr range from .5 to 15.3 percent, while Chitipa actually shows a decrease of 5.2 percent. No very coherent pattern can be discerned. The highest increases (11-15 percent) occur in the peripheral Central districts, namely Kasungu, Mchinji, Nkhotakota, Salima and Dedza; another relatively high-increase 1/ We may eliminate changes in child mortality here, since as discussed in the body of the report, they could not account for more than a fraction of the observed changes in age structure at national level at least. They could of course be responsible for small changes at district level. - 78 - group (8-10 percent) includes Karonga, Rumphi, Ntchis,i, Ntcheu and Chikwawa. At the other extreme (excluding Chitipa), Blantyre/Mwanza, Mangochi, Dowa, Chiradzulu, Mzimba and Thyolo all show increases of less than 5 percent; the latter two, indeed, less than one percent. No satisfactory match with patterns of growth, migration, language, etc. can be achieved here; and some . at least of the increases are alarmingly large. The next step is examination and comparison of the percentage increases in the proportionr aged 5-9. Several clues can be sought here. If changes in age reporting (i.e., in assigning children to either the 0-4 or 5-9 age group) are responsible for increased percentages aged 0-4, com- plementary 6ecreases should appear in the 5-9 age group. If fertility, or age-selective migration, has been gradually increasing, we should find somewhat smaller, but parallel, rises among the 5-9 age group compared to the 0-4 age group. If improvements in the completeness of enumeration of babies and very young children are the cause of 0-4 age group increases, we should find little or no change 1/ in the 5-9 age-group; although this pattern might also arise if women have migrated in accompanied by only their youngest children or if very recent in-migration of higher-fertility women has occurred. Very large differences in increase between 0-4 and 5-9 age groups should generally be considered as evidence either of data problems or multiple causation. In fact, the pattern of percentage increases for the 5-9 age-group also appears as rather random. Large increases (9-15 percent) are found in Chitipa, Nkhotakota, Salima, Chikwawa and Nsanje; small decreases (up to 5.4 percent) in Kasungu, Mchinji, Dowa, Ntcheu, Zomba, Chiradzulu and Mulanje; 1/ Obviously if any one age group in a population increases in numbers, the proportionate share of all the others must decline. The effect should be insignificant for any one 5 year age group, however. -79 - zero change in Ntchisi; and small increases (under 5 percent) everywhere else. Again no consistent associa ion with any other characteristics .is apparent. .Comparison with changes in the 0-4 age group are revealing. We first note the case of Mzimba, which shows much the same insignificant in- crease in both age groups, and can be regarded as essentially unchanged: the total percentage under 10 rises only from 32.1 to 32.3. Clearly there is no need to postulate any fertility trend here. This is also the case in Chitipa and Zomba: in both those districts an increase in one group is balanced by a decrease in the other group, so that the total percentage aged uner 10 barely alters, and changes in age reporting can probably be held mainly responsible. The same is true of Chiradzulu and Thyolo. The former combines a small increase in the 0-4 age group with a larger decrease in the 5-9 age group (with a resulting insignificait decrease of the proportion under 10 from 31.8 to 31.5 percent), while the latter shows a small rise in the 5-9 age-group and an insignificant rise in the 0-4s (resulting in a small increase under 10 of 33.7 to 34.5 percent): probably some combination of age-reporting changes with variation in enumeration completeness could again be held responsible. The case of Mulanje is similar; a moderate rise in the 0-4 age group is combined with a small decrease in the 5-9 age group, the result being a small rise in the proportion under 10 (from 32.6 to 33.4 percent) that must be regarded as of doubtful significance. Other possible additions to this group are Ntchisi and Dowa, tWo districts so similar in most characteristics that they can often be treated as a pair. Dowa, somewhat like Mulanje, combines a small increase in the 0-4 age group with an insignificant decrease in the 5-9s, producing a small net rise in the proportion under 10 from 34.2 to 35.1 percent. Ntchisi, more strikingly, shows a substantial increase in the 0-4 age group (9 percent), -80- coupled with' io change in the 5-9 age group, suggesting that other factors than simply a gradual rise in fertility, or age or fertility selective migration, 1/ are at work; it seems likely that improvements in enumerating young childreT colostitute at least part of the explanation. Three other districts of Central Provinces, namely Kasungu, Mchinji and Ntcheu, show another variation; small or insignificant decreases in the 5-9 age group, coupled with high (8-14 percent) increases in the 0-4 age group; they also presumably are influenced by additional factors besides any gradual rise in fertility or selective migration. It is possible, of course, zhat in the case of Kasungu and Mchinji, at least, where the inflow of migrants has grown so spectacularly between the censuses, that sudden massive shifts in fertility or age composition could really have occurred; such an explanation is much less appealing for Ntcheu with its large but fairly steady outflow. Probably data deficiencies have played some part in all these districts. The case of Dedza is very similar to Ntcheu: a very small increase in the 5-9 age group is combined with a large (11 percent) increase in the 0-4 age group. Again no one simple explanation seems likely. Four other problem districts stand out, namely Nkhotakota, Salima, Chikwawa and Nsanje. All show substantial (7-15 percent) rises in the 0-4 age group, coupled with rises in the 5-9 age group that are on the same scale (9-15 percent) and, indeed, greater than for the 0-4s in Chikwawa and Nsanje. Such massive increases in the proportion of children in the female population (the 1/ Age selective migration is an unlikely agency here anyway. Ntchisi is a district of net out-migration, and the changes here would require either migration in of small children (with or without mothers) or out-migration of females of all ages except under 5. - 81 - percent under 10 rising from 30 or 31 percent to 34 or 35 percent in all cases) in a period of only 11 years imply again, that factots over and above any .gradual trend in fertility or migration have been at work. The greater rise among 5-9s in Chikwawa and Nsanje suggest that there, at least, data deficiencies play some part in the rejuvenation of the population. There remain 7 districts, namely Karonga, Rumphi, Nkhata Bay, Lilongwe, Mangochi, Machinga and Blantyre/Mwanza, where a more satisfactory pattern of moderate to substantial increases in the 0-4 age group (4-10 percent) accompanied by lesser increases in the 5-9 age group (2-5 percent) can be observed. This pattern is consistent 1/ with a gradually rising level of fertility or selective migration. As a final check, we can examine changes in the ratio of numbers in the 0-4 age group to the numbers in the 5-9 age group 21/. If fertility were gradually rising over time we should expect a reasonably gentle increase 1/ Though not, of course, conclusive evidence for such trends. Variations in data quality always remain a possible explanation. 2/ The overall levels are also interesting. In a stable population, the higher the fertility level, the higher this ratio should be. Despite all the uncertainties of data quality and age misstatement, it is striking to note that the ratios for the central core highland districts, and the southernmost districts of Southern Region, are in both years generally higher than elsewhere; thus conforming roughly both to the pattern of district age-distributions and to the regional fertility differentials apparent from regional age distributions and specific fertility data. - 82 - in this ratio; though of course, such an increase could also be caused by selective migration, improvements in enumeration of very young children, or changes in age-reporting. A very sharp rise, however, would indicate that such disturbing factors were likely to be present as well as any genuine fertility increase. An unchanging ratio would indicate a lack of any trend in * fertility. A decrease would signal either declining fertility or (more likely) age-reporting changes or selective migration. The percent changes in the ratio are shown in Table A.2.5 and Figure 10c. Once again the pattern is ratheT random. Very steep rises (10-15 percent) are found in Kasungu, Mchinji, Dedza and Zomba; other large rises (8-9 percent) in Ntchisi, Ntcheu and Mulanje; and smaller increases (2-7 percent in Karonga, Nkhata Bay, Nkhotakota, Dowa, Lilongwe, Mangochi, Machinga, Chiradzulu, and Blantyre/Mwanza. A very steep decline of 13 percent is found in Chitipa and smaller falls of 1-6 percent in Rumphi, Mzimba, Thyolo, Chikwawa and Nsanje. All the cases of decrease must be considered as unlikely to have experienced any fertility rise; and in fact all these districts except Rumphi have already been classed as showing either no clear evidence of trends in fertility, or anomalous fdatures indicating problems of data quality. The cases of very steep increases, are also all districts previously noted as showing clear evidence of age reporting changes (i.e., Zomba) or a degree of rejuvenation too great to be attributed with comfort to fertility trends alone. The same is true of the other high-increase group, except for Mulanje which was classed as showing insufficient evideice of fertility change. - 83 - Of the remaining nine districts with smaller increases, 6 belong to the group previously classed are showing age structure changes compatible with (though of course not conclusive proof of) a rise in fertility. These districts are Karonga, Nkhata Bay, Lilongwe, Mangochi, Machinga and Blantyre/ Mwanza, a remarkably heterogeneots group from any point of view. The other 3 districts are Nkhotakota, where the degree of rejuvenation is again too large for comfort; Dowa, where evidence for fertility change is insufficient; and Chiradzulu, where the evidence is certainly against any rise in fertility. We can then sum up by saying that only the six heterogeneous districts listed above show changes in their age-structure that are fully compatible with the hypothesis of a rise in fertility; however it should be noted that these six do in fact contain 37 percent of Malawi-s population. In five districts, namely Chitipa, Mzimba, Zomba, Thyolo and Chiradzulu, there is no evidence of any change in fertility; these districts are all relatively low-growth areas of net out migration and situated either in the Northern or the Shire highlands. In another six districts, namely Rumphi, Ntchisi, Dowa, Dedza, Ntcheu and Mulanje, the evidence is not entirely consistent and the total effect not very substantial; had these cases occurred in isolation, they would probably have been attributed to data errors or minor effects of migration, Two of the six also lie in the Northern or Shire highlands while the other four are situated in the Central highlands; again all are districts of net out-migration and lower than average growth. The remaining six districts of Kasungu, Mchinji, Nkhotahota, Salima, Chikwawa and Nsanje show a very large degree of rejuvenation combined with features that are not consistent simply with a rise in fertility; the -84 changes are too substantial to be easily attributed to data errors alone, or indeed changes in fertility behavior alone. The four Central province districts -are all areas of high growth and net in-migration, and some at least of the rejuvenation of the population may be explained by age-or fertility-selective in-migration. The other two Lower Shire valley &.stricts. are also areas of high migration (into Chikwawa, out of Nsanje), though of low growth, and possibly this also may explain some of the changes in age structure. One point does emerge clearly from this analysis of district age- structures. If Malawi did experience a genuine rise in fertility between 1966 and 1977 it was certainly not uniform across districts either in occur- rence or degree, and apparently was not systematically associated with any other characteristics such as intercensal growth, migration patterns, or linguistic or geographical groupings. Description of Individual Districts and Their Characteristics: We complete this appendix with brief demographic outlines of each individual OJstrict in turn, in order to pull together the various features discussed above. Chitipa: Chitipa is a Northern highland district, isolated both geographically and linguistically from the rest of Malawi. Nearly 70 percent -of its residents in 1966 spoke 2 languages, Lambya and Sukwa, not found in Malawi outside the extreme north; and another 10 percent spoke 'other' languages. Only about 20 percent spoke a common Malawi language, namely Tumbuka. The total district population is one of the smallest in Malawi, only 72 thousand in 1977; - 85 - censal growth, again, at 1.76 percent per annum, was exceptionally low, the third lowest in the country; it was low for men, women and children alike, with little difference in these broad categories. The sex ratio was 89 in both years, of middling rank by national standard-s in 1966 but relatively rather low in 1977. The percentage of the Chitipa-born popula- tion reported to be working abroad was 8 percent in 1966, or around one- third of the male work force 1/, a rather high level by national standards; the percentage living elsewhere in Malawi (mostly in Karonga) was 7.5 percent. Thus, Chitipa in 1966 had lost about 15 percent of its nativeborn population. By 1977 the percent living elsewhere in Malawi (still most importantly in Karonga though increasingly spread out elsewhere) had doubled to 16 percent; if the same proportion were still abroad, the total percnt lost would have risen to over 20 percent. In return, Chitipa attracted 7 percent of its enumerated population from abroad in 1966 (mostly from Tanzania and Zambia), and a very low figure of 3 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mostly other Northern districts) making up a gain of 10 percent altogether. These percentages had changed very little by 1977, to 7 percent, 5 percent (still mostly from the rest of the North) and 12 percent respectively. 2/ Internal migration resulted in a net outflow in both years, rising from 3 to 8 thousand, neither level very large either absolutely or relatively. The proportion of children in the female population was quite high in both years, with a clear change in patterns of age reporting between the censuses; the percent aged under 10 stayed almost 1/ On the supposition that almost all workers abroad were male and that adult males of working age constituted around a quarter of the total population. 2/ The 1977 census tables tabulate immigrant country of origin in 3 groups only; the first comprising "Zambia, Tanzania and Mozambique", the second "Other African Countries", and the third "Other Countries". It is therefore impossible to distinguish country of origin clearly, as in 1966. - 86 - the same, but the percent under 5 fell and the percent 5-9 rose to balance each other.out. The age and sex structure of the population, in fact, appears to have remained essentially the same in Chitipa. Karonga: Karonga is the most isolated lakeside district in Malawi. It is again linguis- tically unique and of mixed composition, nearly half the population speak Nkonde, which is not found elsewhere in Malawi, and just over one third speak Tumbuka. The balance speak other languages (Lambya, Nyakusa, -Other') which are not common outside the extreme north. The total district population, reaching 107 thousand by 1977, is relatively small by national standards; density is also relatively low, at 32 per km2 in 1977, though still the highest in Northern Region. Overall intercensal growth was near the national average at 2.88 percent, and again the highest in the North; male growth was somewhat higher than female, and child growth 20 percent above the growth of the adult population. The sex ratio rose slightly between 1966 and 1977, from 88 to 90, being relatively rather low in both years. The percentage of the Karonga born population reported to be working in 1966 was 7 percent, or between one-quarter and one-third of the male work force 1/; another 6 percent was living elsewhere in Malawi (mostly scattered through the rest of Northern Region), making up altogether a 13 percent loss. The internal loss alone more than doubled by 1977, to 13 percent (now much more widely scattered throughout 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. -87- Malawi, with Lilongwe and Blantyre important as well as other Northern districts); if proportions abroad had remained constant, the total loss would be around 20 percent. In return, Karonga had attracted 8 percent of its enumerated population from abroad in both 1966 (mostly from Tanzania and Zambia) and 1977 1/; and 10 and 16 percent respectively in 1966 and 1977 from elsewhere in Malawi (mostly the other Northern districts in both years). The total gain thus rose from 18 to 24 percent between the csnsuses. There was a net internal migratory inflow in both years of about 4 thousand, not a large amount either absolutely or relatively. The proportion of children in the female population rose noticeably and consistently between the censuses, (though in both years rather low by national standards); this could best be explained by a rise in fertility and/or age or fertility-selective migration movements. Rumphi: Rumphi covers the high plateau area of the Northern highlands, and is part of the Tumbuka-speaking heartland; only 3 percent of the population speak another mother-tongue. The total district population in 1977 was only 63 thousand, the smallest in Malawi; the density, of only 11 per km2 in 1977, was also the lowest in the country in both years. Total intercen- sal*growth, at 2.63 percent, was not far below the national average: male growth was noticeably higher than female, and child growth substantially above either. The sex ratio rose from 83 to 87 between the censuses and, was low relative to the national average in both years. The percentage of the Rumphi-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was 10.4 1/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. - 88 - percent, or around 40 percent of the male work force 1/, one of the highest in Malawi. Another 16 percent was living elsewhere in Malawi (mostly in the rest of the Northern Region), making up altogether a loss of around one-quarter. By 1977 the internal loss alone had grown to 26 percent (now more widely spattered throughout Malawi, with Lilongwe and Blantyre important in addition to other Northern districts), implying a total loss of over one-third if the proportion abroad were unchanged. In return, Rumphi had attracted 6 percent of its enumerated population from abroad in both 1966 (the majority from Zambia) and 1977 2/, and a lesser proportion from elsewhere in Malawi (mostly Mzimba and, to a lesser extent, other Northern districts in both years) rising from 16 percent in 1966 to 20 percent in 1977. The total gain thus rose from 22 to 26 percent. The net internal migratory flow was rather small in both years, changing direction from a net inflow of 400 in 1966 to a net outflow of 4 thousand in 1977. The proportion of children in the female population rose noticeably between the censuses, though remaining relatively low in both years by national standards; possible explanations are combinations of fertility increase, selective migration and changes in data quality. Mzimba: Mzimba covers the southern division of the Northern highlands, and forms part of the Tumbuka-speaking heartland; only 5 percent of the population speak any other mother-tongue. The 1977 total district population of 301 thousand is quite large by national standards, but density is still very low, at 29 per km2 in 1977. The overall intercensal growth rate of 2.45 percent was somewhat low by national standards; male growth was considerably higher than female, and adult growth somewhat higher than child growth. The sex ratio rose noticeably from 85 to 90, though remaining below the 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. -89- -national average. The percentage of the Mzimba-born population reported as working abroad in 1966 was 6 percent, or around one-quarter of the male workforce 1/; another 12 percent was living elsewhere in Malawi (mostly in Central and Northern regions, particularly Kasungu) making up altogether a total loss of 18 percent. By 1977, the internal loss alone had risen to 17 percent (still mostly in Central and Northern regions, with by far the largest concentration in Kasungu, followed by Lilongwe, Nkhata Bay, Rumphi and Blantyre), implying a total loss of nearly one-quarter if proportions working abroad were constant. In return, Mzimba had attracted 3 percent oi its enumerated popula- tion from abroad in both 1966 (mostly from Zambia and Zimbabwe), and 1977 2/, while the proportion coming in from elsewhere in Malawi (mostly Nkhata Bay, Rumphi, Kasungu and Lilongwe in both years) rose from 4 percent in 1966 to 9 percent in 1977. The total gain therefore rose from 7 percent to 12 percent between the censuses. The net internal migratory flow was substantially outwards in both years, increasing from 21 thoushand in 1966 to 30 thousand in 1977. The proportion of children in the female population was quite high and almost unchanging between the censuses. There is no reason to postulate any significant changes in either female age-structure or fertility. Nkhata Bay: Nkhata Bay, a lakeside district, constitutes a unique linguistic enclave in both Northern Region and all Malawi. Tonga speakers form 70 percent of the population, and are elsewhere found in significant numbers only, as a small minority (14 percent) in the adjacent lakeside district of Nkhotakota to the south. The remaining 30 percent of Nkhata Bay is divided largely between Tumbuka and Chichewa speakers. The 1977 total district population of 106 thousand is relatively rather low by national standards, though not compared either to Northern Region as a whole or to the other lakeside districts. 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. - 90 - The density of 26 per km2 in 1977 is again low for Malawi, but comparable to the lakeside districts north and south of Nkhata Bay. The overall inter- censal growth rate of 2.09 percent was again relatively low; male growth was very much higher than female, and child growth distinctly higher than adult growth. The sex ratio rose substantially, from 84 in 1966 to 91 in 1977, though it remained low by national standards in both years. The percentage of the Nkhata Bay-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was 17.4 percent, or more than two-thirds of the male workforce 1/; this astonishing rate is by far the highest in Malawi, but a similar prominence appears in 1945 census data on workers abroad and also in anecdotal'reports and remarks, and there is no reason to doubt that the Nkhata Bay population, or rather the Tonga group, have been particularly prone to emigrate for employment abroad. The percent living elsewhere in Malawi in 1966 (scattered around the country, but with concentrations in Mzimba, Nkhotakota and Blantyre) was considerably less at 11 percent: making up a total loss of 27 percent, one of the highest in Malawi. By 1977 the internal loss alone had risen to 21 percent, (again scattered over Malawi, but concentrated in Mzimba, Nkhotakota, Lilongwe, Mangochi and Blantyre), implying a total loss of close to 40 percent if the 1966 proportion working abroad were maintained. In return, Nkhata Bay attracted 11 percent of its enumerated population in 1966 from abroad, and 9 percent in 1977; in 1966 2/ these were rather evenly distributed between Zambia, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Mozambique and South Africa, possibly representing wives acquired or children born abroad. The internal gain amounted to 8 percent in 1966 and 14 percent in 1977 (mostly from Mzimba and Rumphi in 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. - 91 both years); thus the total gain rose from 20 to 23 percent between the censuses. Evidently the population of Nkhata Bay is extremely mobile. The resulting net internal migratory flow, is rather moderate, falling from a loss of 16 thousand in 1966 to a loss of 7 thousand in 1977. The proportion of children in the female population was in 1966 the lowest, and in 1977 among the lowest, in all Malawi;,although a consistent rise, compatible with some increase in fertility or selective migration, did occur between the censuses. Nkhotakota: Nkhotakota, a lakeside district, forms an outlying part of the Chichewa- speaking area, but with some Tonga admixture from the north; 82 percent speak the former and 14 percent the latter language. The 1977 total population of 94 thousand is relatively small by national standards, and the density of 22 per km for 1977 is also low. The overall intercensal growth rate of 3.66 percent, however, is well above the national average, and also, together with the adjacent lakeside district of Salima to the north, forms a contrast to the low or moderate growth elsewhere around the lake shore. Male growth was higher than female, and child growtb substantially higher than adult growth (as in all lake shore districts), but the rate was high in all categories. The sex ratio rose substantially between the censuses, from 86 in 1966 to 94 in 1977, changing from being rather low by national standards to a level close to the national average. The percentage of the Nkhotakota-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was about 9 percent, or near a third of - 92 - the male work force 1/, a rather high proportion by national standards. The percent living elsewhere in Malawi in 1966 (mostly elsewhere in Central Region, particularly Lilongwe) was also rather high, at 13 percent, making up - a total loss of around 22 percent. By 1977, the internal loss had risen only slightly to 16 percent, (now more widely scattered throughout the country, but with concentrations particularly in Kasungu, Lilongwe and other Central districts, besides Blantyre), implying no very great change in total loss if the proportion working abroad were constant. In return, Nkhotakota attracted 5 percent of its enumerated 1966 population from abroad (mostly Mozambique and Zimbabwe) 2/, and 15 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mostly the ring of neighboring districts); in 1977 the gain from abroad had changed little, but the internal gain had grown to 21 percent (still mostly from the ring of neighboring districts). Consequently the total gain rose from 20 to 26 percent. The resulting net internal migratory flow was not large, rising from a gain of 1 to 7 thousand between the censuses. The proportion of children in the female population rose substantially between the 1966 and 1977, from a very moderate to a very high level; the features of the increase are not entirely consistent with a rise in fertility, and it may be at least partly due to selective migration and data errors. Salima: Salima, a lakeside district, resembles its northern neighbor Nkhotakota in most respects. It forms another outlying part"of the Chichewa-speaking area, but with Yao admixture from the South: 83 percent speak the former 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. 93 - and 14 percent the latter language. The 1977 total population of 132 thousand is moderate by national standards; the density of 60 per km2 in 1977 is close to the national average, but very much higher than other lakeside districts. The overall intercensal growth rate of 3.83 percent (similar to that of Nkhotakota) is very high; male growth is substantially higher than female and child growth substantially higher than adult, but all are high both absolutely and by national standards. The sex ratio rose strikingly between the censuses, from 84 to 94, or from well below to close to the national average. The percentage of the Salima-born population reported to be working abroad was around 8 percent in 1966, or about one- third of the male work force 1/, rather a high proportion by national standards. The percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi was 9 percent in 1966 (mostly in Lilongwe and other Central districts, besides Blantyre), making up a total loss of 16 percent. The internal loss alone rose to 15 percent by 1977 (still mostly in Central Region, particularly Lilongwe, and in Blantyre), implying a total loss of over 20 percent if the proportion working abroad remained constant. In return, Salima attracted 3 percent of its enumerated population from abroad in 1966 (mostly Mozambique and Zimbabwe) 2/ and 14 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mostly neighboring Central districts as well as Mangochi); the proportion from abroad rose only slightly by 1977 to 4 percent, but the internal gain increased to 22 percent, (now much more widely spread, but with the important contributions still from neighbouring districts and Mangoni). Hence the total gain rose between the censuses from 17.percent to around one-quarter. As a result the net internal migratory flow grew from an inflow .t 5 thousand to an inflow of 12 thousand. As in Nkhotakota, the proportion of children in the female population rose substantially between the censuses, from a relatively low to a rather high level; however some features of the 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. T/ See footnote 2/ on,page 28. - 94 - increase are not consistent with a rise in fertility and it is probably at least partly due to selective migration or data errors. Kasungu: Kasungu, a north-eastern Central highlands district, lies between the Chichewa and Tumbuka heartlands. 62 percent speak Chichewa, and 37 percent Tumbuka. The 1977 total population of 194 thousand is moderately large by national standards, but density, even after a doubling from 12 to 25 per km2 between the censuses, is still low, and resembles the Northern districts more than the rest of the Central highlands. The overall intercensal growth rate of 6.23 percent was the highest in Malawi, and extraordinarily high by any standards. Growth was much higher for males than for females, and somewhat higher for adults than for children, indicating substantial labor in-migration, but growth for all groups was much higher than any possible natural increase, indicating that family migration also occurred. The sex ratio shot up from 87 in 1966 to 107 in 1977, again indicating huge in-migration between the censuses. The percentage of the Kasungu-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was nearly 9 percent, or around a third of the male work force 1/, rather high by national standards. The percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi also was nearly 9 percent in 1966 (mostly in the bordering districts of Mzimba, Dowa, Lilongwe and Mchinji), making up a total loss of 17 percent. By 1977 the internal loss had risen to 12 percent (still mostly in the same districts, with the addition of Blantyre), implying a total loss of over a fifth if proportions abroad were constant. In return, Kasungu in 1966 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. -95 - of its enumerated population from abroad (almost all from Zambia and Zim- babwe) 1/ and 18 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (again mostly from neighbor- ing districts, namely Mzimba, Dowa, Lilongwe, Mchinji, Nkhotakota and Ntchisi); by 1977 the percent gain from abroad had not changed, but the internal gain had shot up to 37 percent (now coming not only from the neighboring Central districts but also from Ntcheu, Dedza, Mangochi, Machinga, Zomba, Blantyre and Mulanje). The total gain thus nearly doubled, from 23 to 41 percent, by far the highest in Malawi. Accordingly, the net internal migratory flow soared from 11 to 56 thousand between the censuses, the latter the second highest in the country, behind Blantyre. The proportion of children in the female population rose substantially, from high to very high; however there are featuies of the increase that indicate other factors besides any rise in fertility (such as selective migration or data errors) have played some part in the change. Mchinji: Mchinji, an eastern Central highlands district, is similar in many respects to its Northern neighbor, Kasungu. It forms an-outer part of the Chichewa-speaking heartland, with 90 percent Chichewa-speakers, and most of the rest speaking "Other" languages. Its 1977 overall total population of 159 thousand is moderately large by national standards; the density nearly doubled between the censuses, from 26 to 47, but remained no more than moderate. The overall intercensal growth rate of 5.61 percent was the second highest in Malawi (after Kasungu) and extremely high by any standards. As in Kasungu, growth was much higher for males than for females, while child growth'was 1/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. - 96 - somewhat below adult, indicating substantial labor in-migration; but growth for all groups was higher than any possible natural increase, indicating that family migration also occurred. As in Kasungu, the sex ratio shot up, from 90 in 1966 to 104 in 1977, again indicating huge in-migration between - the censuses. The percentage of the Mchinji-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was nearly 11 percent, or over 40 percent of the male work force 1/, one of the highest proportions in Malawi. The percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi was nearly 8 perceit (mostly in the neighboring districts of Kasungu and Lilongwe), making up a total loss of 18 percent. By 1977 the internal loss had risen only. slightly to 10 percent (again mostly to Kasungu and Lilongwe, with the addition of Blantyre), implying little change in the total loss, if proportions abroad remained constant. In return, Mchinji in 1966 had attracted 10 percent of its enumerated population from abroad (Zambia, Mozambique and Zimbabwe),-2/ a rather high proportion by national standards, and another 8 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mostly Lilongwe and Kasungu); by 1977 the gain from abroad had dropped to 8 percent while the internal gain had trebled to 24 percent (now much more widely spread, with the most important contributions coming from Lilongwe, Kasungu, Dowa, Dedza, Ntcheu, Mangochi, Machinga, Zomba and Blantyre), the third highest proportion in Malawi, after Kasungu and Blantyre. Consequently the total gain rose substantially from 18 to 32 percent, again the third highest proportion in Malawi, after Blantyre and Kasungu. The resulting net internal migratory flow shot up from an inflow of 600 in 1966 to 26 thousand in 1977. The proportion of children in the female population rose from a high to a very high level between the censuses; as in the case of Kasungu, however, 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. - 97 - there are features which indicate that other factors (such as selective migration ,or data errors) played some part besides any rise in fertility. Ntchisi: Ntchisi, a 'highland district in the central core of Central Region, forms part of the'Chichewa-speaking heartland, 98 percent of its population being Chichewa-speaking. Its 1977 total population of 87 thousand was small 2 by national standards; its 1977 density of 53 per km is higher than any district to the north, but still not among the highest categories in the country. The overall intercensal growth rate of 2.43 percent was rather low by national standards; male growth was somewhat higher than female, and child growth somewhat higher than adult growth. The sex ratio rose from 87 to 92 between the censuses, in both years a little below the national level. The percentage of the Ntchisi-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was 6.7 percent, or about a quarter of the male work force 1/, not a particularly high figure by national standards. The percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi was around 12 percent (mostly in the neighboring districts of Nkhotakota, Dowa, LIlongwe and Kasungu), making up a total loss of around 18 percent in 1966. By 1977 the internal loss ,alone had risen to 22 percent (still mostly spread among the same neighboring districts), implying a total loss of near to 30 percent if proportions abroad had remained constant. In return, Ntchisi in 1966 had attracted less than one percent of its enumerated population from abroad (mainly from Zimbabwe) 2/, a very low proportion by national standards, and around 8 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mainly from 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. -98- Dowa). By 1977 the gain.from abroad had hardly changed, but the internal gain had risen to 12 percent (now, as for the internal loss, spread among the neighboring distr.icts of Kasungu, Nkhotakota, Dowa and Lilongwe); hence the total gain'increased similarly from 8-to 13 percent, again a rather low .proportion by national standards. The resulting net internal migratory flow was negative in both years, but the outflow rose substantially from 3 to 11 thousand. The proportion of children in the female population was relatively high in both 1966 and 1977 and rose between the censuses;'however the effect is not substantial or consistent enough to warrant any firm conclusion on fertility trends. Dowa: Dowa, a highland district in the core of the Central region, is in many respects very similar to its northern neighbor Ntchisi. It also forms part of the Chichewa speaking-heartland. The 1977 total population of 248 thousand is moderately high by national standards; the 1977 density of 81 per km is in the middle range between the sparsely populated areas to the north and Lilongwe and the densely settled Shire highlands to the south. The overall intercensal growth rate of 2.78 percent was just below the national average; male growth was somewhat higher than female, and child growth was a little higher than adult growth. The sex ratio rose from 91 to 96 between the censuses, somewhat above the national average in both cases. The percentage of the Dowa-born population reported to ae working abroad in 1966 was around 5 percent, or a fifth of the male work force 1/, a low proportion by national standards; the percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi was nearly 15 percent (mostly spread among the neighboring districts of Kasungu, Nkhotakota, Ntchisi, Salima, Dedza and Lilongwe, with the latter much the most important), making 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. - 99 - up a total loss of 19 percent. By 1977, the internal loss had risen only slightly to nearly 18 percent (to the same districts as before plus Mchinji and Blantyre, but with Kasungu now very important as well as Lilongwe), implying little change in the total loss, if the proportions abroad were more or less constant. In return, Dowa in 1966, like Ntchisi, attracted less than one percent of the enumerated population from abroad (mainly Zim- babwe) 1/ and 8 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mostly Lilongwe, Ntchisi and Kasungu); by 1977 the gain from abroad had barely changed, but the internal gain had risen to nearly 13 percent (the same districts as before, with the addition of important contributions from Salima and Dedza). Hence the total gain rose in parallel fashion from 8 to 13 percent, rather a low propor- tion by national standards. The resulting net internal migratory flow was outwards in both years, but changed little, from an outflow of 14 to 15 thousand. The proportion of children in the female population was very high in both 1966 and 1977, and rose somewhat between the censuses. However, the rise was not large or consistent enough to warrant any firm conclusions on fertility trends. Lilongwe Lilongwe, a highland district in southern Central Region, which contains one of Malawi's largest,. and certainly its most rapidly expanding town, is part of the heartland of Chichewa-speakers; 96 percent of the popula- tion speak Chichewa as a mother tongue. The 1977 total population of 704 thousand is by far the largest in Malawi; density, however, which grew substan- tially from 81 per km2 in 1966 to 114 in 1977, does not reach the level of any of.the Shire highland districts although it is much higher than anywhere else in Malawi. The overall intercensal growth rate of 3.12 percent was somewhat 1/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. - 100 - higher than the national average. Male growth was higher than female, and child growth higher than adult growth. The sex ratio rose modestly from 94 to 98 between the censuses, in both years noticeably above the national average. The percentage of the Lilongwe-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was around 4 percent, or about one-sixth of the male work force 1/, much the lowest proportion in the country; the proportion enumerated elsewhere in Malawi (spread mostly among the nearby districts of Kasungu, Dowa, Salima, Mchinji, Dedza and Ntcheu, as well as Blantyre 'and Zomba) was 5 percent, again the lowest in all Malawi. The total loss in 1966 was thus only 9 percent, by far the lowest in the country, and indicating that Lilongwe then exerted a very strong attraction on its native-born population. By 1977 the internal loss had risen to 12 percent (now much more widely spread but with former destinations still most important), no longer quite the lowest, but still the second-lowest; implying that the total loss would be around 16 percent if the proportions abroad were unchanged. In return, Lilongwe in 1966 had attracted only 2 percent of its enumerated population from abroad (chiefly Mozambique and, to a lesser extent, Zambia and Zimbabwe) 2/, but 11 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (most importantly Dowa and Dedza, but with substantial contributions from all over Central Region as well as Mzimba, Mangochi, Zomba, Blantyre and Mulanje). By 1977, the gain from abroad had barely changed, while the internal gain had risen to 17 percent (with substantial contributions from all parts of Malawi except Mwanza, Chikwawa and Nsanje); thus the total gain rose from 13 to 19 percent between the censuses, not among the highest group in either year. 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. 101 - The resulting net internal migratory flow was positive in both years, and rose only moderately from an inflow of 33 to 41 thousand; in size this was one of the largest net flows in Malawi in both years, but in relation to the population of Lilongwe was not very important in either 1966 or 1977. Lilongwe thus appears to be basically a rather stable population by national standards. The proportion of children in the female population was very high in both 1966 and 1977 and rose somewhat between the censuses; the increase is consistent with (though of course not necessarily due either partially or totally to) a rise in fertility during that period. Dedza Dedza, an almost entirely highland district in southern Central Region, lies in the outskirts of the Chichewa-speaking heartland; 89 percent speak Chichewa and most of the remainder speak Yao, the language of the southern lake shores. The 1977 total population of 298 thousand is quite high by national standards; density, at 82 per km in 1977, lies in the middle range for Malawi. The overall intercensal growth rate of 2.31 percent is relatively rather low by national standards; male growth is somewhat higher than female and child growth much higher than adult growth. The sex ratio rose only slightly from 83 to 85 between the censuses, both values among the lowest in Malawi and signifying very substantial male labor out-migration. The percentage of the Dedza-born population reported as working abroad in 1966 was just under 7 percent, or around a quarter of the male work force 1/, not unduly high by national standards; the percent.enumerated elsewhere in Malawi was 9 percent (chiefly in Lilongwe, Salima, Ntcheu and Blantyre, as well as, to a lesser 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. - 102 - extent, Machinga, Mangochi and Zomba), again not unduly large. The total loss amounted to around 16 percent, a moderate value by national standards. By 1977, the.internal loss alone amounted to 15 percent (now to be found scattered through most of Central Region, as well as the former destinations in Southern Region, but with by far the largest concentration in Lilongwe), implying a total loss of over 20 percent, again not excessive. Presumably migration from Dedza is very largely of male labor. In return, Dedza in 1966 attracted under 4 percent of its enumerated population from abroad (mostly Mozambique and Zimbabwe) 1/ and 6 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mainly Dowa, Lilongwe, Ntcheu and Blantyre); by 1977 the gain from abroad had barely changed, while the internal gain (again mostly from Lilongwe, Ntcheu, Salima, Mangochi, Zomba and Blantyre) had risen only slightly to near 8 percent. Consequently the total gain was almost the same in both years, at 10 and 11 percent respectively, again both low figures by national standards.. The resulting net internal migratory flow was negative, and more than trebled between the censuses, from an outflow of 7 to 25 thousand. The proportion of children in the female population increased from high in 1966 to very high in 1977, but it appears likely from some features of the increase that besides any genuine increase in fertility, such factors as selective migration or data errors may have played some part. Ntcheu Ntcheu, the southernmost district of Central Region covering the southern fringe extension of the Central highlands, represents an extension of the Chichewa-speaking heartlend, with 95 percent of the population Chichewa 1/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. - 103 - speakers. The 1977 total population of 227 thousand was moderate by national standards; density also, reaching 66. per km2 in 1977, was moderate and within the range of nearby districts to the east and north. The overall intercensal growth rate of 2.87 percent was close to the national average; male growth was noticeably.higher than female and child growth a little above adult growth. The sex ratio rose from 80 to 86 between the censuses, but in both years remained among the lowest in Malawi, indicating continued heavy male out- migration. The proportion of the Ntcheu-born population reported as working abroad in 1966 was 7.6 percent, or around 30 percent of the male work force 1/, rather high by national standards; the percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi (chiefly spread throughout Lilongwe, Dedza, Mangochi, Machinga, Zomba, Thyolo and, most importantly, Blantyre) was 18 percent, one of the highest internal losses in Malawi,. The total loss in 1966 thus amounted to about a quarter, again one of the highest proportions in the country. By 1977 the internal loss had grown only moderately to 22 percent (now also in Kasungu, Mchinji, Salima, Mwanza and Chikwawa, as well as former destinations, but with Blantyre still much the most important), implying a total loss of close to 30 percent, if proportions abroad remained constant. In return, Ntcheu in 1966 attracted around 6 percent of its enumerated population from abroad (mostly Mozambique and Zimbabwe) 2/ and around 9 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (chiefly from Lilongwe, Dedza, Mangochi, Zomba, Thyolo and Blantyre, the latter being much the most important); by 1977 the gain from abroad had dropped to 5 percent and the internal gain had risen to 12.5 percent (now more widely spread to include Machinga, Chiradzulu, Mulanje and Nsanje as well as 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. - 104 - former senders, though Blantyre is still much the most important). Thus the total gain rose only from around 16 to 18 percent, neither very high by national standards. The resulting net internal migratory flow was negative in both years, increasing from 16 to 24 thousand between the censuses. The proportion of children in the female population increased between 1966 and 1977 but was low by national standards in both years; there are features of the increase that indicate the presence of other factors, such as selective migration or data errors, beside any genuine rise in fertility. Mangochi Mangochi, the northernmost Southern region district, surrounding the southern end of the lake, is the headquarters of the Yao-speaking group, with 80 percent speaking Yao and most of the rest Chichewa. The 1977 total population of 302 thousand is quite high by national standards; density, however, which 2 reached 48 per km in 1977, is relatively rather low. The overall intercensal growth rate of 2.36 percent was also rather low by national standards; male growth was a little higher than female, and child growth was somewhat higher than adult growth. The sex ratio rose from 80 to 84 between the censuses, but was joint lowest and lowest of all respectively in 1966 and 1977, indicating continued very heavy male out-migration. The proportion of the Mangochi-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was 8 percent, or a third of the male workforce 1/, rather high by national standards, but similar to neighboring districts around the southern lake shores and upper Shire valley; the percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi (mainly in Ntcheu, Salima, Lilongwe, Machinga, Zomba, Thyolo and Blantyre) was also rather high, at near to 15 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. -.105- of around 21 percent, again rather high by national standards. By 1977 the internal loss had risen somewhat to nearly 18 percent (now even more widely spread in Kasungu, Mchinji, and Dedza, besides former destinations as well), implying a-total loss of around one-quarter if proportions abroad remained constant. In return, Mangochi in 1966 attracted 19 percent of its enumerated population from abroad (mostly from Mozambique, and,-to a very much lesser extent, Zimbabwe) 1/, much the highest proportion in Malawi; but only around 5 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mainly from the nearby districts of Ntcheu, Machinga, Zomba and Blantyre). By 1977 the gain from abroad, (though still one of the highest in Malawi) had dropped substantially to 11 percent while the internal gain (now much more widely spread, including Nkhata Bay, Lilongwe, Thyolo, and Mulanje as well as former senders) nearly doubled to 9 percent. Consequently the total gain actually dropped from 24 percent in 1966 to 20 percent in 1977. The resulting net internal migratory flow was negative in both years, rising from an outflow of 19 thousand to 25 thousand between the censuses, one of the highest net losses in the country in numbers, though not huge relative to the population size of Mangochi. The proportion of children in the female population was rather low by national standards in both 1966 and 1977, with a slight increase between the censuses, consistent with (though not necessarily due to) some rise in fertility. Machinga Nachinga, the district containing the upper Shire valley, is mixed linguistically, with Yao predominating. About half the population speak 1/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. - 106 - Yao, about a quarter. Lomwe, and about a fifth Chichewa. The 1977 total population of 342 thousand is quite large by national standards, but density, even after a rapid increase from 38 in 1966 to 57 in 1977, is only in the moderate range for Malawi. The overall intercensal growth rate of 3.71 percent is very high by national or indeed any standards; male growth was somewhat higher than female, and child growth distinctly higher than adult growth, but all were high by any standards, indicating either (or both) very rapid natural increase or substantial family in-migration between the censuses. The sex ratio rose a little, from 84 in 1966 to 86 in 1977, but remained among the lowest in Malawi in both years, indicating continued heavy male out-migration; this is oddly combined with very high intercensal growth for all age/sex groups, presumably implying that separate male labor in-migration was unimportant. The proportion of the Machinga-born popula- tion reported in 1966 to be working abroad was 8.3 percent, about a third of the male work force 1/, a rather high level by national standards, but similar to other districts in the southern lake zone; the percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi (mainly in the nearby districts of Mangochi, Zomba and Blantyre) was nearly 9 percent, making up a total loss of around 16 percent which is not high by national standards. By 1977, the internal loss had grown to 12 percent, (now more widely spread, with Kasungu, Lilongwe, Mchinji, and Ntcheu also important, .in addition to former destinations), implying a total loss of around a fifth, if proportions abroad remained constant. In return, Machinga in 1966 attracted 10 percent of its enumerated population from abroad (Mozambique and, to a much lesser extent, Zimbabwe) 2/ and 19 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. -107- percent from elsewhere in Malawi (from all parts of Southern Region except Chikwawa, as well as Ntcheu, but with the biggest contribution coming from Zomba), the second highest level in the country, after Blantyre. By 1977 the gain from abroad had fallen to 7 percent, while the internal gain (still from the same sources, but with the addition of Dedza and Chikwawa) had risen somewhat to 23 percent. Consequently the total gain altered little, from around 29 to around 30 percent, but in both years was among the highest in Malawi. The resulting net internal migratory flow was a large inflow in botl-, years, rising from 27 to 43 thousand between the censuses, again one of the highest in the country (both in numbers and relative to distinct population) in each case. The proportion of children in the female'popula- tion was relatively somewhat low in both 1966 and 1977, though less so than in its three neighbors to the north, south and west. There was some increase between the censuses, consistent with (though not necessarily due either wholly or partially to) some rise in fertility during the period. Zomba Zomba, an eastern Shire highland district which contains an important, though slow-growing, town, is linguistically mixed. Around 40 percent of the population speak Chichewa, one-quarter Yao, and around 30 percent Lomwe. The total population in 1977 of 352 thousand was the fourth highest in Malawi; and density in both years, (110 and 137 respectively) was very high by national standards, though somewhat lower than the western Shire highlands. The overall intercensal growth rate of 2 percent was low by national standards; male growth was lower than female and child growth higher than adult growth, but none reached the national overall average. The sex ratio fell between the censuses, from 98 to 93 and thus from well above the national average to just I - 108- about the national level, implying a substantial reversal of male migration from in to out of the district. The proportion of the Zomba-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was 5.1 percent, or around one-fifth of the male work force 1/, the second lowest figure in Malawi; the percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi (mostly scattered throughout the rest of the Shire highlands, plus Mangochi and Machinga, as well as Ntcheu and Mchinji) was 18 percent, a rather high figure by national standards. The total loss amounted to 21 percent, again a rather high figure. By 1977 the internal loss alone was 22 percent (now even more widely scattered, including Mzimba, Kasungu, Salima, Lilongwe and Dedza as well as former destinations), implying a total loss of around a quarter, if the proportions abroad remained constant. In return, Zomba in 1966 attracted 7 percent of its enumerated population from abroad (mostly from Mozambique and, to a much lesser extent, Zimbabwe)-2/ and 15 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mainly Mangochi, Machinga, Lilongwe, Ntcheu.and the rest of the Shire highlands), a relatively high level by national standards. By 1977 the gain from abroad had fallen to 4.5 percent, while the internal gain had risen only slightly to 17 percent (now from Mzimba, Dedza and Nsanje in addition to former destinations); thus the total gain changed only slightly from 22.2 percent in 1966 to 21.5 percent in 1977. The resulting net internal migratory flow was outwards in both years, but rose dramatically from a loss of 400 to 19 thousand between 1966 and.1977. The proportion of children in the female population was very low by national standards in both years, with very little change between the censuses. The very slight increase that occurred is too small and too inconsistent to be taken seriously. 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. - 109 - Mulanje Mulanje, the southeastern corner of the Shire highlands, is linguistically mixed, and also the headquarters of the Lomwe language in Malawi; two-thirds of the population speak Lomwe, one-fifth Chichewa, and the remainder is divided between Yao and Kokola-speakers. The 1977 total population of 478 thousand was second only to Lilongwe in size; density (reaching 138 in 1977) is also high by national standards, and similar to its northern neighbor Zomba, though neither reach the levels of the western Shire highlands. The overall intercensal .growth rate of 1.62 percent was very low by national standards; male growth was lower than female and child growth distinctly higher than adult growth, but no group reached the level of national overall growth. The sex ratio fell from 92 to 89 between the censuses, from slightly above to definitely below the national average, implying substantial male out-migration. The proportion of the Mulanje-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was 6.2 percent, or around a quarter of the male work force 1/, not a particularly high figure by national standards; the percent enumerated elsewhere was nearly 9 percent (mostly in the rest of the Shire highlands, plus Machinga and Lilongwe), again a rather low level. The total loss was hence around 14 percent, one of the lowest levels in Malawi. By 1977 the internal loss had risen to 12.5 percent (now more widely spread in Mzimba, Kasungu, Ntcheu, Mangochi and Chikwawa, as well as former destinations), implying a total loss of nearly a fifth if proportions abroad remained constant. In return, Mulanje in 1966 attracted 10.5 percent of its enumerated population from abroad (almost all from Mozambique and, to a very much smaller extent, 1/ See footnote 1/ to page 28. - 110 - Zimbabwe) 1/, one of the highest levels*in the country, and nearly 6 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mostly from other parts of the Shire highlands plus Nsanje). By 1977 the gain from abroad had dropped to about 6 percent, while the internal gain (still mostly from the same senders as before) rose hardly at all. Consequently, the total gain fell from 16 to 12 percent. The result- ing net internal migratory flow was outward in both 1966 and 1977 and nearly quadrupled from almost 9 thousand to 32 thousand between the censuses. The proportion of children in the female population was relatively rather high in both 1966 and 1977 and rose somewhat between the censuses. However, the increase was too small and inconsistent to be taken very seriously. Thyolo 2/ Thyolo, the southernmost district of the Shire highlands is linguistically very diverse, without any predominating language; a third speak Chichewa, another third Lomwe, a quarter Kokola (a language hardly found elsewhere in Malawi except for a very small minority in Thyolo's eastern neighbor Mulanje) and 5 percent Yao. The 1977 total population of 322 thousand is large by national standards; density, reaching 188 per km2 in 1977, is the third highest in Malawi. The overall intercensal growth rate of 2.05 percent was low by national standards; male growth was lower than female, and child growth higher than adult growth, but no group reached the level of national overall growth. The sex ratio fell slightly from 97 to 96 between the censuses (though it remained above the national average in both 1966 and 1977), 1/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. 2/ See pages 1 and 2. - 111 - implying some male out-migration during the intercensal period. The proportion of the Thyolo-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was 5.2 percent, or around a fifth of the male work force 1/, a low level by national standards; the percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi (scattered through all the Southern Region, except Mangochi, and also in Ntcheu) was 12 percent, making up a total loss of around 17 percent, a moderate level by national standards. By 1977 the internal loss bad risen to 16 percent, (to the same destinations as before, with the addition of Mangochi and Lilongwe), implying a total loss of around a fifth if proportions abroad remained constant. In return, Thyolo in 1966 attracted about 8 percent of its enumerated popula- tion from abroad (almost all from Mozambique, and, to a very much smaller extent, Zimbabwe) 2/ and around 13 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mainly from all over the Southern Region, except Machinga, and also from Ntcheu); by 1977 the gain from abroad had dropped to 5 percent, and the internal gain had risen only very slightly, from 13.2 to 13.5 percent, (from the same senders as before); hence the total gain fell from 21 to 18 percent.* The resulting net internal migratory flow reversed between the censuses, from an inflow of 6 thousand in 1966 to an outflow of 7 thousand in 1977, but was small in both years. The proportion of children in the female population was high in both 1966 and 1977, with barely any change between the censuses. There is hence no evidence of any trend in fertility. 1/ See footnote 1/ on page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ on page 28. - 112 - Chiradzulu Chiradzulu, a small district in the centre of the Shire Highlands, is (like all the Shire highlands) linguistically diverse. Roughly equal proportions speak Chichewa and Lomwe (36 and 38 percent, respectively) while the remaining quarter are almost all Yao speakers. The 1977 total population of 176 thous'and is only very moderate by national standards, but density, reaching 230 per km in 1977, is substantially the highest in Malawi. The overall intercensal growth rate of 1.93 percent was low by national standards; male growth was lower than female growth and there was little difference between child and adult growth. None of the groups reached anywhere near the national overall level of growth. The sex ratio fell slightly from 89 to 87 between the censuses, both levels being below the national average and indi- cating continued substantial male outmigration. The proportion of the Chirad- zulu born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was 6.9 percent, or just,over a quarter of the male work force, 1/ a moderate level by national standards; the percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi, however, was 24 percent (mainly elsewhere in the Shire highlands, plus Machinga), the second highest level in Malawi. Hence the total loss reached over 29 percent, again the highest in the country. By 1977 the internal loss alone had grown to 28 percent (still mostly to elsewhere in the Shire highlands, plus Machinga, but with the addition of Lilongwe and Ntcheu), still second highest in Malawi, and implying a total loss of around one-third if proportions abroad remained constant. In return, Chiradzulu in 1966 had attracted 4 percent of its enumerated population from abroad (mostly from Mozambique, and, to a far 1/ See footnote 1/ to page 28. -113- lesser extent, Zimbabwe) 1/, a rather low level by national standards and much the lowest in Southern Region; and 9 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mainly from the rest of .the Shire highlands). By 1977 the gain from abroad had dropped to 2.6 percent, one of the lowest in the country, while the internal gain (still mostly from elsewhere in the Shire highlands) had risen only slightly to 10.5 percent. Hence, the total gain changed almost not at all, from 13.3 percent in 1966 to 13.1 percent in 1977, both rather low levels by national standards. The resulting net internal migratory flow was outwards in both years, increasing sharply from an outflow of 26 thousand in 1966 to one of 41 thousand in 1977; in both cases the highest outflow (in numbers) in Malawi, and large also by comparison with the total population size. The proportion of children in the female population was low relative to national levels in both 1966 and 1977 and changed almost not at all, implying an absence of any trend in fertility. Blantyre and Mwanza These must be treated together since they formed one district, "Blantyre" in 1966, and no age or migration data are available for them separately then. Blantyre is the westernmost district of the Shire highlands and contains Malawi's most urbanized area. Mwanza, to its west, covers the middle Shire valley. Together they were liuguistically diverse in 1966, with 57 percent Chichewa speakers, 23 percent Yao, 8 percent Lomwe and the remainder including Tumbuka, Sena, Ngoni, Tonga and 'Other'; probably the Chichewa speakers were more concentrated in Mwanza, and the Yao and Lomwe speakers in Blantyre. The 1977 population of Blantyre was 408 thousand (third largest in Malawi) and that of Mwanza was 71 thousand (second smallest in Malawi), Density in Blantyre, nearly doubling between the censuses to reach 203 per km2 in 1977, was also 1/ See footnote 2/ to page 28. - 114 - the second highest in Malawi, after its eastern neighbor Chiradzulu; density in Mwanza, also nearly doubling between 1966 and 1977, was still very low in 1977 at 31 per km 2, though no longer in the very lowest group. Overall intercensal growth rates were both very high, at 4.89 percent for Blantyre and 4.79.percent for Mwanza; male growth was higher than female in Mwanza and the reverse in Blantyre, while child growth was substantially higher than adult in the two combined. All groups, however, showed growth substantially above any likely natural increase, implying heavy immigration to both districts between the censuses. The sex ratio fell slightly in Blantyre from 110 in 1966 to 109 In 1977, and rose in Mwanza from 86 to 90; well above the national average, and indeed implying substantial past male immigration in the former, and below the national average in both years, implying continued male outmigration, in the latter. The proportion of the "Blantyre"-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was 6.1 percent, or around one-quarter of the male work force 1/, a moderate figure by national standards; the percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi was around 17 percent, (very widely spread, but principal- ly in the rest of Southern region, except Nsanje, and in Lilongwe, Dedza and Ntcheu) rather high by national standards. The total loss thus amounted to around 22 percent, a little on the high side by national standards. By 1977, the internal loss was 22 percent for Blantyre and 17.3 percent for Mwanza, implying some slight rise in the total loss for both districts combined. In return, "Blantyre" in 1966 had attracted around 6 percent of its enumerated population from abroad (mainly Mozambique, Zimbabwe and South Africa) 2/ and 28 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (from all over the country, but principally 1/ See footnote I/ to page 28. 2/ See footnotR 2/ to page 28. - 115 - from the rest of the Southern region, plus Nkhata Bay, Mzimba, Lilongwe, Dedza and Ntcheu), by far the highest level in Malawi. By 1977 the gain from abroad amounted to 13 percent in Mwanza and around 6 percent in Blantyre; while the internal gain stood at 14 percent in Mwanza (mainly Blantyre, Thyolo and Ntcheu), rather low by national standards, and 37 percent in Blantyre (large contingents from all over the country, excepting only Chitipa, Ntchisi- and Mchinji, but particularly from the rest of Southern Region), the second highest level in Malawi (after Kasungu). Hence the total gain stood at 34 percent for "Blantyre" in 1966, the highest in the country; and at 27 and 42 percent for Mwanza and Blantyre, respectively, in 1977, the former high but the latter again the highest in Malawi. The resulting net internal migratory flow was positive for "Blantyre" in 1966, the inflow of 38 thousand being the largest, in numbers, in the country. In 1977 Blantyre showed an inflow, now much larger at 81 thousand (still by far the highest in Malawi) while Mwanza showed a small net outflow of 1.2 thousand. Presumably, therefore, a substan- tial part of Blantyre's intercensal growth was due to internal inmigration, while hwanza's must be attributed to some combination of natural increase and net immigration from abroad. The proportion of children in the female popula- tion of "Blantyre" was relatively high in 1966, and was still high in both Blantyre and Mwanza in 1977; though higher in the former than the latter. Some rise probably occurred.in both districts between the -census; the features of this rise are all consistent with (though not necessarily either wholly or partially due to) some increase in fertility. Chikwawa 1/ Chikwawa, the lowland district covering the northern half of the lower Shire valley, is linguistically divided; around half of the population speak 1/ See pp. 1, 2. -116- Chichewa, around one-third Sena (found elsewhere in significant numbers only in Nsanje to the south) and the remainder mostly Lomwe or "Other". The 1977 total population of 194 thousand was moderate by national standards; density, reaching 41 per km2 in 1977, was low. The overall intercensal growth rate of 2.5 percent was rather lower than the national average; male growth was higher than female, and child growth substantially higher than adult growth, with children approximating the national overall level of growth, and other groups below it. The sex ratio rose from 94 to 96 between the censuses, above the national level in both years, and not too far below normal levels in either case. The proportion of the Chikwawa-born population reported to be working abroad in 1966 was 6.4 percent, or just over a quarter of the male workforce 1/, a moderate level by national standards; the percent enumerated elsewhere was around 7 percent (mainly in Blantyre, Chitadzulu and Nsanje), making up a total loss of around 13 percent, a low level by national standards. By 1977, the internal loss alone had doubled to 14 percent (now more dispersed, but with the largest contingents in Blantyre, Thyolo, Nsanje and Machinga), implying a total loss of around a fifth if proportions abroad remained constant. In return, Chikwawa in 1966 had attracted 14 percent of its enumerated popula- tion from abroad (almost all from Mozambique and, to a very much lesser extent, Zimbabwe), 2/ a similar level to Nsanje, and both second highest in the country; the percent attracted from elsewhere in Malawi was also relative- ly high, at 16 percent (most importantly from Nsanje, followed by Thyolo and Blantyre). By 1977 the gain from abroad had fallen a little to 11 percent, 1/ See footnote 1/ to page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ to page 28. - 117 - while the internal gain (now more widely spread, but with Nsanje, followed by Thyolo, Blantyre, and in addition, Mulanje, still the most important) had risen somewhat to 18 percent. Consequently, the total gain dropped slightly - from 31 to 29 percent between 1966 and 1977, in both years among the highest in the country. The resulting net internal migratory flow was positive in both years, but fell from an inflow of 18 to 13 thousand. The proportion of children in the female population rose very substantially between the censuses, from a relatively rather low to a relatively high level; but there are features of the increase that imply the presence of other factors such as selective migration or data errors besides any rise in fertility. Nsanje Nsanje, the lowland southernmost district of Malawi, which contains the southern half of the lower Shire valley, is the headquarters of the Sena language (found elsewhere in significant numbers only in Chikwawa to the north); nearly three-quarters of the population are Sena-speaking, a fifth Chichewa-speaking, and most of the remainder Lomwe and Kokola. The 1977 total population of 109 thousand is rather low by national standards; density, which barely increased between the censuses from 52 to 56 per km 2, is only moderate. The overall intercensal growth rate of .65 percent was the lowest in Malawi; male growth was higher than female, and child growth very much higher than adult growth, but none of the groups approached even a rate of 2 percent. The sex ratio rose only slightly from 88 to 89 between the censuses, both lower than the national average. Massive outmigration of both male and female adults, possibly also of whole families, is indicated. The proportion of the Nsanje-born population reported in 1966 to be working abroad was 7.6 percent, 118 - or around 30 percent of the male work force 1/, a moderately high level by national standards; the percent enumerated elsewhere in Malawi (mainly in Chikwawa, followed by Blantyre, Thyolo, Mulanje and Machinga) was 26 percent, the highest level in the country. Hence the total loss was 32 percent, again the highest in Malawi. By 1977 the internal loss alone had grown to 34 percent (now more widely spread, with substantial contingents in Zomba and Ntcheu, as well as former destinations, but still with Chikwawa the most important), still the highest level in Malawi, and implying a total loss of around 40 percent if proportions abroad remained constant. In return, Nsanje in 1966 had attracted 15 percent of its enumerated population from abroad (almost all from Mozambique) 2/, the second highest level in the country; but had attracted only 5 percent from elsewhere in Malawi (mainly Chikwawa and Thyolo), one of the lowest levels in the country. By 1977 the gain from abroad had dropped to 10 percent, while the internal gain (still from Chikwawa and Thyolo) had doubled to 10 percent, still low by national standards. Consequently, the total gain had barely changed, from 19.3 percent in 1966 to 19.2 in 1977. The resulting net.internal migratory flow was outwards in both years, rising from an outflow of 24 thousand in 1966 to 35 thousand in 1977; the former was second highest, and the latter the highest,'outflow in Malawi in their respective years, and both are also substantial relative to the population size of the district. The proportion of children in the female population rose very substantially between the censuses, from a relatively low to a relatively rather high level; however, there are features of the increase that indicate the presence of other factors, such as selective migration or data errors, besides any rise in fertility. 1/ See footnote 1/ to page 28. 2/ See footnote 2/ to page 28. Appendix Tables Éd9 9 Table A.2.1: NAMES OF MALAWI DISTRICTS 1926 - 1980 1926/31 1945 1966 1977 [ Chitipa Chittpa North Nyasa Karonga I ( Karonga Karonga 6est Nyasa Chinteche Nkhata Bay Nkhata Bay ( Rumpt Rumphi Homberas Nimba [ [ Nzinba Nz imba iKasungu Kasungu Kasungu Kasungu [ Nkhotakota Nkhotakota Kota Kota Nkhotakota [ ( Ntchisl Ntchist [ Dowa Dowa Vowa Dowa ( I Salima Salima Lilongwe Lilongwe Lilongwe Lilongwe Fort hanning Fort Manning Mchinji Mchinji Dedza Dedza Dedza Dedza Ncheu Ntcheu Ntcheu Ntcheu South Nyasa Fort Johnson Fort Johnson Mangochi Upper Shire Liwonde Kasupe Machinga Zouba Zomba Zomba Zomba Chiradzulu Chiradzulu Chiradzulu Chiradzulu blantyre Blantyre ] (Blantyre ] Blantyre I Central Shire .Kano ] [Mwanza Lholo Cholo Cholo Thyolo hlanje Mlanje Mlanje Mulanje Chikwawa Chlikwawa Chikwawa Chikwawa Lower bhire Port Herald Nsanje Nsanje Table A.2.2: NALAW1 DISTRICTS: TOTAL POPULATION SIZE, DENSITY, DISTRIBUTION AND CROWTil; 1966 AND 1977 CENSUSES 2/ecesl 3/ Total Population Ranking Intercensa Population Density District 1966 1977 1966 1977 Growth Rate (Percent) . 1966 1977 Chitipa 59,521 72,316 22 22 1.76 14 17 Karonga 77,687 106,923 19 18 2.88 23 32 Nkhata Bay 83,911 105,803 18 19 2.09 21 26 Rumphi 46,63b 62,450 23 24 2.63 10 11 Nziuba 229,736 301,361 8 8 2.45 22 29 Northern Region 497,491 648,853 3 3 2.40 19 24 Kasungu 97,472 194,436 15 12 6.23 12 25 Nkhota Kota 62,918 94,370 21 20 3.66 15 22 Ntchisi 66,762 87,431 20 21 2.43 40 53 Duwa 182,OU0 247,603 10 10 2.78 56 81 Salima 86,552 132,276 16 16 3.83 44 60 Lilongwe 498,524 704,117 1 1 3.12 81 114 Itchinji 85,324 158,833 17 15 5.61 26 47 Dedza 230,715 298,190 7 9 2.31 64 82 Ntcheu 164,685 226,454 11 11 2.87 48 . 66 Central RegioP 1,474,952 2,143,716 2 2 3.37 42 60 o Hangochi 232.L92 302,341 6 7 2.36 37 48 hachinga 226,506 341,836 9 5 3.71 38 57 Zomba 282,391 352,334 3 4 2.00 110 137 Chiradzulu 142,197 176,184 13 14 1.93 186 230 diantyre 237,289 408,462 5 3 4.89 126 203 11wanza 41, 981 71,405 24 23 4.79 18 31 L/ Thyolo 256,605 322,000 4 6 2.05 148 188 Mulanje 398,681 477,546 2 2 1.62 116 138 1/ chikwawa 147,364 194,425 12 13 2.50 30 41 Nsauje 101,234 108,758 14 17 . .65 52 56 Southern Region 2,067,140 2,754,891 1 1 2.59 65 87 tLALAII 4,039,583 5,547,460 2.86 43 59 1/ See p.p. 1,2 of Appendix 2. 2/ These intercensal district growth rates differ in some cases from those given in Table I of Voltime I of the 1977 Census Report. Since district populations given here are identical to those given in the 1977 Census Table 1.2, the cause of the discrepancy is not apparent. 3/ Persons per square kilometre. Table A.2.3: IALAWI DISTRICTS: DATA ON POPULATION, S12E, STRUCTUR1E AN) GiO1WTIl; 1966 AND 1977 CENSUSES Total Population Hale Female Total Poj-lation Total Population Female Population Female PopuJaton Populatic., Population Age -4 Aged 5-9 Aged 0-4 - Aged 39 District 19b6 1977 1966 1977 1966 1977 1966 1977 1966 1977. 1966 1977 1966 1977 ChitIpa 59,521 72,316 27,-b0 34,022 31,561 38,294 12,040 13,682 9,698 12,648 6,046 6,964 4,813 6,341 ar-nga 77,681 10, 923 36,433 50,563 41,254 56,360 13,518 20,358 11,512 16,418 6,923 10,348 5,784 8,231 Nkhata Bay h3,911 105,803 38,259 50,375 45,652 55,428 14,440 18,927 12,459 15,931 7364 9,581 6,285 7,942 KUL1p1 14,636 62,450 21,090 29,072 25,546 33,378 8,393 11,770 7,007 9,879 4,267 6,026 3,620 4,967 Nzimba 229,736 301,361 105,302 142,832 124,434 158,529 44,404 56,884 34,319 44,481 22,654 29,026 17,307 22,158 Northern Rekjon 497,491 648,853 229,044 306,864 268,447 341,989 92,795 121,621 74,995 99,357 47,254 61,945 37,809 49,639 Kasungu 97,472 194,436 45,345 100,685 52,127 93,751 18,537 37,485 15,016 26,804 9,407 19,187 7,649 13,405 Nkhotakota 62,918 94,370 29,086 45,605 33,832 48,765 11,933 19,099 8,939 14,021 6,061 9,815 4,434 7,111 Ntchisi 66,762 87,437 31,128 41,918 35,634 45,519 13,050 18,093 9,732 12,523 6,696 9,318 4,975 6,380 1o,a 182,000 247,603 86,917 120,985 95,083 126,618 36,775 51,181 26,750 35,803 18,832 26,250 13,669 18,161 Salina 86,552 132,276 39,544 64,088 47,008 68,188 15,561 26,359 12,109 19,486 7,991 13,365 6,226 9,789 Lilongwe 498,524 704,117 240,975 348,511 257,549 355,606 96,404 143,913 70,714 101,440 49,364 73,539 35,999 51,814 behinji 83,324 158,833 40,440 80,918 44,884 77,915 16,0.55 31,501 13,698 23,350 8,219 16,196 6,858 11,733 Dedza 230,715 298,190 104,784 137,173 125,931 161,017 44,622 63,326 35,205 45,527 22,803 32,383 17,874 23,212 Ntcheu 164,685 226,454 73,353 104,438 91,332 122,016 29,734 42,866 25,008 32,989 15,035 21,856 12,640 16,675 F- Central H Kejjon 1,474,952 2,143,716 691,572 1,044,321 783,380 1,099,395 282,671 433,823 217,171 311,943 144,408 221,909 110,324 158,2P0 fangochi 232,692 302,341 103,614 138,352 129,078 163,989 43,304 57,639 36,043 47,108 22,325 29,565 17,878 23,279 fachinga 226,506 341,836 103,138 157,580 123,368 184,256 41,623 66,954 35,456 53,963 21,365 34,154 17,727 27,194 zonba 282,391 352,334 139,509 169,366 142,882 182,968 47,111 63,333 41,812 50,101 23,925 32,526 20,959 25,396 Chiradzulu 142,197 176,184 66,879 81,833 75,318 94,351 25,176 32 060 21,783 25,912 12,812 16,431 11,120 13,306 1/Ilantyre 237,289 408,062 124,168 212,487 113,121 195,575 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 48,511 1 88,0471 38,381] 67,650 1 24,667 1 44,501 1 19,310] 34,290 1/hwanza 41,981 71,405 19,385 33,720 22,596 37,685 ] 1 ] 1 1 . 1 1 2/Thyolo 256,605 322,000 126,625 157,327 129,980 164,673 46,754 2/ 62,874 35,948 2/49,1?9 23,833 2/ 31,838 18,1752/24,921 dulanje 39b,881 477,546 190,768 225,017 208,113 252,529 73,114 94,425 59,983 - 72,042 37,409 48,319 30,345~ 36,117 2/Cikwawa 147,364 194,425 71,277 95,413 76,087 99,012 28,628 2/ 38,029 21,800 2/30,873 14,540 2/ 19,450 11,1222/15,488 j'sanje 101,234 108,758 47,283 51,309 53,951 57,449 18,538 21,311 14,234 17,035 9,554 10,928 7,219 8,759 Southern Reg.lon 2,067,140 2,754,891 992,646 1,322,404 1,074,494 1,432,487 372,759 524,672 305,440 414,013 190,430 267,712 153,855 208,750 MIALWI 4,039,583 5,547,460 1,913,262 2,673,589 2,126,321 2,873,871 748,225 1,080,116 597,606 825,313 382,092 551,566 301,988 416,669 1/ See pp. 1,2 of Appendix 2. 2/ See pp. 1,2 of Appendix 2. Table A.2.4: MALAWI DISTRICTS: INDICES OF POPULATION STRUCTURE AND GROWTH; 1966 AND 1977 CENSUSES Ratio of Percent of Females Percent of Females Children Intercensal Growth Rate, 1966-1977 Sex Ratio Aged under 5 Aged 5-9 0-4/5-9 District Total Pop. Total Males Total Females Children Children 5-9 Children 1966 1977 1966 1977 1966 1977 1966 1977 under 5 under 10 Chitipa 1.76 1.77 1.74 1.15 2.40 1.73 88.6 88.8 19.2 18.2 15.2 16.6 1.24 1.08 .Karonga 2.68 2.96 2.82 3.69 3.20 3.47 88.3 89.7 16.8 18.4 14.0 14.6 1.17 1.24 :.khata bay 2.09 2.4b 1.75 2.44 2.22 2.34 83.8 90.9 16.1 17.3 13.8' 14.3 1.16 1.19 aiumphi 2.63 2.90 2.41 3.05 3.10 3.07 82.6 87.1 16.7 18.1 14.2 . 14.9 1.20 1.19 Aziriba 2.45 2.75 2.18 2.23 2.34 2.28 84.6 90.1 18.2 18.3 13.9 14.0 1.29 1.28 Northern Region 2.40 2.64 2.18 2.44 2.54 2.48 85.3 89.7 17.6 18.1 14.1 14.5 1.24 1.22 Kasungu 6.23 7.20 5.30 6.35 5.23 5.87 87.0 107.4 18.0 20.5 14.7 14.3 1.23 1.40 NkhoLakota 3.66 4.06 .3.30 4.24 4.06 4.17 86.0 93.5 17.9 20.1 13.1 14.6 1.33 1.36 htchist 2.43 2.9 2.21 2.95 2.28 2.67 87.4 92.1 18.8 20.5 14.0 14.0 1.34 1.44 owa 2.76 2.98 2.58 2.98 2.63 2.84 91.4 95.6 19.8 20.7 14.4 14.3 1.37 1.43 Salima 3.83 4.36 3.36 4.76 4.2-9 - 4.56 84.1 94.0 17.0 19.6 13.2 14.4 1.29 1.35 Lilongwe 3.12 3.33 2.91 3.62 3.26 3.46 93.6 98.0 19.2 20.7 14.0 14.6 1.36 1.42 "Ichinji 5.61 6.26 4.98 6.08 4.81 5.52 90.1 103.9 18.3 20.8 15.3 15.1 1.17 1.35 bjdza 2.31 2.43 2.22 3.16 2.32 2.80 83.2 85.2 18.1 20.1 14.2 14.4 1.27 1.39 itchLu 2.87 3.19 2.61 3.30 2.50 2.94 80.3 85.6 16.5 17.9 13.8 13.7 1.9 1'.30 Central Region 3.37 3.72 3.06 3.86 3.27 3.61 88.3 95.0 18.4 20.2 14.1 14.4 1.30 1.39 I1an6uchi 2.36 2.61 2.1.6 2.58 2.42 2.51 80.3 84.4 17.3 18.0 13.9 14.2 1.20 1.22 Wachinga 3.71 3.82 3.62 4.29 3.79 4.06 83.6 85.5 17.3 18.5 14.4 14.8 1.17 1.24 4ouba 2.00 1.75 2.23 2.67 1.63 2.20 97.6 92.6 16.7 17.8 14.7 13.9 1.13 1.26 Chiradzulu 1.93 1.82 2.03 2.18 1.57 1.90 88.8 86.7 17.0 17.4 14.8 14.1 1.16 1.24 1/Blantyre 4.69 4.85 4.94 1 ] 1 J 109.8 108.6 . I I I I ) 5.38 ] . 5.11 ] 5.26 ] 18.2 J 19.1 ] 14.2 ] 14.7 ] 1.26 ) 1.30 1/Ilwanza 4.79 4.99 4.62 j ] ] 1 85.8 89.5 2/Thyolo 2.05 1.96 2.13 2.67 2/ 2.86 2/ 2.75 2/ 97." 95.5 19.2 19.3 14.6 15.1 1.10 1.27 Mulanje 1.62 1.49 1.75 2.31 1.65 2.02 91.7 89.1 18.0 19.1 14.6 14.3 1.22 1.31 2/tiLkwawa 2,50 2.63 2.38 2.56 2/ 3,14 2/ 2.82 2/ 93.7 96.4 17.8 19.6 13.6 15.6 1.31 1.23 Gsanje .65 .74 .57 .1.26 1.62 - 1.42 87.6 89.3 17.7 19.0 13.4 15.2 1.30 1.25 Southern Region 2.59 2.59 2.59 3.08 2.74 2.93 92.4 92.3 17.7 18.7 14.3 14.6 1.22 1.27 MALWI 2.86 3.02 2.72 3.31 2.91 3.14 90.0 93.0 18.0 19.2 14.2 14.5 1.25 1.31 1/ See pp. 1,2 of Appendix 2. 2/ See pp. 1,2 of Appendix 2. Table A.2.5: MALAWI DISTRICTS: INDICES OF CHANGE IN POPULATION STRUCTURE AND GROWTH, 1966 - 1977 Percent Change Percent Difference between Child and Total Growth Rates Percent Change in Percent Change In Sex Ratio Children under 5 Children 5-9 Children under 10 Percent of Females in Ratio of 1966-1977 aged under 5 aged 5-9 Children 0-4/ Children 5-9 District 1966-1977 thiltipa + .2 - 35 + 36 - 2 - 5.2 + 9.2' - 13 Karonja + 1.6 + 28 + 11 + 20 + 9.5 + 4.3 + 6 Nkhaua bay + 8.5 + 17 + 6 + 12 + 7.5 + 3.6 + 3 humphi + 5.4 + 16 + 18 + 17 + 8.4 + 4.9 - 1 .Aztimba + 6.5 - 9 - 4 - 7 + .5 + .7 - I Northern Re&ion + 5.2 + 2 + 6 + 3 + 2.8 + 2.8 - 1 Kasunlu + 23.4 + 2 - 16 - 6 + 13.9 - 2.7 + 13 ikhoLakota + 8.7 + 16 + I + -14 + 12.3 + 11.5 + 2 htchisi + 5.4 + 21 - 6 + 10 + 9.0 0 + 8 Vowa + 4.6 + 7 - 5 + 2 + 4.5 - .7 + 4 balira + 11.8 + 24 + 12 + 19 + 15.3 + 9.1 + 5 Lilongwe + 4.7 + 16 + 4 + 11 + 7.8 + 4.3 . + 4 hchinji + 15.3 + 8 - 14 - 2 + 13.7 - 1.3 + 15 ledza + 2.4 + 37 0 + 21 + 11.0 + 1.4 + 10 ;tcheu + 6.6 + 15 - 13 + 2 + 8.5 - .7 + 9 Central Region + 7.6 + 15 - 3 + 7 + 9.8 + 2.1 + 7 ejaiochi + 5.1 + 9 + 3 + 6 + 4.0 + 2.2 + 2 bachinga + 2.3 + 16 + 2 + 9 + 6.9 + 2.8 + 6 Zoubas - 5.1 + 34 - 19 + 10 + 6.6 - 5.4 + 12 Lhiradzulu - 2.4 + 13 - 19 - 2 + 2.4 - 4.7 + 7 blantyre 1/ - 1.1 ] ] + ] ) ] + 10 ] + 5 + 8 + 4.9 ) + 3.5 1 + 3 ilwanza 1/ + 4.3 1 1 1 ] 1 ] Thyolo2/ - 2.0 + 9 + 17 + 13 + .5 + 3.4 - 2 ilulanje - 2.8 + 43 + 2 + 25 + 6.1 - 2.1 + 8 Chikwawa 2/ + 2.9 + 38 + 69 + 52 + 10.1 + 14.7 - 6 Asanje + 1.9 94 + 149 + 118 + 7.3 + 13.4 - 4 Southern Region - .1 19 + 6 + 13 + 5.6 + 2.1 + 4 fALAWI + 3.3 16 + 2 + 10 + 6.7 + 2.1 + 5 1/ See pp. 1,2 of Appendix 2. 2/ See pp. 1.2 of Appendix 2. Table A.2.6: MALAWI DISTRICTS: DATA ON PLACE OF UlilTil AND PLACE OF ENUMERATION, 1966- AND 197.7-2CENSUSES M: 1966 Census11 Enumerated Native-born Population Population Population Relatives Population Total Total Native Net Total Net Cain/ Population Population Enumerated Born Outside Enumerated Reported Born In Lifetime Born Popula- Cain/Loss Loss of of District of District and Born Malawi and in District Living District Higrants tion Outside of Life- 'Lifetime Enumerated , in District Enumerated and Born Outside and Enumer- into District time Internal in Malawi in District Elsewhere Halawl ated Else- District Migrants Migrants in Malawi where in District Malawi Chitipa 59,510 58,148 53,803 3,982 1,725 5,000 4,345 5,707 9,345 - 3,638 - 2,620 Karonga 77,572 67,684 63,371 6,388 7,813 5,000 4,313 14,201 9,313 + 4,888 + 3,500 Nkhata Bay 83,70 76,175 67,545 9,249 7,076 16,000 8,630 16,325 24,630 - 8,305 - 1,554 Rumphi 46,578 43,266 36,225 2,887 7,466 5,000 7,041 10,353 12,041 - 1,688 + 425 hZinba 229,372 243,712 213,911 6,276 9,185 16,000 29,801 15,461 45,801 -30,340 -20,616 (33,265) (54,130) (62,047) (101,130) Northern Region 496,902 488,985 459,889 28,782 8,231 46,000 29,096 37,013 75,096 -38,083 -20,865 Kasungu 97,275 82,344 75,058 4,304 17,913 8,000 7,286 22,217 15,286 + 6,931 +10,627 Nkhotakota 62,689 58,173 50,350 3,432 9,087 6,000 7,823 12,519 13,823 - 1,304 + 1,264 Utchisi 66,664 69,647 61,145 422 5,097 5,000 8,502 5,519 13,502 - 7,983 - 3,405 owa 181,732 195,010 166,428 931 14,373 11,000 28,582 15,304 39,582 -24,278 -14,209 Salima 86,178 78,780 71,989 2,217 11,972 7,000 6,791 14,189 13,791 + 398 + 5,181 Lilongwe 496,485 453,529 430,706 10,317 55,462 18,000 22,823 , 65,779 40,823 +24,956 +32,639 Mchinji 85,190 76,132 70,243 8,413 6,534 9,000 5,889 14,947 14,889 + 58 + 645 Dedza 230,083 228,989 207,810 8,252 14,021 17,000 21,179 22,273 38,179 -15,906 - 7,158 htcheu 164,408 170,052 138,966 10,274 15,168 14,000 31,086 25,442 45,086 -19,644 -15,918 9 (149,627) (139,961) (198,189) (234,961) Central Region 1,470,884 1,412,656 1,365,687 48,562 56,635 94,000 46,969 105,197 140,969 -35,772 + 9,666 hangochi 232,235 206,831 176,614 44,226 11,395 18,000 30,217 55,621 48,217 + 7,404 -18,822 Hachinga 226,103 177,248 161,582 21,945 42,576 16,000 15,666 64,521 31,666 +32,855 +26,910 Zouba 280,299 261,034 218,129 19,619 42,551 14,000 42,905 62,170 56,905 + 5,265 - 354 Chiradzulu 141,914 161,912 123,009 5,867 13,038 12,000 38,903 18,905 50,903 -31,998 -25,865 Blantyre 270,887 216,459 178,771 16,398 75,718 14,000 37,688 92,116 51,688 +40,428 +38,030 Mwanza J Thyolo 244,808 219,583 193,450 19,149 32,209 12,000 26,133 51,358 38,133 +13,225 + 6,076 Mulanje 397,900 364,876 332,814 41,862 23,224 24,000 32,062 65,086 56,062 + 9,024 - 8,838 Chikwawa 157,832 117,431 109,717 22,734 25,381 8,000 7,714 48,115 15,714 +32,401 +17,667 4sunje 100,960 109,855 81,452 14,710 4,798 9,000 28,403 19,508 37,403 -17,895 -23,605 (270,890) (259,691) (477,400) (386,691) Southern 2,052,938 1,835,229 1,795,172 206,510 51,256 126,000 40,057 257,766 166,057 +91,709 +11,199 Rtegion luALAWI 4,020,724 3,736;870 3,736,870 283,854 266,000 * 283,854 266,000 +17,854 1/ Cross tabulations of population by place of birth and place of enumeration are given in the 1966 Census Report for the African population only. These figures are therefore for Africans only. However, the data on Relatives Working Abroad refer to all races, since no breakdown of the total by race is 1ruvided at district level. Since non-Africans amounted to only about 1,000 of the 266,000 total relatives abroad, their Incluion here should he insignificant. 2/ The totals for the enumerated population of Districts include a number of persons with unstated birthplace. Therefore, categories will not sum to these tols. Since only .02% of the total population (or 1,162 persons) are of unstated birthplace the discrepancy Is insignificant. Table A.2.6: HALAWI DISTRICTS: DATA ON PLACE OF BIRTH AND PLACE OF ENIUMERATION, 1966-1AND 19772/CENSUSES B: 1977 Census2/ Enumerated Native-born Population Population Population Population Net Gain/ Population Population Enumerated Born Outside Enumerated Born in Loss of of District of District and Born Halawl and in District District Lifetime Lnumerated In District Enumerated and Born and Enumer- Internal in Halawl in District Elsewhere ated Else- Migrants In Malawi where in District District ' Llitipa 72,316 75,730 63,819 4,912 3,582 11,911 - 8,329 Ka rona 10b,923 94, 301 81,681 8,494 16,740 12,620 + 4,120 Nkhata Bay 105,803 103,276 81,501 9,284 15,010 21,775 - 6,765 Rubiphi 62,450 62,728 46,301 3,681 12,455 16,427 - 3,972 Hzimba 301,361 321,932 265,782 9,197 26,322 56,150 - 29,828 Northern Kegion 648,853 657,967 584,492 35,568 28,701 73,475 - 44,774 Kasungu 194,436 130,753 114,939 7,393 72,042 15,814 + 56,228 Nkhotakota 94,370 82,604 69,577 4,697 20,040 13,027 + 7,013 Ncchist 87,437 97,801 76,477 602 10,354 21,324 - 10,970 Dowa 247,603 261,306 214,554 1,481 31,559 46,752 - 15,193 Salima 132,276 115,986 98,771 4,708 28,791 17,215 + 11,576 H Lilongwe 704,117 645,272 568,340 17,615 117,826 76,932 + 40,894 hchinji 158,833 120,281 107,922 12,831 38,060 12,359 + 25,701 Ln Dedza 298,190 313,294 265,826 9,572 22,759 47,468 - 24,709 tftcheu 226,454 238,440 186,461 11,568 28,394 51,979 23,585 Central Region 2,143,716 2,005,737 1,920,688 70,467 152,004 85,049 + 66,955 hangochi 302,341 295,176 242,602 32,136 27,561 52,574 - 25,013 aachinga 341,836 274,014 240,241 24,321 77,210 33,773 + 43,437 Zomba 352,334 354,977 276,386 15,988 59,780 78,591 - 18,811 Chiradzulu 176,184 212,702 153,167 -4,495 18,508 59,535 - 41,027 Blantyre 408,062 304,208 * 236,179 22,874 148,940 68,029 + 80,911 hwanza 71,405 63,Z37 52,333 9,263 9,803 10,954 - 1,151 Thyolo 322,000 313,?2 262,840 15,513 43,613 50,632 - 7,019 Mulanje 477,546 482,519 422,061 27,029 28,407 60,458 - 32,051 ChILkwawa 194,425 160,309 138,279 20,666 35,428 22,030 + 13,398 "sanje 108,758 133,186 87,828 10,424 10,503 45,358 - 34,855 Southern Region 2,754,891 2,593,850 2,473,086 182,709 98,583 120,764 - 22,181 HALaw I5,547,460 5,257,554 5,257,554 288,744 - - - 1/, 2/ See Footnotes 1/ and 2/ to Table A.2.6 A. Table A.2.7: MALAWI DISTRICTS: PERCENTAGE GAINS AND LOSSES OF LIFETIME HICRANTS, 1966YAND 1977 CENSUSES A: 1966 Census 2/ 2/ 2/ Percentage of Native- 2/ Percentage Gain of Lifetime Migrants- Percentage Loss of Lifetime Migrants- Born Population Retained mumigrants Internal Immigrants + Emigrants to Internal Outigrants Emigrants + Inc luding ExcIud ing from Abroad Inmigrauts Internal. Outside Malawi within Malawl Internal Relatives Relatives froid within Inmigrants Including Excluding Outmigrants Abroad Abroad halawi Rlatives Relatives District Abroad Abroad Chitipa 6.7 2.9 9.6 7.9 6.9 7.5 14.8 85.2 92.5 Karouga 8.2 10.1 18.3 6.9 5.9 6.4 12.8 87.2 93.6 "khata bay 11.0 8.4 19.5 17.4 9.4 11.3 26.7 73.3 88.7 1ul"phL b.2 16.0 22.2 10.4 14.6 16.3 24.9 75.1 '83.7 Mzilaba 2.7 4.0 6.7 6.2 11.5 12.2 17.6 82.4 87.8 Northern Region 5.8 1.7 7.4 8.6 5.4 6.0 14.0 86.0 94.0 kasungu 4.4 18.4 22.8 8.9 8.1 8.8 16.9 83.1 91.2 Nkhotakota 5.5 14.5 19.9 9.3 12.2 13.4 21.5 78.5 86.6 Ntchisi 0.6 7.6 8.3 6.7 11.4 12.2 18.1 81.9 87.8 Dowa 0.5 7.9 8.4 5.3 13.9 14.7 19.2 80.8 85.3 Salima 2.6 13.9 16.5 8.2 7.9 8.6 16.1 83.9 91.4 Lilongwe 2.1 11.2 13.2 3.8 4.8 5.0 8.7 91.3 95.0 Nchinji 9.9 7.7 17.5 *- 10.6 6.9 7.7 17.5 82.5 92.3 Dedza 3.6 6.1 9.7 6.9 8.6 9.2 15.5 84.5 90.8 Ntcheu 6.2 9.2 15.5 7.6 16.9 18.3 24.5 75.5 81.7 Central Region 3.3 3.9 7.2 6.2 3.1 3.3 9.4 90.6 96.7 Mangochi 19.0 4.9 24.0 8.0 13.4 14.6 21.4 78.6 85.4 machinga 9.7 18.8 28.5 8.3 8.1 8.8 16.4 83.6 91.2 Zomba 7.0 15.2 22.2 5.1 15.6 16.4 20.7 79.3 83.6 Chiradzulu 4.1 9.2 13.3 6.9 22.4 24.0 29.3 70.7 76.0 ilantre 6.1 28.0 34.0 6.1 16.4 17.4 22.4 77.6 82.6 Thyolo 7.8 13.2 21.0 5.2 11.3 11.9 16.5 83.5 88.1 tiulanje 10.5 5.8 16.4 6.2 8.2 8.8 14.4 85.6 91.2 Chikwawa 14.4 16.1 30.5 6.4 6.1 6.6 12.5 87.5 . 93.4 Nsanje 14.6 4.8 19.3 7.6 23.9 - 25.9 31.5 68.5 74.1 Southern Region 10.1 2.5 12.6 6.4 2.0 2.2 8.5 91.5 97.8 MALAWl 7.1 - - 6.6 - - - 93.4 - 1/ See footnote I to Table A.2.6.A. 2/ Percentage gains of mfgrants are calculated by dividing inmigrants from other districts or inmigrants take out from outside Malawi or bothe by the enumerated population. Percentage losses of emigrants to outside Malawi are calculated by dividing numbers of reported relatives abroad by the native-born population of the district enumerated in Malawi plus relatives abroad. Percentage losses of outeigrants to elsewhere in Malawi are calculated for 1966 in 2 ways: the first by dividing outmigrants by the native- born population of the district enumerated in Malawi plus relatives abroad, and the second by dividing outmigrants by the native- born population of tihe district enumerated in Malawi only. For 1977, only the second procedure could be used, of course. Like- wise 2 ways of calculating the percentage of native-born population retained by each district have been used for 1966: the first includes reported relatives abroad as part of the native-born population, while the second confines the native-horn population to that enumerated elsewhere in Malawi. Again, only the second method is available for 1977. The percentage loss of all migrants., whether to inside or outside Malawi,* is of course calculated on a base of the native-horn population enumerated in Malawi plus reported relatives abroad. Table A.2.7: NALAI DISTRICTS; PERCENTAGE GAINS AND LOSSES OF LIFETIME M1GRANTS,11966 AND -977 CENSUSES 2/ B: 1977 Census- 2/ 2/ Percentage of Native- Percentage Gain of Lifetime Higrants- Percentage Loss of Lifetime Migrants Born Population Retained ITmigrants Internal Immigrants + Internal Outmigrants to from Abroad Inmilgrants Inmigrants within Halawl frot within halawi District Lhitipa 6.8 5.0 11.7 15.7 84.3 Karonga 7.9 15.7 23.6 13.4 86.6 Nkhata Bay 8.8 14.2 23.0 21.1 78.9 lCumphil 5.9 19.9 25.8 26.2 73.8 HzImba 3.1 8.7 11.8 17.4 82.6 Northern Region 5.5 4.4 9.9 11.2 88.8 Kasungu 3.8 .37.1 40.9 12.1 87.9 Ukhotakota 5.0 21.2 26.2 15.8 84.2 Ntchisi 0.7 11.8 12.5 21.8 78.2 Dowa 0.6 12.7 13.3 17.9 82.1 Salima 3.6 21.8 25.3 14.8 85.2 Lilongwe 2.5 16.7 19.2 11.9 88.1 Mchinji 8.1 24.0 32.0 10.3 89.7 Dedza 3.2 7.6 10.8 15.2 84.8 NLcheu 5.1 12.5 17.6 21.8 78.2 Central Region 3.3 7.1 10.4 4.2 95.8 Hugoclhi 10.6 9.1 19.7 17.8 82.2 Machinga 7.1 22.6 29.7 12.3 87.7 Zomba 4.5 17.0 21.5 22.1 77.9 Chiradzulu 2.6 10.5 13.1 28.0 72.0 Wlantyre 5.6 36.5 42.1 22.4 77.6 Hwanza 13.0 13.7 26.7 17.3 82.7 Thyolo 4.8 13.5 18.4 16.2 83.8 1-ulanje 5.7 5.9 11.6 12.5 87.5 Lhikwawa 10.6 18.2 28.9 13.7 86.3 Nsanje 9.6 9.7 19.2 34.1 65.9 Southern Region 6.6 3.6 10.2 4.7 95.3 HALAWI 5.2 - * - 1/ See- Footnote I to Tablp A.2.6.A. 2/ See Footnote 2 to Table A.2.7.A. 'rable A.2.8a: HALAWI DISTRIcTS: HALAWI-BORN POPULATION BY PLACE OF hIRI AND PLAC OF ENUMERATION: NATIVE-BORN POPULATION OF NORTHERN REGION Place of Birth Place of Enutueration MALAW1 Chitipa Varonga Nkhata Bay . Rumphi HZiMba Northern Region Chitipa 75,730 63,819 1,145 126 601 734 66,425 Karonga 94,301 6,372 81,681 1,316 3,695 1,995 95,059 hKhata bay 103,276 650 990 81,501 1,430 6,873 91,444 Kut.1phi 62,728 752 1,270 851 46,301 6,653 55,827 birAba 321,932 1,261 1,453 3,272 3,969 265,782 275,737 Northern Region 657,967 72,854 86,539 87,066 55,996 282,037 584,492 Kasungu 130,753 190 278 624 380 18,340 19,812 Nkhotakota 82,604 290 717 3,055 406 1,737 6,205 Ntchisi 97,801 11 100 61 53 148 373 Dowa 261,306 64 104 340 90 746 1,344 Salia 115,986 104 299 899 294 581 2,177 Lilongwe 645,272 748 1,492 2,267 1,644 7,416 13,567. Mchinji 120,281 .61 . 129 151 118 746 1,205 Dudza 313,294 53 128 150 101 429 861 htcheu 238,440 57 90 212 72 373 804 Central Region 2,005,737 1,578 3,337 7,759 3,158 30,516 46,348 00 hangochi 295,176 80 606 2,134 553 362 3,735 Hachinga 274,014 204 276 378 130 458 1,446 Zomba 354,977 251 844 720 408 1,547 3,770 Chiradzulu 212,702 22 90 161 64 163 500 blantyre 304,208 562 1,978 4,007 1,948 5,521 14,016 1wa nza 63,287 17 27 44 17 92 197 Thyolo 313,472 38 143 179 97 395 852 Hulanje 482,519 37 129 98 98 233 595 Chikwawa 160,309 63 264 679 216 478 1,700 usanjo 133,186 25 68 51 43 130 316 Southern Region 2,593,850 1,298 4,425 8,451 3,574 9,379 27,127 IALAWI 5,257,554 75,730 94,301 103,276 62,728 321,932 657,967 Note: Underlined figures are the numbers of those both born and enumerated in the plac concerned. Table A.2.8b: MALAWI DISTRICTS: MALAWI-BORN POPULATION BY PLACE OF BIRTIvAND PLACE OF ENUMERATION, 1977 CENSUS: NATIVE-BORN POPULATION OF CENTRAL REGION Place of Birth Place of Enumeration Kasunju Nkhotakota Ntchisl [ownl Sallma Lilongwe cinDeda Ntchen Central Geio Chitipa 108 57 17 42 37 126 23 21 45 476 Karonga 122 213 188 114 153 335 42 170 159 1,496 Nkhata bay 233 900 57 142 179 458 58 293 . 154 2,474 Rulphi 170 84 32 110 91 426 27 117 75 1,132 izimba 2,603 966 215 419 249 2,208 334 454 567 8,015 Northern Region 3,236 2,220 509 827 709 3,553 484 1,055 1,000 13,593 Kasungu 114,939 2,123 5,447 11,520 838 11,516 2,771 3,537 1,355 154,046 'khotakota 1,171 69,577 3,366 1,221 1,519 1,331 200 497 492 79,374 14chist 637 1,107 76,477 4,827 218 2,025 111 368 94 85,864 bowa 1,847 713 6,347 214,554 1,936 12,863 445 2,295 878 241,878 Salima . 400 1,430 431 3,203 98,771 4,293 300 3,448 2,199 114,475 Lilongwe 3,184 2,070 3,288 19,376 5,276 568,340 5,529 20,162 9,648 636,873 hchinji 2,179 318 439 2,331 607 15,825 107,922 3,270 956 133,847 Uedza 257 157 123 761 1,266 9,400 274 265,826 2,961 281,025 Ntcheu 184 153 102 319 528 2,382 205 2,972 186,461 193,306 H Central Region 124,798 77,648 96,020 258,112 110,959 627,975 117,757 302,375 205,044 1,920,688 bjangochi 311 359 67 176 833 1,794 185 877 2,228 6,830 11achinga 253 253 96 229 484 2,136 242 1,199 4,996 9,888 Zomba 505 * 378 336 483 325 2,249 400 1,196 2,218 8,090 Chiradzulu 63 44 30 93 93 564 53 240 604 1,784 blantyre 1,169 1,345 548 1,029 2,159 5,030 815 4,958 17,457 34,510 hwanza 48 26 22 45 48 304 41 233 1,000 1,767 Thyolo 108 100 68 82 131 632 93 436 2,331 3,981 Nulanje 124 77 36 114 79 513 60 228 411 1,642 Chikwawa 83 117 53 67 99 387 121 405 932 2,264 Nsanje 55 37 16 49 67 135 30 92 219 700 Southern Region 2,719 2,736 1,272 2,367 4,318 13,744 2,040 9,864 32,396 71,456 HALAW1 130,753 82,604 97,801 261,306 115,986 645,272 120,281 313,294 238,440 2,005,737 Note: Underlined figures are- the numbers of those both born and enumerated in the place concerned.- Table A.2.8c: HALAWI DISTRICTS: HALAWI-BORN POPULATION BY PLACE OF BIRTH AND PLACE OF ENUMERATION, 1977 CENSUS: NATIVE-BORN POPULATION OF SOUTHERN RECION Place of Birth Place of Enumeration Mangochi Machina. Zomba Chlradzulu Blantyre Hwanza Thyolo Nulanje Ch1kwawa Nsanje Southern Region Chitipa 29 25 119 30 156 7 43 35 15 *41 500 Karonga 294 90 433 79 585 18 108 100 86 73 1,866 hkhata Bay 430 132 406 87 818 29 195 316 110 70 2,593 Rulaphi 218 89 449 112 530 12 95 198 45 49 1,797 hzl,suba 1,088 742 1,888 465 1,699 76 805 1,120 203 266. 8,352 Northern Region 2,059 1,078 3,295 773 3,788 142 1,246 1,769 459 499 15,108 Kasungu 3,567 2,806 1,687 494 1,227 152 879 1,565 254 492 13,123 Nkhotakota 869 238 761 239 894 53 198 331 191 264 4,038 LLchist 87 30 116 33 190 14 32 41 31 20 594 Dowa 646 213 454 183 620 43 189 349 82 112 2,891 Sallma 4,380 979 1,370 362 1,994 124 539 524 199 439 10,910 Lilongwe 6,077 2,787 8,510 2,323 9,173 469 1,943 2,832 826 786 35,726 Achinji 5,074 1,543 1,289 396 886 172 485 679 166 240 10,930 ledza 1,294 360 1,165 224 2,040 98 280 354 507 377 6,699 htcheu 1,650 1,477 2,624 1,539 7,564 571 2,116 1,200 931 1,073 20,745 Central Region 23,644 10,433 17,976 5,793 24,588 1,696 6,661 7,875 3,187 3,803 105,656 CD .1I Hangochi 242,602 4,795 3,356 823 3,584 217 1,488 1,371 487 875 259,598 Nachinga 8,f008 240,241 23,310 8,016 10,238 778 4,316 6,075 1,917 3,218 306,117 Zomba 4,222 4,772 276,386 12,062 8,751 548 3,673 9,349 961 1,582 324,306 ChIradzulu 685 565 3,206 153,167 3,575 197 2,891 4,164 258 683 169,391 Vlantyre 9,947 7,612 17,077 17,866 236,179 5,890 13,628 13,131 6,400 8,863 336,593 iwanza 269 281 566 578 2,823 52,333 1.400 587 900 435 60,172 Thyolo 2,022 992 3,158 5,083 4,904 623 262,840 13,782 3,624 4,592 301,620 Hulanje 702 396 5,383 7,506 2,521 173 6,606 422,061 766 2,117 448,231 Chikwawa 768 647 964 786 2,429 617 5,013 1,549 138,279 18,691 169,743 Nsanje 248 202 300 249 828 73 3,710 806 3,071 87,828 97,315 Southern Region 269,473 262,503 333,706 206,136 275,832 61,449 305,565 472,875 156,663 128,884 3,473,086 NALaW1 295,176 274,014 354,977 212,702 304,208 63,287 313,472 482,519 160,309 133,186 2,593,850 Note: Underlined fihures are the numbers of those both born and enumerated in the place in question, „ � k � � .г �д � •t. � 3 � у�', < � � � г � � r s � �' : � � � �• � � 9 . 4 �ь � � т 7� � � � � . . � i �, , � е� Z� � � � �$ qp2' ° а 7r� Mf Т• , .ьт..-� .р р i7 � � ^ •, � • � . � • ё�г...; Ф_�•. Ф � ' . � � •д~ё � � • • � • �1 '� ^ � h и е, .-r:�•�:•,° е е� Фе� ел л•е� Ф�е�=Ф���,�•�у р� � � Ф • s�.ea �s•1•� .в ° `Qл� �• о •'� ••.. . •:� . �.R.j� � ® ''11 ._. х • а•'Фв л°+: • �•�• • Ф �� .,л°е� �,� 1'��Ф �•°Фл � � • ° �.� �••� °�'"• а_ 1д j , � � • •п •• •°. Ф•� ��`• п •�. � • •.. .вФ� . 7а ��.в "1 . i ; s �• •� ~ ,' . г i � ы. w ; : •• 0 i•" • � � ~ С ..° � � ��• д т i ё • � ` �� г а° . • , ' " . ^: �о , � ���° Ъ � ii . , s � �� � о е��о�'а.'�°s°"'•'s. .е= е .ад�лв°`С:� � s � ё •° �i „° fм��wy ���s� "..��. •.°•,� � � ®« о:•��° •Ф 1:� �. Ф р. . е .� � ? �• ` .f:Ф у'`'�' *' - � _� ° St W +о Z 0 � ' 4л°" g� . t./ � И s i ` � ��'� ,�,^ � Ч •• �б Z � � _ А Ф •• 3 В 4Е`:• rsa S � � � � i � I � � � f. 꿰 州 .' ,ь � �. . - 1з4 - . ' ����� ��...�..�....� _ M+�a��r�A ��sт���г5 ���lс�,чТ ®t� �миеЬt�l��д ��+�Ри>с°а��°в�iы в� ►9iC ��r���� ��Е�ге�в�д�° � �tv�гV �r�в�ие4� �� � ����Р� тсаа���� i�°• 1.�. '��уΡ � . .. Чб►1Я. , � л�°1i'1, ... • �' ИКБW r а ti:°�.ai;� &У � в .• а у{ :�lврее'aaS °• 4� �� . л°�°'�еде0 и . '�1�А'о� • Ов � � "`7,�aje - .е'а �! ' ° о о 1 в' . . .а рЬа �а� b е Ов�<' • .аг'� _ . °е � rвёао ° °:е е ае�:ё� в а` . � л : � в . °° ' д в•� � в, �• ♦ s , , е r®•.е,��° .У аоЪOо •�� . � , а °в \� е а .•� . ° �ё. °е. , в е . . ° •в'. °аЪ� у°•` °влq.°ео i �У{О• °��ё�ё� Ч. ° �;Бд.'4Ъ •-� : °. ..ho •. e�Dr.ne - . о о: ° f 9 рЕ0: . :е.�.0 � о•а •etëo.��.. s�.•,°)° �9,� „_ C w л. д, , °а � л'• °ев;�� • '' , ° .ё .д,. Dtoo а �' оо � о °jо° � � г• ,о�� � %о �� ° �s� в0 О . � af °п�°.в у. вКв е • вlд. бвбв Ь � . ® ��� Би�70�ЪФ:���� и9°� ��в�5�il�'�1!!L, L®t�� diгtvd�ь`Гя�.S 135 MOkt-ftWI DISTRIC73 POPULATION 126 AND DeNS ITY TOTAL ftfuLATIOM POP~TIGN DENS ITY 111'? CENSV.S fws ans p« km Tkov 541%14 4 J. all tio 31 4 tie. jag., 州 1+ b 137- t-* w i PTVEKPjGC fft^UA(. CHILDREN ftG-ED 5 1 1 epip, 5 U1VO4M 10 YEAPAS (goik Sex-*s) sotA S~$) eN 1-x X.22 2n åå fil (t 3). -j_-( 訓 州 141 D IsTiklvrs LIFtInME NkfrKATiON OUT CF DISTRICr3 CENSV.5 cmtcr&An-co imrEKNAL Our~ ATI6N RefoKTED A.CA.1i11v65, PcotceNr or- AiATive-aopti WOKKINC_ ~ OPID DLåTgicr PopuLA-noN PcAc vw om tinr;ve-IBGAN Pts ~CeNTA G4c- OF otsrRicr töp<jr-A«noN (,xJUL1,14 W-tQ:e§wi, ff N UM« pk;j k,;t NOT NATIM- F30~ DtSTKtcT- _(1& i "¥b 44) pc>PULA11<>N (j^WIKA,nc, IN Dtsmcr ep fkni. INI. -2 21 9 74. Zt, -142 - t 6 MtW DiTro cUToPDi.CT fd Fe '1 H£ MIGCrlnTr4~ OUJr ~ lT CE4NT OF NATSUS.80A D(sfMtcr POgULT.ON .. d11 *.°'7) -f `• �i ч�.�ге R. 2. 7 а._ - 14з - , . • +мr� к.лw а D'srR �стs , • . +о.! F�°Tl М Е ГIIGRATtO 1V 1 NT® 'D 1S7'� 1�T5 � а+}�псёьvТ �а�и�а►fа`лп аsз�` � l'� is 6 CEIV 5t15 , � � rнп�4�сят �о n� t1�тFяNAL �N 4�9tGlLqTaoN - Т_bTR !. 1N М 1G R 1�Tio 1U Р�сЕ+�т о� �иаiы�Атао te�ce;�лrT ®f ЕntимвRйт�D рЕдсЕлiт о!� �urte+tP9cr�. �lsт'�t�сг roPutl4•:-toN Ocs'ПtI�T PoPt�utтtcN fltsT�tcCT PoPu�r4rtлN ' 604Vьf оыТ'si 0� ttAL�иr 1 • В®�г� Ea.�gWн��E ги гtRыtы�at 8оР�л+ ®uтs�DE D�sтli�r� , а F G'и иМь�еllTlofц r ` и �-. а .�{ ° • .•= : �~ •,А 11 ° :,� У jf� 1в!i вi.ё�'r9 � ' в'•�•;.в •� ��.�,� Т.д i. :� ° ° '`'<,:'?� '`"'''� �;?.у;.}t . ю.1 �' •у; г',5� 1s. � � � .м:."а .+, • .;+�о�;� ••;�.�в.:� ,+:д�в'.:ь1 ^ '� +.•'. � ♦. ' • . � ✓� , � �sY� rw1 ;ели.'w:i �S• �в ;�Ji •�'�"��'!о .•• „� .•t ` ° � ,Y�в,i.ti� Т.:а, �У V о 'Мв 'вв� •` ���� в ёvв•р•� в �J�•j i.A .3; ��+;� • .� 4'� i '4� й • ' �е G.p '; : � ;r,.� • : � ;+:+� �4.�::^�' .:° .;г. ?3-1� `.� в�r. g .в..•.•+ '• •...�'� � "ьУ'�•! м..вмi•� w.вsNa�� .. �д . в • • . +� � • .eJ.'.j � ..lдвl вв'в � \ •' вв�� •вв s ♦ У '•е'✓Н� в � У .еег�вl, � ' о /,. • вi С а • вв•в в pi1• iв +�вв�� ;ы�i � ввв/�ьИ�� f* •в• •��Ме� е�,•у�•�� � • � е , •в.� .S, i.7 ' .s"'. • и.У Ч•... `':::т • ••е •�••;:г�� ;.: ,,,•,,•.�� .•� •.ro � • �'� ,в � . • i CI.T •, �в е � ° �• в в вв, • У . 'S'(Г ео а° •е° °.� •f� •• ` ",.в \�°.ы� о а •вев.;�� .�Ъ,Фе� •�.Ii д�М ie • �в1вИ� L��i,ввв•в_, • л ' в� i о . ° o, � �i',• i , ° � ° � ее •� ° �•� е j . .'�а° ,' �;� о ® ;: ' в• , • � • в,: о . 7 v Sвi• �• ввt��. • � �+е'. °,1�• е� у ,�°.• •.��вi: 1 в'£в •� о•� • i � • • �в ••• . i� в.Ч,,. • ! � в�• в. '! . 9.S'� i i • � ••. в � ••� � а .3ё:�.д.�.•1 в':� •1�'у� • а ,•е�•.i s � •в0'1в1 ••°•а •в•�� • а : � ��.д е � i.• ��вв •' �е�и � .•.�, ,ц: . .•�'1е•и. :� •уе•Ч, '1г•.в1 ��:1 .�ь�: � •л • 4.4 • 8s � ::;��..+7 �f,} 1гв? в 1• �в .�� � •,}�'•'•, е•i � • ". 'ta� � '. 1' • �З л �. : � ° . �• • �Ot w • • w •j°: 1Т_ • •и •'� , ® В � � °.� а � �в� ви i ~ � J � .е �1, � �•+•'�.. е �у' � е С� •' • 7 а � •1 ; �e�t ' ,1 •� . , � .'•...+ .,л:.1в,' • Т; '•• 9.1 8 � �� •°• ', �в'.: �•; • � ` ��i °л~� `'� . ' `•>':: г., т � т.! t• �� . f °e�i.. •'�• •:,°в..Л а 1ё • �•� 1],1J l i�h v �i +r ° , ° • дьс ~о � и . . � в в � : :° �7.4 : , �. • Е1 ? ' ` •. r У °.. . . � в �' , о . . .�r: .:,� � г,.д ,: �����у 5.s �.L . � � ° • ' !•..' :iч` �;��°д ,��`°.. ..� . , 3 ь .. �!°' i.� �.'.'1 :��� • 13' �, .�..� е а о � • � ® • �'.у в, �.7 (Т. и • • е •вО� 1L.ai �+ У� je' У . � 7-� У• �� ° �$.! '2!!� _ , . � '`v� � t.^� ' ;ы - �� . 'Q•`�Т ' ... _,, ид ':Z1 ' ••�� � � ., G. :а ��УФ�а' -'� � Aj; �� 4. � + . - ' _ ' � �i1 1a.g 5.� � � - 7` • � 1ыь �.. � q 10. i г.а ` LЯ�• .;� о. . �7 • �м ° � �Т•Э л ri 144 - OtteffkATION INTO DISTIKICr£ UTAL INMIGMJIGNI P£' OF VNUMUMVJ) OM ENUPtSPLOrMD DI-STKIC-T PofuLA-n~ DtsrKtcor P<%etjLAi-tat-i OU TSJIDIE ~ W i DtSTMttr POPULMJÖW BOM OVMIDE DtSMI OF 'v2 :'-a ck. Ck [ij . qr- 41M- f. 叫 ............. ............. om Y-- OQ BL c cr o Ir t o i -ji 馴 •°I4��-• . . . . � � � - @� i � �116 �. ГЪ • � л� . '� D�� � . .• � � �'+�,а�а � va! В ® t 5 �'°R J �.: Г'S _ (��1��'rt1`Н� �!� �Е1°9k�� t� P�Jt�Pr°Г?06�1 hCтED ьl1VD� �- (® �У�А� : ����и� �� p�sтR��u�пcN 1� d g г�иs v� В't�� е �NS vs �s _� � . 7b. . г:���` � . � ,r.•;'л� . С 1� 1в•�.'� �q� ' ,; � +лаФ ве-�в{1 %* 1 {I.в,• • о • • •� Зо.,� oi:�r�:?А Э7.о + .��5�•?� _ �•�: • �.• о • . • .'iв� дл4 . ; . р : ,� . • �'a aw,: �лtiв�•:.r • � �:��'yi •ь! � s° W�a ••� а•. � � �•1 .дд;�� � т• ��Ja•+ д �и..� :! •'•�ьу ' � � � • 1• °.)о . • �'! ' �п+���•, � � �•в�,ло,ё �I.�, а. • (7р. ^µА � . • ° • as�� ' . о� � в . s е �во'"е •п ео • ;ву �'1•9 ' �'�'°оуΡ� е � .,° •а r.s{в•е • в8•а•�.,! � •• •• '/ •• ёд 'е ��; � � :'j�� е��У• Ja Т �.• •М{ а `в °д ' • � • а .; в`��• • ° • rвдв '°°° . i � �Ъ••1 °,•,� . `•'й� ,�l З.Z.1 �.. о р � � , � ° •в � ` ® •• л..®в.е' }.у 32'.З о•• м', ;' �� ; 10 ♦ 2!1 ,: " °°а 3a.i ';�y�i'��•i! , е ° •.<.J а �е�ё,л•в'.'i•/ 1Ъ'��s � �•а ••�, ' а� и а•i°• °ё i,r9 в.•.;; о• �� •То . "°'°4• 1 • �р ° ��+�,.••�," •е�•ь "g ё•п9,о • ' � f : < °°•а•�}в•!, а6'g ;•°'Р°St'��{� °��� ° �е{ ��' 1 . .. .в°г. `/ ��•° •1е�`,+ • °2{rc •� � в � е°iI • • ,: в• • ! � ` . • 1 �а ы��ro � ь {,�„{{а . .оа•� .. . �/ . оЧ• .� { 1Ф 1 _ ,� .S{�ву .°�� • �о °) ° е °° / , � ' ,�� � ��ва ,'� �'� %.О w, °+о� • . i�7�° �<�• ,i ° ч �л •°��•р9 r _ д�.. - °�. �• : е.о•i ё. й• 1 i_��'7 J� _ !� о�ё ие � . . • ��' • в - ' � . а s 1 ° °еее /// . � . � { '� � � �;..а'.с°°• � Li е� се.вё� , .�� ' � °е / ' . а •'6°ё � . ' ' • � . . � ; е �пве°,,(/ .. � ° °.и• а' t � � о•.`, а ,1 33.L 34�•_�' . • 1°Ф�ее' _ \ •.��t°°::•в , ! � О �1 L а �, �� � � _ S. • � . { v _ - • • �д. , ��,,, • ,� ••, в о • - •�ар�. 'ty.G в � 3Т.а �',�'•:.ч � :•.•.:,v +.{,•ееМ,.д . �• , ,1 _ : � weвN s.з ;'°� ;,� р . �3S.э�j) т;;:' �•�; « . 1.1 ` _ ��r.: � " 32. д � ввri � '1 � fif , . э�.ь ' .8а.� • зт.з� ����i :��• е ,. { i�в� а•м '' 37 за.7•`=. за' �х.4 . та� {•w т{ 5 '0; - 33.4 +•4 37�9 �35 3" . jk5 31.а ._зи 3 149 IN PERcrNýA" ar- "tIALE POPULftrioN INC1kEASE 47 中：&,&_! ha 15 2 APPENDIX 3 Analysis of Child and Parental Survival Data Child Survival Data 1. Data on child survival from the 1970 PCS and the 1977 census, for urban/rural in 1970 and by both urban/rural and by region in 1977, were analyzed by the Trussell variant of the Brass child survival technique (for details see the UN Manual X: Indirect Techniques for Demographic Estimation, New York, 1983). The results in print-out form are attached as Tables A.3.1-3 and are shown graphically in Figures A.3.1-3. Their main features are as follows: a. The national level results from 1970 and 1977 are roughly consistent in level and trend, provided that the $outh model age pattern of mortality in childhood and adolescence is used; as often occurs with African data, late childhood and adolescent mortality in the North pattern seems to be too high to provide a useful model. The main obvious anomalies are the points for women aged 20-24, and 25-29 in 1970 (too heavy mortality) and women aged 45-49 in 1977 and 1970 (too light mortality). These types of anomalies are not infrequently found in child survival data. The overall general trend is of a rather gradual decline in childhood mortality from the late 1950s to the early 1970s. - 153 - b. The data from 1977 appear to be of very good quality, producing an extremely smo6th and consistent set of estimates over time. The level and trend of child mortality shown can be accepted fairly confidently. The PCS data, by contrast, are inferior and irregular, and should be accorded much less confidence in detail, particularly those from the younger women. c. The pattern of urban and rural child mortality differen- tials are consistent in 1970 and 1977, with urban mortality very much lower at all periods. The quality differences between the 1970 and 1977 data also show up clearly in both cases and are very similar in pattern. d. Regional differentials in 1977 are also quite marked and internally consistent, with Northern Region showing the lightest child mortality, Southern Region somewhat heavier, and Central Region by far the heaviest mortality in child- hood. The size of the differentials alters little over time, though there is some suggestion that the decline has been somewhat steeper in Southern Region than elsewhere. 2. The national level results were used selectively to make estimates of childhood mortality levels for three periods in time: namely 1955-60, 1962-67, and 1970-75. A "synthetic cohort" estimation of child survival was also tried on the assumption that the 7 year lapse between the - 154 - two data sets could be approximated by 5 or 10 year cohorts (see UN Manual X for details of the methodology). Results were not good, giving levels of mortality for the period 1970-77 much lower than those derived from the conventional method using the data from women aged 20-35. This is no doubt due to the very irregular and anomalously heavy mortality reported by the younger women in 1970. (See Appendix 4 for details of calculations). The 1970-75 estimate was taken as the average of the three points for women aged 20-24, 25-29, and 30-34 years in 1977, yielding a Coale-Demeny South model level of 8.29, and corresponding values of ql, q2, q3, q5 and qIO of .191, .268, .304, .334 and .361. Because the data give every indication of good quality, this estimated general level of mortality in childhood is considered very firmly based. For the 1962-67 period, an average was taken of the four points for women aged 25-29 and 30-34 years in 1970, and women aged 40-44 and 45-49 years in 1977, yielding a South level of 7.48 and values for ql - q1O of .202, .285, .323, .355 and .384. This estimate is of course rather shaky, because most of the anomalous points are concentrated in the period 1962-67, but other reasonable combinations and selections of points in this period would yield much the same kind of level, and the implied level and trend compared with the 1970-75 period appears reasonable. Finally, for the 1955-60 period, a rough estimate was made by taking an average of the three points for women aged 35-39, 40-44, and 45-49 years in 1970, which yields a Coale-Demeny South level of 7.04, and corresponding qs of .208, .294, .334, .367, and .398. These estimates are the shakiest, because they are founded only on data from older women about events furthest back in time, without confirmation from other overlapping data sources. The levels of mortality reported are likely - 155 - (from experience elsewhere) to be too low. Thus the overall decline in mortality between the mid-1950s, and the mid-1970s may be somewhat steeper than is apparent from these data. However, the overall picture may be taken as reasonable approximation to reality. Between the mid-1950s and the mid-1970s, the percentage of children failing to survive to age 5 fell from at least 37 percent to around 33 percent, and to age 10 from at least 40 percent to 36 percent. These levels of mortality are extraordinarily high at both dates by comparison even within contemporary Africa (at national level), and are equalled only by a few very high-mortality countries in West Africa. They are unprecedented in Eastern Africa at national level. (see Hill et al: The Demographic Situation in Sub-Saharan Africa: Background Paper to the Population Strategy Paper for Sub-Saharan Africa: World Bank, forthcoming). It is interesting to note, however, that there is some evidence of similarly anomalously high childhood mortality in neighboring areas of Zambia, Tanzania and Mozambique; in Eastern Province of Zambia, for example, which is geographically contiguous and ethnically similar to Central Region, the level of childhood mortality is the highest in the country, despite relatively favorable climatic and economic conditions, with an estimated 25-30 percent of children dying before.age 5 over the period 1950-1970. Further investigation of the demarcation of this possible high mortality area is planned as soon as the data from the latest round of censuses from Tanzania (1978), Zambia (1980) and Mozambique (1980) are fully available. - 156 - Parental Survival Data 3. Data on survival of mothers and fathers from the 1970 PCS and the 1977 census at national level, and at regional level for 1977, were analysed by the Brass orphanhood technique (for details see the UN Manual X:, New York, 1983.). The results in print-out form are attached as Tables A.3.5 and A.3.6, and are shown graphically in Figures A.3.4 and 5. Their main features are as follows: a. The usual bucket shape appears, with extremely low reported mortality of parents both of children and the elderly. The first is usually ascribed to the adoption effect, whereby orphaned children are adopted by relatives who are then reported as the real (and alive) parents; and the second to poor reporting of parental survival plus age exaggeration by elderly respondents, Normal practice is therefore to use only the estimates from the bottom of the bucket, or roughly respondents aged 20-40 years. b. Using estimates Erom this age-range, the data from 1970-71 and 1977 appear reasonably consistent, indicating a moderate decline in adult mortality between the late 1950s and the late 1960s. The 1970-71 data on parental survival are smoother and more internally consistent than the 1977 data, in contrast to the data on child survival; a possible - 157 - explanation is that questions on parental survival were still a new and experimental approach in 1970, and there- fore may have received particular care and attention in training and field work. (c) Comparison of levels of mortality from child and parental survival show low adult mortality relative to childhood mortality in terms of historical Western experience as embodied in the Coale-Demeny model life tables. The age pattern of mortality is "more South than South" (South being the model with the lowest adult relative to child- hood mortality) by 3-6 levels. Male and female .adult mortality Coale-Demeny South levels are close, with male levels a little higher; hence the contrast between adulthood and childhood is a little more extreme for males, and male and female adult mortality rates are very similar. These age and sex patterns are unusual for eastern Africa where, according to parental survival data combined with child survival, the Coale-Demeny North pattern appears to provide a good model in East Africa, while age patterns in Southern Africa fall between North and South, or close to West. However, the South pattern has been found to fit several data sets from Western Africa based on child survival and reported recent deaths or longitudinal survey death rates. (See Hill et al: op cit., para. 4). It is, of course, also commonly found - 158 - elsewhere in the developing world, notably in Latin America North Africa and the Middle East. (See, for example, A. Adlakha: Model Life Tables: An Empirical Test of Their Applicability to Less Developed Countries: Demography 9, No. 4, November 1972 and UN). Some instance of patterns "more South than South" have also been reported for West Africa and the Middle East, though rarely in as extreme a form as in Malawi. A small or absent female advantage in adult mortality is also commonly found in cases where the South model is reported. It is interesting to note that adult mortality levels in Malawi are not out of line with the range for eastern Africa in general, quite unlike the situation for childhood mortality (see Hill et al, op. cit, para. 4). It may be, therefore, that the extreme contrast between adult and childhood levels in Malawi is the result of the abnormally high childhood mortality for eastern Africa, combined with a normal level of adult mortality for the region. It is also interesting to note that this contrast is present also in the reported recent deaths data from both the 1970-71 PCS and the 1977 census, deficient as these data may be. (d) There is very little variation in adult mortality levels between regions. Male mortality is slightly lower in Northern, and slightly higher in Southern, with Central in - 159 - between; female mortality is almost the same in all. Again this contrasts with the quite marked variation in childhood mortality (and fertility) between the regions. (Urban/rural differentials in mortality, of course, cannot be usefully studied, because there is no assurance that parents of urban respondents are or were themselves urban dwelling; indeed, in Malawi, most probably were not.) 4. Since two sets of parental survival data were available for Malawi, it was possible to examine cohort parental survival at national level between 1971 and 1977 (see UN Manual X for details of the methodology). The results are shown in print-out form in Table A.3.7 and in Figure A.3.4 Cohort maternal survival results appear reasonably consistent with the two earlier sets of data, indicating a further moderate decline in female adult mortality between the mid-1960s and mid-1970s. Cohort paternal survival results, on the other hand, are less believable, implying an exceptionally low level of adult male mortality in the 1970s and an extremely steep decline since the mid-1960s. Paternal survival data are of course usually considered less reliable than maternal on both methodological grounds (because of less knowledge of male fertility patterns) and practical grounds (because adult males tend to be more mobile ' and thus more easily lost sight of by families than adult females; particularly so in a country of male labor emigration such as Malawi). However, the paternal data are not obviously inferior to the maternal in either year. - 160 - 5. To construct full national life tables for 1955-60, 1962-67 and 1970-75, South levels of 12.0, 13.0, and 14.0 were chosen for male adult mortality, and of 11.0, 12.0, and 13.0 for female adult mortality. For regional life tables for 1970-75, South levels of 14.25, 14.25 and 14.0 for males and 13.25, 13.25 and 13.0 for females were selected for Northern, Central and Southern Regions respectively. For 1955-60 and 1962-67, the levels chosen are heavily rounded estimates based on the values for young adult respondents. For 1970-75 the national female estimate was based on the cohort parental survival values, and the national male estimate selected on the assumption that sex differentials would remain -the same as in the earlier periods. Regional values are based on the national female value combined with the scale of differentials observed in the regional parental survival data and assuming a constant male advantage of I level. Regional life tables do not weight out exactly to the national value (because of past interregional migration) the population of reference for parental survival at least is in any case somewhat inprecise) and are intended only to give an approximate idea of regional mortality differentials. 6. Estimated South levels for childhood and adult mortality are shown in full in Table A.3.8. For the construction of the life tables for males, the two levels of mortality were very simply spliced. Childhood qx values were taken direct from the equivalent South model life table up to the age of 15 years, and adult values similarly from the equivalent after the age of 20 years. The qx value for the 15-19 age group was calculated as an average of the values from the childhood and adult levels except for - 161 Central Region males in 1975, where the childhood and adult level values were averaged with weights of .4 and .6 respectively. This gave a reasonably smooth series of qx values. For females, however, where the split between childhood and adult levels was greater, splicing was done over the 3 age groups 10-14, 15-19, and 20-24 years. In the national life tables for 1955-60, 1962-67 and 1970-75, and in Northern and Southern Regions in 1970-75, qx values for the 3 age groups were calculated as weighted averages of childhood and adult levels, with weights of .9 and .1 respectively for the 10-14 age groups, .4 and .6 respectively for the 15-19 age group, and .1 and .9 respectively for the 20-24 age group. For Central Region females in 1970-75, the most extreme split of all, the weights were .5 and .5 for the 10-14 age group, .3 and .7 for the 15-19 age group, and .1 and .9 for the 20-24 age group. Again, the aim was to achieve a reasonably smooth series of qx values. The resulting life tables are shown in Tables A.3.9-14; sex differentials in death rates are shown in Table 4.3.15 and Figure A.3 together with those from reported death rates from the PCS and the 1977 census for comparison. - 162 - Table A 3 lA: Malawi -'Brass P/F and Child Survival Analysis of PCS National Data,- M A L AW I PCS N A TI I NAL B R A S 1970-72: Print-Out of AFEMO Programme 01,T-ION SELECTECI, fINA =. IBAD .ILi 0 INST != 0 IFAM= 0 ISR. := 1030 IMTS 1 ***DATA USED*** CEB B0TH1 418. 3r550244 492845. 718.475. 696822. 7 6(041 562505 B2 BOTH 26:125, 55309. 42520. 35500. 24840 . 12816. 700 CS BOTH 6350+ 239045. 323804. 470506. 428491. 457366. 321109. 198A4. 213841. 1.4' 3714. 151889. 114971. 1 1.17517. 3L 747. ' ESTIMAT ION OF F ER T ILITY USI N G I N FORMAT1* ON ojN ALL BIRTHS. (SEX =- B0TH-) AGE NUMBER OF CHILDREN B IR TH11S REPO '0R TED-. R EPO-0R TEDL AD JUSTED P ( I)/ I) GROUP W 0 m E N -VER BORi-NE IN YEAR ~'(I) . FERTILITY (I) ,1 5 1989S '4:18 -> 2ý1 2 5. 0 2842 0.13:16 .0396 2 2341. 3024. 5'09. .60 0. 2586 1.4012 1 .9 3 :·· 1437114 > 492845 4504 349 4 295 2.8E,6 71 1 .1961 4 15.1 30 470 0.2337 4.2 41. :1446 -5 J14971. 6 96"22 2 4 43 6060 0 C,,.2161 5. 2,3(1):1 1.1479 6 .1.7 5174 7> 60C-41. 12816, 6.10 ->3.091 5,ý' 88 74 , 11.107 7 - 1747 6 . 7007. 68k. ø 0. 1 0857 : '.34 1 .0500 ADJUSTED FERTILITY SCI-IfHDULE F lOR DIE'R T ADJUSTMIIENT FCi1TJRS P2--F2 F- P3/F3,, AVRG P2F3 P3/F P2 /P4/FG) ADJUSTM E NT f.CTR .000 . 1.18.49 1.1905 1 C.89 51...752 AG3E i R OUP F .F(I) F F I) F i 1 . C7 0115 0.1814 0.7 2, 0266h3 .3'156 0 ý.317:1 .316 (j.33) 3 029`?39 0 3-4 83 0.3 499J* 0.34 -,.3.4 54 .4 0.2309 0.2'73 6 0.2749 0`27 47 .74 5 0.I20ø9 6 0ý.248-4 G-.249I.6 .24`7.- 0.246A.«ýg' 6 0.0959 0.1136 0.114 .114 011 7 0.ý08E315 0.09615 r)09 70 0.0 969 00 F-ERTIITY 6,6534 78 3.4 7.9203 7.'13 9 7 89 BIRF,TH RATE 0.0501 0.0 59,4 G,005'9 7 0 056 059 "r S 0TI N1,i -163- Tab3 i 3 1A contin.lL,'i ~-------------- S TIMA TION OF CH[LD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EGUfT,Or1 . MLT REGION NRTH SEX = BOTH P(I)/P(2) =0.1712 P<2)/P(3) = 0.4841 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS Q VALUES FOR ML<X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO G(1) Q(2) 0(3) Q(5) BORN ML (X) m 56418. 36350. 1 0.3637 0.40 1.08 0.3637 0.4.482 0.4999 0.5681 2 2m 355024. 239045. 2 0.3229 4.43a7 2,34 0.2554 0.3229 0.3643 0.4188 3: N3 492845, 323804. 3 0.3245 5.85 ,o 4.16 0.2255 0.2869 0.3245 0.3740 4 t 718475. 4705069 5 0.3392 7.04 46?.33 0.2030 0.2593 0.2938 0.3392 5 W1 696822. 428491. 10 0.4026 6.544143.74 0.2122 0.2707 0.3065 0.3536 6 " 766041. 457366. 15 0.4159 6865r11.37 0.2063 0.2634 0.2983 0.3443 7 W.l562505. 321109. 20 0.4347 7,015.1314.24 0.2035 0.2599 0.2944 0+3400 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 5.45 0.2337 0.2968 0.3354 0.3864 MALAWI PCS NATIONAL BRASS ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORtALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION SOTH SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2> = 0.1712 P(2)/P(3) = 0.4841 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 01) (2) Q(3) Q(5) c,RN~ ML (X) 1 56418. 36350. 1 0.3517 -0.29 1.07 0.3517 0..4929 0,5579 0.6:119 2 35502-4. 239045. 2 0.3373 5,15 2.36 0.2375 0.3373 0.3832 0.4214 6 3 *492845. 323804. 3 0.3461 6.56 4.27 0.2152 0.3048 0.3461 0.3804 4 718475. 470506. 5 0.3515 7.62 '6.58 0.1998 0.2821 0.3200 0.3515 5 696822. 428491. 10 0.3995 6.95 9.16 0.2093 0.2962 0.3363 0.3696 6 766041. '457366. 15 0.4099 7.,09 11.97 0.2072 0.2931 0.3327 0.3655 7 562505. 221109. 20 0,4308 7.09 15.09 0.2072 Ø..2932 0 3328 0.3656 AVERAGE MOR57.4 0.2279 0.3234 '0 374 0.4039 MALAWI PCS NATIONAL BRASS ESTIMATION OF CHILD UORTALITY USING TRUSSELL '- EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = EAST SEX = BOTH P(1)/F(2) = 0.1712 P(2)/P(3) = 0. 4841 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS Q VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0 (2) Q(3) Q5) BORN ML(X) 1 56418. 36350. 1 0.3782 3.54 1.09 0.3782 0.4424 0.4694 0.4993 2 355024. 239045. 2 0.3400 6.85 2.42 0.2862 0.3400 0.3626 0.3876 3 492845. 323804. 3 0.3433 7.52 4.39 0.-2703 0.3217 0 . 3433 0> .3672 4 718475. 470506. 5 0.3471 8.20 6.74 0.2547 04.3037 0 .3243 0.3471. 5 696822. 428491. 10 0.3956 7,40 9.36 0,273'1. 0.3249 0.3467 0.370 6 - 766041. 457366. 15 0.4075 7-42 12.24 0.2726 0.3244 0.3461 0.3704 7 562505. 321109. 20 0.430-1 7.27 15.46 0.2761 0.3284 0.3504 0.3747 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL 6,89 ),2854 0.3390 0.3616 0-385 MALAWI PCS NATIONAL DRASS ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION WEST SEX = DOTH I(1)/P<2) Q.1712 P(2)/P(3) = 04841 AGE CHI.DREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS L VALUES lFOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO Q 1) Q 2) G(3) c15) BORN ML(X) l 5641. 36350. 1 0.3732 1.58 1.08 0,3732 0.4525 0.42'76 0.52. 2 3,55 239045. 2 0.3386 5.12 2.40 0.2732 0>3386 0.3676 0.'6 3 492840. 323804. 3 0.3408 6.03 4.34 0.2520 0.3136 0.3408 0."P 4 7-4 75. 470506. 5 0.3469 6.87 : 6.63 0.2340 0.2920 0.31 ? 0.3? 5 696822, 428491. 10 0.3942 6.2:1 9.Id> 0.2483 0,3091 0,1 0.3.67 6 766041. 457366. 15 0.4077 6,40 1»1.86 0.2.440 0.3040 0.306 0.3609 7 62505. 321:109. 20 0.4308 6.47 14.78 0.2426 0.3023 0.3287 0 359 AVER?GE MORTALITY LEVEL = 5.53 0.2637 0.3274 0.3556 ø3,O 4)Y - 164 - Table A 3 1B: MALAWI - Br:Q P/ and Child Survival Analysis of PCS Rural Data, 1970-72; Print-Out of AFEMO Programme * *1* * . MÅLAÅWI PCSi~ RU.RAL BRASS**k 13PTIONS- (DELECTE.D' DINA =1 TIB,ALD = T=0 IFAM =)ý 0 ISRB =,.,,30 IT *D Ao A USE D* CEB B-1OTH 175 313260 + 435620. '67220 417 16450. = 5370150 B1.2 BOTH 2..3.460 . 4 -784 04 36800 3 31015 0 4 22770 . 11960 -4 6 670. CS BOTH 32660S 0 . 207-460. 2 2 290 , -, 4.1 30 (y 3859 40,, -, (1.1 42232 00 'S 3l4.2-190 .1.82350 ý 190670' ,,,(' 126 5 00 ÷ .136i4850 J. C,3580 4 10 9710 7 7770 'T p 0 F TRPOP 370'5300 4 @ cå @ 12 @ ý, @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ e e E --1T-Ii 'E N lF FERT I...I-1.-TY UON ON ALI I RI- F • E .·= ..T: (31 . 11 . ." R. . ... -. .. F .- 1 1 AGE NUBRFCIREN BIRTHS REGRE RPRTfED A DJ UST ED P. I)/F( I (R-U WOMz, 1 'J11E N ::ÆR 1:BF' RN N YEA P yI F-f)111 f1:ER T:.I...11TY F (TE 25 0 c `!,75 0 J.283 0 2 3 2 1 0 <:96'7 2 190670'-ý 31.i32604 4?4, 1142 0251 ÷307 .27 3 1.26r5004 436c 60 3,4436 0..20 278 1.307 4 J1.36250 67220... 3050 4,729P4 0: 226` 4029 3 1.. 17 3 4.170 22770C 5 02152 5: .69 1.17 4 6 O 19710, 716450Cl 11960 6 504 0 ,*. ..090? 5 4 63 1 13`19 7 779T70 4. 53705 - 604 6:87 :: 5 6,44 7 j~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ LJI. E:uf El "-T l 1-(C -IE'D 1L C E - ADJUSTED FILT 2C··EDL F2 DkFEEN ADJ*TE (. FACT-RF` '2 F2 P' i· A 0 014,18 4 C . 1792 0 1,8,10 0 86 .7U7 2 0.257 ø.>3:123 :35 0 3L40311 40+42244 2 cl2,1 0 2 7 27346 0 2"?1 0,20 2, 0 :0 9 1 0 25215 . 5 49 0, 2544 :25. 6 0 EK9ó6 0 011 54 901165 0 116Y3 015 7f 0.81 0"95f095 0093 00 FERTLIT 6.5-3,39 7818,90 79 65 0 7 9497 7.,8664 BIRTHr1RATE 00493 0 15 9 5 0060 010600 t)005 94 . _______________ - 165 - -- - Table A 3 13 continued. MALAWI rCS RURAL BRASS ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = NRTH SEX =- BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.1723 P(2)/P(3) = 0.4771 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO Q(1) 0(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 51750. 32660. 1 0.3738 0.06 11.10 0.3738 0,4597 0.5122 0.5815 2 313260. 207460. 2 0.3343 4.00 2.35 0.2649 0.3343 0.3768 0.4327 3 435620. 281290. 3 0.3364 5.41 4.14 0.2344 0.2977 0o3364 03875 4 647220. 416530. 5 0.3518 6.60 6.26 0.2111 0.269: 0.3049 0.351 5 641700, 386940. 10 0.4186 6.04 -8.63 0.2217 0.2823 0.3194 0.3663 6 716450. 423200. 15 0.4242 6.60 11.22 0.2111 0.2693 0.3048 0.3518 7 537050. 304290. 20 0.4406 6.83 14.09 0.2068 0.2640 0.2990 0.3451 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 5.08 0.2411 0.3059 0.3455 0.3977 MALAWI PCS RURAL BRASS ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = SOTH SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.1723 P(2)/P(3) = 0.4771 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN . ML(X) 1 51750. 32660. 1 0.3614 -0.70 1,09 0*3614 0.5057 0.5722 0.6274 2 313260. 207460. 2 0,3492 4.67 2.36 0.2458 0.3492 0.3968 0.4363 3 435620t 281290. 3 0.3557 6.07 4.24 0.2226 0,3158 0.3587 0.3943 4 .647220.. 416530. 5 0.3642 7.14 6.50 0.2065 0.2920 0.3315 0.3642 5* * - - . 641700: 3.85940-.-q0.41.4F .. 643 9.03,Q.217-1 '0.4076 .0.3494 '0.3840 6 716450-. '423200. 15- 0.4*17 7 684 .80 0.2110-0.29B7 0.3391.0.3726 7 537050. 304290. 20 0.4363 6.91 L4.92 0.2098 0.2970 0.3372 0.3705 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 5.34 0.2344 0.3329 0.3782 0o4159 MALAWI PCS RURAL BRASS ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = EAST SEX = BOTH P(I)/P(2) = 0.1723 P(2)/P(3) = 0.4771 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE G(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 51750. 32660o 1 0.3897 3.17 1,11 0.3897 0.4549 0.4823 0.5126 2 313260. 207460. 2 0,3519 6.44 2.43 0.2967 0.3519 0,3751 0.4008 3 435620. 281290. 3 0,3555 7.10 4.36 0.2803 0.3332 0.3555 0.3800 4 647220. 416530, 5 0.3594 7.78 6.66 0.2642 0.3147 0.3359 03594 5 641700. 385940. 10 0.4105 6.93 9.23 0.2943 0.3378 0.3603 0.3852 6 716450. 423200. 15 0.4151 7.19 12.07 0.27B2 0.3308 0,3529 0.37/3 7 537050. 304290. 20 0.4355 7.11 15.28 0.2800 0,3329 0.3551 0.3797 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 6.53 0.2944 0.3492 0.3723 0.3978 MALAWI PCS RURAL BRASS ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = WEST SEX = BOTH P(,)/P(2) = 0.1723 P(2)/P(3) = 0.4771 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE ](X) MORT YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) Q(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 51750. 32660. 1 0.3839 1.26 1,10 0.3839 0.4644 0.5000 0.5406 2 313260. 207460. 2 0.3505 4,70 2.41 0.2833 0b3505 0.3803 0.4142 3 435620. 281290. 3 0.3531 5.61 4.31 0.2617 0.3250 0.3531 0.3051 4 647220. 416530t 5 0.3595 6,45 6.56 0.2430 0.3028 0.3293 0.3595 5 641700. 385940. 10 04094 5.73 9.03 0.2589 0.3218 0.3496 0.3S13 6 716450. 423200. 15 0.4155 6.16 11,70 0.2493 0.3104 0.3374 0.3682 7 537050. 304290. 20 0.4366 6.30 14.63 0.2463 0.3068 0.5336 0'3641 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 5.17 0.2719 0.3371 0.3660 0.+989 - 166 - * * : .* . ** Table A 3 1C: MALAWI - Brass P/F and Child Survival-Analysis of PCS Urban Data ÅLAÅWI j-~iUk BR A:r 971970-72;Print-Out of AFEMO Programme OP::TIONSý SELECTEDj: IANA . IBA = 0 INST = IFAM = 0 [SRB = 1030 IMTS = 1 S@ @ @ @ 2 @ @ Cl (1 @ (ý Q 2 f(3@f2 & (p @ @ @ @ @ *D ATA UsED** CEB BOT1-- 4663 4 4176.44 57225 71255, !55 122 4 99:. 25455 B.12 BOTH 6,65 7469. 5720. 4450, 200 85 -. 36,7 CS BOTH 3690. 31585, 42514, 5397.-6.> 4255:1. 34166. 181 FPO . 648 3171 1 7: 4 15039 9171 773777 4 424~7 ESTIMATN r: O jF FERTI.ITY J&SI. NG3 I:NFORMATION ON ALLBRTHS, A GE, NUMJBER OF CHI 111 L D LDRE N BIR 1.-T H s RiEPOR TED REPO:R'E0 , TED IADJUSTED Z I /F (I GRFUP WiF, 5OMEN lEV,'ER BORNE.-IN YEAR P)-FETILJITY •ViI * .. . SU.RV . - . 1 6 4 2..1703 038 7 2 2174 414:L 7 ;469, 1.0:24 0..323 1<.7960 1,*~0036 -6 77 4 9 J.4 + .80.4~ 0 ~2 23 J.~ 7 9 6C, 0C: 3 17ýý21 4 5 57 2225 5 -7 20 , 3 2 3243 0323 4.-4 5 1 1519568 10 39 9 1255 44!.. 40 4 7 0 :2959 5 + 03,5 0 4. 0 6 700 4591:. /856 6.5016.9 "E91 P.2/ F2 <ý PF: 3 9 AV,3 )ER,AGCsE P2/ F2, Pý3/ýF3 l: P 4F, '7 -7 2 -2 FACOR% 1 00 4 06 0 480 ý.3 0 ( 3:'116) k0- . 27 0 ,32 2 3212 3 4 0.29-i05 01,2915 0.:2,134 7 ø28 57,. 0.20 Q 0216ýý6 0.1 '7-4 02:123 0. 2131 02 094 6, 009 82 k) 09ff6 ,0963oJ 0 0966l: 0 1 ,9p,.;(*. 7 2 . 3 0 3 0.0 8:1 ) 0.. .f,; F'ERF,TI1lIT 1,1Y 7.271 747546.' 7 5 7-,3 8 7:é *"ý.0 5 7,44~713ý "IT RA 6 C)545.9 5.320 - 167 - -- Table A 3 IC continued MALAWI PCS'URBAN BRASS ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = NRTH SEX = BOTH P(I)/P(2) 0.1655 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5422 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) -MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) G(2) 0(3) G(5) BORN ML(X) 1 4668. 3690. 1 0.2280 5.72 0.93 0.2280 0.2900 0.3279 0.3779 2 41764. 31585. 2 0.2380 8.02 2.33 0.1858 0.2380 0.2699 0.3120 3 57225. 42514. 3 0.2354 9.56 4.40 0.1615 0.2074 0.2354 0.2724 4 71255. 53976. 5 0.2299 11.35 6.88 0,1360 0.1749 0.1986 0.2299 5 55122. 42551. 10 0.2301 12.72 '9.65 0.1185 0.1517 0.1720 0.1988 6 49591. 34166. 15 0.3104 10.38 12.55 01495 0.1921 0.2182 0.2526 7 25455. 16819. 20 0.3339 10.29 .15.48 0.1509 0.1939 0.2202 0.2549 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 9.72 0.1591 0.2044 0.2321 0.2686 MALAWI PCS URBAN BRASS ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = SOTH SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.1655 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5422 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) Q(2) 0(3) 0<5) BORN ML(X) 1 4668. 3690. 1 0.2213 6.15 0.92 0,213 0.3139 0.3565 0.3919 2 .41764. 31585. 2 0.2482 9.33 .2.34 0.1773 0.2482 0.2809 0.3080 3 57225. 42514. 3 0.2"3 10.68 4.53 0.1619 0.2238 0-.2523-0..2759 . '4 71255. 53976. 5 0.2--j3 12.26 7;20 0.1455 0.1969.042206 0.2403 .- 55122 42551; :10-: - 020. 13.48 '0. 17 0.1333 .0.1772 0,1975'0.2143 6. 49591. 34166. 15 '0.3088- 10-*73 13.28 0.1615 0.2230 0.2513 0.2749 7 25455. 16819. 20 0.333I 10.46 -.6.45 0.1643 0.2277 0.2569 0.2811 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL =.10.44 0.1645 0.2280 0.2573 0.2816 MALAWI PCS URBAN BRASS ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = EAST SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.1655 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5422 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE 0(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) Q(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 4668. 3690. 1 0.2331 9.19 0.94 042331 0.274 0.2975 0.3186 2 41764. 31585. 2 0.2511 10.32 2.41 0.2101 0.2511 0.2683 0.2874 3 57225. 42514. 3 0.2520 10.95 4.67 0.1978 0.2359 0.2520 0.2698 4 71255. 53976. 5 0.2387 12.15 7.38 0.1763 0.2094 0.2233 0.2387 5 55122. 42551. 10 0.2293 13.17 10.41 0.1588 0.1828 0.2001 0.2135 6 49591. 34166. 15 0.3079 10.68 1359 0.2030 0.2423 0.2589 0.2772 7 25455. 16819. 20 0.3332 10.37 16.84 0.2091 0*2498 0.2670 0.2859 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 10.98 0.1973 0.2354 0,2514 0.2691 MALAWI PCS URBAN BRASS ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = WEST SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) 0.1655' P(2)/P(3) = 0.5422 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 4668. 3690. 1 O'o2323 6.95 0.94 O2323 0.2900 0.3156 0,3448 2 41764. 31585. 2 0,2496 8.65 2.39 0.1992 0.2496 0,2720 0.2974 3 57225. 42514. 3 0.2491 9.61 4.61 0.1822 0.2286 0.2491 '0.2725 4 71255. 53976. 5 0.2374 11.03 7.25 0.1586 0.1991 0.2170 0.2374 5 55122. 42551. 10 0.2272 12.25 10.14 0.1400 0.1754 0o1911 0.2089 6 49591. 34166, 15 0.3059 9t81 13.11 0.1787 0.2243 0.2444 0.2674 7 25455. 16819. 20 0.3312 9.68 16.03 0.1809 0.2270 0.2474 0+2706 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 9.71 0.1804 0.2263 0.2467 0,2699 READY DELETE MALPOUT.DATA ENTRY (A) A235HS.MALPOUT.DATA DELETED READY ITf,T m:,i snmrr Y)vr - 168 - Table A 3 2A: MALAWI - Brass P/F and Child Survival Analysis of 1977 Census, National Data;Print-eu of AFEI0 Programme . MALAWI NATIONAL P OVER F AND CHILD SURVIVAL DATA OPTIONS SELECTED: IANA= 1 IBAD = 1 INST = 0 IFAM = 0 ISRB= 1030 IMTS= 1 ++++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + EL-BADRY'S CORRECTION ATTEMPTED: CORRECTION USED. COVARIANCE = 0.9994 INTERCEPT = 0.0021 THE POINTS USED RANGE FROM li = 1 TO 12 = 7 @ @ @ 0 @ @ @ 9 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ R @ @ @ R @ @ @ @ ***DATA USED*** CEB BOTH 6 138786. 506123. 82923 810639. 876958. 725277. 780327. WPB12.1314 BOTH .T119 .41TSt .2 o*4 01 3.15 .1,26S .001 36853. 71119. 64160. 38803, 28348, 13708. 7830. CS BOTH 104468. 367442. 572228. 535387. 559653. 447143. 462279. FPOP 280018. 254149. 233239. 161081. 144989. 109000. 113341. FB12 . 24264. 15764. 3030. 604. 241. 101. 70. 17S9'264. 39424, 14622. 6934. 5437. 4263. 4613. NSPA .'0774. .2465. 1242. 707. 622,' 492. - 548; ESTIMATION OF FERTILITY USING INFORMATION ON ALL BIRTHS. (SEX = BOTH) AGE NUMBER OF CHILDREN BIRTHS REPORTED REPORTED ADJUSTED P(I)/F(I) GROUP WOMEN EVER BORNE IN YEAR P(I) FERTILITY F(I) SURV 1 279423. 138786. 36853. 0.4967 .too 0.1319 0.2968 1.6737 2 253609. 506123. 71119, 1.9957 -Al 0.2804 1.4893 1.3400 3 232744. 829235. 64160. 3.5629 .Zo1 0.2757 2,9059 1.2261 4 160739. 810639. 38803. 5.0432 -0 0.2414 4.1797 1.2066 5 1.44681. 876958. 28348. 6.0613 v1 0.1959 5.2441 1.1558 6 108768. 725277. 13708. 6.6681 ms% 0.1260 5.9409 11224 7 113100. 780327. 7830. 6.8994 4sx 0.0692 6.5225 1.0578 ADJUSTED FERTILITY SCHEDULE FOR DIFFERENT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS. (ONE; P2/F2; AVERAGE P2/F2 3 P3/F3; WEIGHTED AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F3; AVERAGE P2/F2r P3/F3 & P4/F4) ADJUSTMENT FACTOR: 1.0000 1.3400 1*2830 1.2855 1.2576 AGE GROUP F(I) F(I) F(I) F(I) F(I) 1 0.1548 0.2074 0.1986 0.1989 0.1946 2 0*2853 0.3823 0,3661 0.3668 0,3588 3 0.2743 0+3675 0.3519 0.3526 0.3449 4 0.2378 0.3187 0.3051 0.3057 0.2991 5 0.1914 0.2565 0.2456 0.2461 0.2408 6 0.1154 0.1546 0.1481 0.1483 0.1451 7 0.0616 0.0825 0.0790 0.0792 0.0774 TOTAL FERTILITY 6.6029 8.8479 8.4718 8.4880 8,3036 BIRTH RATE 0.0478 0.0641 0*0614 0.0615 0.0602 - 169 - . Table A 3 2A continued MAkWI NATIONAL P OVER F AND CHILD SURVIVAL DATA ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS, MLT REGION NRTH SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.2489 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5601 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS Q 'VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO Q(1) Q(2) Q(3) Q(5) BORN ML(X) . 1lz7 138786. 104468. 1 0.2125 6.53 1.35 0.2125 0.2710 0.3068 0.3540 22U.*506123. 367442. 2 0.2505 7o441k I2.78 0.19 0.2505 0.2840 0.3280' 3 z41829235. 572228. 3 0.2821 7*5273054.70 0.1945 0.2488 0.2821 043258 4 Iots 810639. 535387. 5 0.3271 7o47705 6.90 0- 95 0.2498 0.2832 0.q271 5 'h,s9876958. 559653. 10 0.3740 7.47'w9,31 0.1955 0.2500 0.2834 0.3273 6 1011s 725277. 447143. 15 0.3925 7.60011,.88 0.1931 0.2471 0.2801 0.3236 7 "' 780327. 462279. 20 0.4096 7.79(7414o68 0.1898 0.2430 0.2755 0.3184 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 7.40 0.1966 0.2514 0.2849 0#3291 MALAWI NATIONAL P OVER F AND CHILD SURVIVAL DATA ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION SOTH SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0,2489 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5601 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO Q(1) Q(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 138786. 104468. 1 0.2032 7.38 1.34 0.2032 0+2872 0,3259 0.3580 2 506123. 367442. 2 0.263' 8*541- 4s2.80 0.18740.2634 0..2985 0.3276 3 829235. 572228. 3 0.30.: 8.317''4.84 0.1904 0.2880 0.3037 0.3334 4 . .530639.. 535387' -5: 8.34 1 . 01i6U719.0.1944.,Q.274'0 0"3107'0341 5 .376958. 559653. 10 0.3724 -7.8947i9.76 0.1960 0,2764 0.3135 0.3442 6 725277. 447143. 15 0.3878' 7.85z12.50 0.1966-0.2772 0.3144 0.3453 7 780327. 462279. 20 0'.4064 7,90(-15.55 0.1959 0.2763 0.3134 0.3441 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 7.98 0.1947 0.2745 0*3113 0.3418 MALAWI NATIONAL P OVER F AND CHILD SURVIVAL DATA ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = EAST SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.2489 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5601 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) Q(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 138786. 104468. 1 0.2314 9.27 1.37 0.2314 0.2765 0.2954 0.3163 2 506123. 367442. 2 0.2714 9.48 2.89 0.2271 0.2714 0.2900 0.3105 3 829235. 572228. 3 0.3034 8.96 4.97 0.2378 0.2a4-0.3034 0.3249 4 810639. 535387. 5 0,3377 8.52 7.36 0.2476 0.29.54 0.3155 0.3377 5 876958. 559653. 10 0.3691 8.25 9.96 0.2535 0.3023 0.3228 0.3454 6 725277. 447143. 15 0.3855 8.12 12.78 0.2565 0.3057 0.3265 0.3494 7 780327. 462279- 20 0.4059 8.02 15.92 0.2586 0,3082 0.3291 0.3522 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 0.66 0.2445 0.2918 0.3117 0.3337 MALAWI NATIONAL P OVER F AND CHILD SURVIVAL DATA ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = WEST SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) 0.2489 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5601 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) Q(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 138786. 104468. 1 0.2218 7.48 1.36 0.2216 0.2772 0.3018 0.3298 2 506123. 367442. 2 0.2671 7,90 2.86 0.2134 0.2671 0.2908 0.3179 3 829235. 572228. 3 0.2997 7.56 4.91 0.2202 0.2753 042997 0.3275 4 810639. 535387. 5 0.3365 7,24 7.24 0.2266 0.2830 0.3080 0.3365 5 876958. 559653. 10 0.3668 7.09 9.73 0.2294 0.2865 0,3118 0.3405 6 725277. 447143. 15 0*3846 7.13 12.36 0.2287 0.2856 0.3108 0.3395 7 780327, 462279. 20 0.4055 7+25 15.20 0.2263 0.2927 0.3076 0.3361 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL 7.38 0.2238 0.2796 0.3044 0.3325 - 170 - Table A 3 2A continued MALAWI NATIONAL OVIER F AND CHILD SURVIVAIL DATA ESTIMATION OF AN ODJUSTMENT FACTOR USING INFORMATION ON FIRST DIRTHS. (SEX = .O8TH) A E NUMBEER OF ZERO FIIRST REPORTE:D REPORTED F C I) PY I/I) GROUP WOMEN PARITY BI RTHS P()F1ERTILITY 1 WOMEN 1 279423. 187264. 24264. 0.3298 0.0868 0.2101 1.5702 2 253609 39424. 15764. 0.8445 0.0622 0.6444 1.3106 3 232744. 1.4622. 3030. 0.9372 0.0130 0.7974 1.1753 4 160739 . 6934. 604. 0. 9569 0.0038 0. 8245 :1 .1605 5 144681. 5437. 2.41. 0.9624 0.0017 0.8345 1.1533 6 108768. 4263. 101. 0.9608 0.0009 0.8391 1.1450 7 113100. 4613. 70. 0.9592 0.0006 0.8440 : 4 ADJUSTED FERTILITY SCHEDULE FOR DIFFERENT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS (ONEI1 P2/F2 AVERAGE P2/F2 3 P3/F30 WEIGHTED AVERAGE P.F2 :.P3/F3 AERAGE P2/F2. P3/F3 I P4/1F4) ADIUSTHENYT .•~ ~ ~ ~ ~~i poTå-p :. 00 - -'.~: . 1.42n30 .. 1..2459.Y -...1155, AB.E GROUP' F (I);` F(I) F (I) F (I F(= I) . 0.1039 0.1362 0.1291 0.1294 0.1263 2 0.0469 0.0615 003 0.:.05.4 00570 3 0.0116 0.0152 0.01.45 0.0145 0.0141 4 0 . 0036 0 . 0047 0.. 44 0.004.4 0.0043 5 0001.6 0.0021 0.0020 0.0020 0.0020 6 0.0009 00012 0.0012 0.0012 0.0011 7 0 . 0005 0. 000 0 .0006 0 . 0006 0.0006 PROPORTION OF MOTHER9 0.8449 01.073 1.0502 1.0527 1.0270 -171- Table A 3 2B: MATAWI - Brass P/F and Child Survival Analysis of 1977 Census Rural DataiPrint-Out of AFEMO Programme MALAWI RURAL P OVER F ETC OPTIONS SELECTED: IANA =1 IBAD = 1 INST =0 IFAM =0 ISRB= 1030 IMTS =1 + + + + +-+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + EL.-BADRY'S CORRECTION ATTEMPTED: CORRECTION USED. COVARIANCE = 0.9989 INTERCEPT = 0.0018 THE POINTS USED RANGE FROM Il = 1 TO 12 = 7 + + + + + + + + + + ++ + ++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ***DATA USED*** CEB BOTH 129424. 461236. 759457. 749103. 819379. 685003. 747291. B12 BOTH 34131. 64332. 58448. 35704. 26426. 12988. 7495. 1 CS BOTH 96826. 330704. 516718. 487478. 516465. 418117. 439653./ FPOP 256543. 229157o 212274. 148219. 135074. 102638. 108185. FB12 22453. 14170. 2747. 548. 222. 94. 67, / ZCEB 170382. 34370. 13050. 6307. 5026. .3977. 4351. NSPA . . 430.* 914173 1017. A 594. '519.' 494. TPOP 5076802+ J @ @ @ @ @ @ e @ @ @ @ @ 0 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ESTIMATION OF FERTILITY USING INFORMATION ON ALL BIRTHS# (SEX = BOTH) AGE NUMBER OF CHILDREN BIRTHS REPORTED REPORTED ADJUSTED P(I)/F(I) GROUP WOMEN EVER BORNE IN YEAR P(I) FERTILITY F(I) SURV 1 256082. 129424. 34131. 0.5054 0.1333 0.3002 1.6837 2 228745. 461236. 64332. 2.0164 0.2812 1.4991 1.3451 3 211893. 759457. 58448* 3.5842 0.2758 2.9177 1.2284 4 147953. 749103.' 35704. 5.0631 0.2413 4.1913 1,2080 5 134831. 819379. 26426. 6*0771 0+1960 5.2552 1.1564 6 102454* 685003t 12988. 6.6860 0.1268 5.9551 1.1227 7 107991. 747291. 7495. 6.9200 0.0694 6.5386 1.0583 ADJUSTED FERTILITY SCHEDULE FOR DIFFERENT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS. (ONE; F2/F2; AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F3; WEIGHTED AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F3; AVERAGE P2/F2p P3/F3 & P4/F4) ADJUSTMENT FACTOR: 1.0000 1.3451 1.2867 1.2890 1.2605 AGE GROUP F(I) F(I) F(I) F(I) F(I) 1 0.1563 0.2103 0.2011 0.2015 0*1970 2 0.2860 0t3847 0.3680 0*3686 0.3605 .3 0.2744 0.3691 0.3531 0.3537 0.3459 4 0.2377 0.3198 0.3059 0,3064 0.2997 5 0.1916 0.2577 0.2465 0.2469 0.2415 6 0.1161 0.1562 0.1494 0.1497 0.1464 7 0.0617 0.0830 0.0794 0.0796 0.0778 TOTAL FERTILITY 6.6192 8,9032 8.5171 8+5319 8.3435 BIRTH RATE 0.0480 0.0645 0.0617 0.0618 0.0605 - 172 - Table A 3 2B continued HALAWI RURAL P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = NRTH SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.2506 P(2)/P(3) 0.5626 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO Q(1) 0(2) 0(3) G(5) BORN ML(X) 1 129424. 96826. 1 0.2157 6.36 1.36 0.2157 0.2749 0.3112 0.3589 2 461236. 330704. 2 0.2582 7,09%%2.79 0.2021 0.2582 0.2926 0.3378 3 759457. 516718. 3 0.2905 7,1771034.72 0.2006 0.2564 0.2905 0.3355 4 749103. 487478. 5 0.3362 7.151016.92 0.2011 0.2569 0.2911 0.3362 5 819379. 516465. 10 0.3819 7.21a0k 9.33 0.2000 0.2556 0.2997 0.3345 6 685003. 418117. 15 0.3985 7.4103511.90 0.1965 0*2513 0.2848 0,3289 7 747291. 439653. 20 0.4135 7.671'.514.70 0.1919 0.2456 0.2784 0.3217 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 7.15 0.2010 0.2569 0.2910 0.3361 MALAWI RURAL P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = SOTH SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.2506 P(2)/P(3) 0.5626 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 129424. 96826. 1 0.2062 7.17 1.35 0.2062 0.2916 0.3310 0.3636 2 461236. 330704. 2 0.2716 8.13-.'i2.81 0.1928 0.2716 0.3079 0.3380 3 759457, .516718., 3 0.3129 7.?11104.86 0.1957 0.2759 0.3129 0.3436 .4 749103-. 487478. 5 0.3507 7657 -210..1994.0.281,4 0.-a.19,3 0.3507 s ' .19379,*- 5164656.10 0:3803 .7,51MT9.78 0.1999 0.2822 0.3201 0.3516 6 685003. 418117. 15 0.3938 7.65o;:12.53 0.1994 0.2816 0.3194 0.3508 7 747291. 439653. 20 0.4103 7.77:-15.58 0.1977 0.2790 0.3165 0.3476 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 7.70 0.1987 0.2805 0.3181 0.3494 MALAWI RURAL P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION EAST SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) 0.2506 F(2)/P(3) = 0.5626 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE C(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) Q(5) BORN ML(X) 1 129424. 96826. 1 0.2351 9.09 1.37 0.235:1 0.2808 0.3000 0.3213 2 461236. 330704. 2 0.2799 9.13 2.90 0.2343 0.2799 0.2990 0.3202 3 759457. 516718. 3 0.3126 8.62 4.99 0.2453 0.2927 0.3126 0.3347 4 749103: 487478. 5 0.3472 8.19 7.38 02548 0.3038 0.3244 0.3472 5 819379. 516465. 10 0,3770 7,99 9.99 0.2592 0.3089 0.3298 0.3530 6 685003. 418117. 15 0.3915 7.92 12.81 0.2608 0.3108 0.3318 0.3550 7 747291t 439653. 20 0.4098 7.90 15.95 0.2614 0.3115 0.3325 0,3558 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 8.41 0.2501 0.2983 0.3185 0.3409 MALAWI RURAL P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = WEST SEX = BOTH P(I)/P(2) = 0.2506 P(2)/P(3) 0.5626 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO Q(L) . 0(2). 0(3) "CS) BORN ML(X) 1 129424. 96826. 1 0.2252 7o30 1.37 0.2252 0.2814 0.3062 0.3346 2 461236. 330704. 2 0.2754 7.55 2.87 0.2203 0.2754 0.2998 0.3276 3 759457. 516718. 3 0.3087 7.21 4.92 0.2271 0.2837 0.3087 0.3373 4 749103, 487478. 5 0.3459 6.91 7.26 0,2332 02911 0,3167 0.3459 5 819379. 516465. 10 0.3746 6.84 9.76 0.2347 0.2929 0.3186 0,3480 6 685003. 418117. 15 0.3906 6.94 12.39 0.2326 0.2903 0.3158 0.3450 7 747291, 439653. 20 0.4093 7.13 15.23 0.2287 0.2856 0.3108 0+3395 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL 7,13 0.2288 0.2857 0.3109 0.3396 - 173 - Table A 3 2B continued MALAWI RURAL P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF AN ADJUSTMENT FACTOR USING INFORMATION ON FIRST IRTIS. (SEX = BOTII G* GE NUMBER OF ZERO FIRS T REP0RTEri REPORTED F ( I) P I) /F I GROUP WüMEN P'ARITY B IRTHS P( I) FERTILITY WOMEN 1 6082. 170382. 22453. 0.3347 0.0877 0.2:122 .5768 2 228745. 34370. 14170. 0.8497 0.0619 0.6480 1.31:13 211893. 13050, 2747, 0.9384 0.0130 0.8004 1. J1.724 1417953. 6307. 548. 0<.9574 0.0037 0.8272 1.1573 S13483:1. 5026. 222, 0.9627 0.0016 0.837:1 .1.1501 6 102454-> 3977. 9-4. 0.9612 0.*0009 0.841.6 .1.1421 7 107991 4351, 67. 0.9597 0.0006 0.8465 1.1337 ADJUSTED FERTILITY SCHEDULIE FOR DIFFERENT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS. 'ONE9 P'2/F2; AVERAGE P-2/F2 & P3/F3y WEIGHTED AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F3 AVERAGE P2/F2P P3/F3 & -4/F4) ADJUSTMENT FACTOR . .+0.000 * >3:1. 1. 2419. I... 2445 1.21.37: AGE G RIP,CI F1~(I' ' F(I) F(I) F7(I) 0.1 043 -.17. .0:1. 0 .1304 0.1272 2 0 04Ik)66 G- 0.2 0 . 0579 0 .0580 0 .0566 3 016 0.015 0.014.4 0.014.4 0.01.41 4 0.0035 C0.06 0. 0044 0.0044 0.0043 5 0 016 0' 0, 02 0 .0020 0 .0020 0.0019 001.00019 0,0012 0.001.2 0 00:1.2 0.0011 0 0005 0.0006 0 0006 0 .0006 0 .0006 F M1: TI··lER M C.4174 1..",11 :12 0 . 0524 1.0546 1.0285 -174- * ~ ~ * ~ ~(* * * ** ** * ' * 4- * * -* * * * * -,k * ******~ Table A 3 2C: MALANI Brass P/F and Child Survival Analysis of 1977 census iALAWI URBAN P OVER F ETC Urban Data: Print-Out of AFM0 Programe OPTIONS SELECTED. IANA =1 IBAD = 1 INST = 0 IFAM = 0 ISRB = 1030 IMTS=1 + + + + +.+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + * EL-BADRY'S CORRECTION ATTEMPTED: CORRECTION USED. COVARIANCE = 0.9990 INTERCEPT = 0.0063 THE POINTS USED RANGE FROM li = 1 TO 12 = 7 CA @ 0 @ @ @ @ @ G @ @ @ 9 0 @ 0 @aa a aa a a a @ & @ @ @ @ @ ***DATA USED*** CEB BOTH 9362. 44887. 69779. 61536. 57579. 40274. 33036. B12 BOTH 2722. 6787. 5712. 3099. 1922. 720. 335. CS BOTH 7642. 36738. 55510. 47909. 43188. 29026. 22626. v FPOP 23475. 24992. 20965. 12862. 9915. 6362+ 5156. FBi2 1811. 1594. 283. 56. 19. 7. 3. 1 ZCEB 16869. 5025. 1554. 622. 414. 294. 277. NSPA 1357. 492. 225. 123. 103. 62. 54. V TPOP 470658. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 0 0 @ @ @ @ @aa a a a a @ * . . .* ESTIMATION -OF FERTILITY USING INFORMATION ON ALL BIRTHS. (SEX = BOTH) AGE NUMBER GF CHILDREN BIRTHS REPORTED REPORTED ADJUSTED P(I)/F(I) GROUP WOMEN EVER BORNE IN YEAR P(I) FERTILITY F(I) SURV 1 23328. 9362. 2722. 0.4013 0.1167 0.2592 1,5486 2 24835. 44887. 6787. 1.8074 0.2733 1.3875 1o3026 3 20833. 69779. 5712. 3.3494 0.2742 2.7857 1.2023 4 12781. 61536. 3099. 4.8145 0.2425 4o0640 1.1847 5 9853. 57579. 1922. 5.8439 0.1951 5.t362 1.1378 6 6322. 40274, 720. 6.3704 0.1139 5.7854 1.1011 7 5124. 33036. 335. 6.4478 0.0654 6.3287 1.0188 ADJUSTED FERTILITY SCHEDULE FOR DIFFERENT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS. (ONE; P2/F2; AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F3; WEIGHTED AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F3; AVERAGE P2/F2, P3/F3 & P4/F4) ADJUSTMENT FACTOR: 1.0000 1.3026 1.2525 1.2569 1.2299 AGE GROUP F(I) F(I) F(I) F(I) F(I) 1 0.1379 0.1796 0.1727 0.1733 0.1696 2 0.2797 0.3643 0.3503 0.3515 0.3440 3 0.2731 0.3557 0.3420 0.3432 0.3358 4 0.2387 0o3110 0.2990 0.3000 0.2936 5 0.1896 0.2469 0.2374 0.2382 0.2331 6 0.1040 0.1355 0.1303 0.1307 0.1279 7 0.0581 0.0756 0.0727 0.0730 0.0714 TOTAL FERTILITY 6.4047 8.3430 8,0218 8.0500 7.8771 BIRTH RATE 0.0464 0.0605 0.0582 0.0584 0.0571 - 175 - Table A 3 2C continued MALAWI 'URBAN P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION NRTH SEX = BOTH P(I)/P(2) = 0.2220 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5396 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE QN:X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) (5) BORN ML(X) 1 9362. 7642. 1 0.1691 9.06 1.25 0.1691 0.2171 0.2464 0.2850 2 44887. 36738. 2 0.1704 11.61-542.63 0.1325 0.1704 0,1935 0.2240 3 69779. 55510. 3 0.1880 11.891"L4.54 0.1288 0.1655 0.1880 0o2177 4 61536. 47909. 5 0.2141. 12.051-16.76 0.1267 0.1629 0.1850 0.2141 * 5 57579. 43188. 10 0.2585 11.620159o20 0.1324 0.1701 0.1933 0.2237 6 40274. 29026o 15 0.2858 11.27-911.81 0.1371 0.1762 0.2002 0.2317 7 33036. 22626. 20 0.3167 10.87114.64 0.1425 0.1832 0.2080 0.2409 a AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 11.20 0.1380 0.1775 0.2016 0.2334 MALAWI URBAN P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONSt MLT REGION = SOTH SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) 0.2220 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5396 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE QCX) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO Q(1) 0(2) Q(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 9362. 7642. 1 0.1625 10.63 1.23 0.1625 0.2247 0.2534 0.2772 2 44887. 36738. 2 0.1787 13.3915t2.65 0.1342 0.1787 0.1992 0.2162 3 69779. 55510. 3 0.2.019 13.24'o'4.67 0.1356 041810 0o2019 0.2193 4 61536. 47.909. 5 0.2230 13.06io-it7.04 .0.1374 041838 0'.2052 0.2230 ..55' . 57579,. 43188.: 10-0,'2573- 12. 33da 9-.64 0.1448 0.1957 0;2192 0.2387 6 40274. 29026o 1 5 0.2824 11.74(rr12.44 0.1508 0.2055 0,2307 0.2516 7 33036. 22626. 20 0,3143 11.141;-15.52 0.1571 0.2f58 0.2428 0.2653 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 12.22 ,. 0.1459 0.1976 0.2214 0.2411 MALAWI URBAN P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION EAST SEX = BOTH F(1.)/P(2) = 0.2220 P(2)/P(3) 0.5396 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) Q(5) BORN ML(X) 1 9362. 7642. 1 0.1807 11.90 1.26 0.1.807 0.2148 0.2292 0.2451 2 44887, 36738. 2 0.1827 13.42 2.73 0.1546 0.1827 0.1945 0.2076 3 69779. 55510. 3 0.2013 13.12 4.80 0,1597 0.1890 0.2013 0.2149 4 61536. 47909. 5 0.2207 12.88 7.20 0.1637 0.1939 0.2066 0.2207 5 57579. 43188. 10 0.2551 12.20 9.85 0.1755 0.2085 0.2223 0.2377 6 40274. 29026. 15 0.2808 11.62 12472 01856 0.2210 0.2358 0,2523 7 33036. 22626. 20 0.3139 11.00 15.89 0.1969 0.2349 0.2508 0.2685 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 12.31 0.1736 0.2062 0.2198 02349 MALAWI URBAN P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = WEST SEX = BOTH F(1)/P(2) = 0.2220 P(2)/P(3) = 0,5396 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 9362. 7642. 1 0.1753 10.01 1.26 0.1753 0.2200 0.2398 0.2623 2 44887. 36738. 2 0.1805 11.98 2.70 0.3440 0.1805 0.1968 0.2152 3 69779. 55510. 3 0.1991 11.87 4.74 0.1457 0.1827 0.1991 0,2178 4 61536. 47909. 5 0.2200 11.78 7.09 0.1471 0.1845 0.2011 0,2200 5 57579. 43188. 10 0.2536 11,20 9.63 0.1.561 0.1959 0.2135 0,2336 6 40274, 29026. 15 0.2802 10*75 12.31 0.1632 0.2048 0.2233 0.2443 7 33036. 22626, 20 0.3137 10.29 15.17 0.1707 0.2142 0.2335 0.2555 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 11.13 0.1571 0.1972 0+2150 02352 - 176 - Table A 3 2C continued MALAW[i URBAN P CIVER-*F ETC ESTIIATION Of- AN ADJUSTJENT FACTOR USING INFORMATION ON FIRST BIRTHS. (SIEX =BOTH) AG1E NUMEiR OF Z1ERO F*RST REPORTED REPORTED F(I) P( /F() GROUP .WOMEN IDARI-TY BIRTHS P(i) :ERTILITY 1 ~WOMEN 1 23328. 16869. 1811< 0.2769 0.0776 0.1863 1.4861 2 24835. 5025. 1594. 0.7977 0.0642 0.6042 1.3201 3 20833. 1554. 283. 0<9254 0.0136 0>7625 1+2136 4 12731. 622. 561. 0.951.3 0.'0044 04.7934 I1 9 199i 5 9853. 414. 19 0.9580 0.0019 0.8053 131896 6 6322. 29.4÷ 7. 0.9535 0.0011 0.8113 1,1753 7. 5124. 277 3. 0.9460 04+0006 0.162 1.1591 ADJUSTED FERTILITY SCH.·EDULE FOR DIFFERENT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS. (0NE P2/F20 AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F39 WEIGHTED AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F3 AVERAGE P2/F2 P3/F3 & P4/F4) ADJUSTMENT Fe;CTOR: 1.0000 1. 3201, .2668- 1.2715 141443 - A(E 1G U 1. I) .f,T) F(1I) FkI) . 00941 0.1243 0.1193 061197 0.1171 2 0496 0.0655 0 0629 0,0631 0.0617 00121 0.0160 0.0154 001 54 0.0151 4 0004 0.0055 0.0052 0.0053 0.0052 Q.0019 0.0025 0.0024 0.0024 0.0023 0.001.1 0.0014 0.0014 0.014 0.0013 7 0.0004 00006 0.0005 0.0006 040005 PROPORTION MOTHE f -1f.-RS, .3 1.70 1.0786 1.0350 0.0398 1 0 166 .- - 177- 8 it* ** ** * * * * ** ** * *1 * * ***** * * **** Table A 3 3A: MAIMI - Brass P/F and Child Survival Analysis: 1977 Census MALAW- NORTHERN P OVER F ETC Data for Northern Region: Print-Out of AFMO Programme OPTIONS SELECTED. IANA = 1 IZ1AD = 1 INST = 0 IFAM = 0 ISRB= 1030 IMTS = 1 + .+ . . .+ ...+ ...+ . .+ . ++ + .+ + . .+ + + + ++ + + + + ++ EL-BADRY'S CORRECTION ATTEMPTED*. CORRECTION USED. COVARIANCE 0.9979 INTERCEPT = 0.0028 THE POINTS USED RANGE FROM II = 1 TO 12 = 7 + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + + + + +1 + + + + + + + + + .+i + + ++ ***DATA USED*** CEBI BOTH 14832. 54493, 82450. 94093. 101887. 90421. 87863. , B12 BOTH 4614. 8287. 6677. 4835. 3304. 1586. 615. CS BOTH 11664. 41669. 60344. 66746. 70390. 60468. 55796. FPOP 37104. 27818. 22594. 18389. 16687. 13720. 13187. FB12 3275. 1797. 276. 60. 22, 12. 6. ZCEB 26703. 4352. 1222. 644. 537o 476. 440. NSPA 803. 217. 92. 71. . 60. 45. 45. J TPOP 648853. -ISTI .,o OF' IRTIL-IfY USING INÑFORMATION ON ALL' BI THS. (SEX = BOTH) AGE NUMBER OF CHILDREN BIRTHS REPORTED REPORTED ADJUSTED P(I)/F(I) GROUP WJOMEN EVER BORNE IN YEAR P(1) FERTILITY F(I) SURV 1 .37000. 14832. 4614. 0.4009 0.1247 0*2754 1.4555 2 .27740. 54493. 8287. 1.9644 0.2987 1.5005 1.3091 3 22531. 82450. 6677. 3.6594 0.2963 3.0168 1.2130 4 '18338., 94093. 4835. 5.1311 0.2637 4.4142 1.1624 5 16640.' 101887. 3304. 6.1229 0.1986 5.5313 1.1069 6 '13682. 90421. 1586. 6.6489 0.1159 6.2410 1.0589 7 13150. 87863. 615. 6.å815 0.0468 6.6692 1.0098 ,JJUSTED FERTILITY SCHEDULE FOR DIFFERENT ADJUSTMENT FAICTORS. (ONE9 P2/F2; AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F3ý WEIGHTED AVERAGE P2/F2 g P3/F3; AVERAGE P2/F2Y P3/F3 & P4/F4) ADJUSTMENT FACTOR'. 1.0000 L.,3091 1.2611 / 1.2661 1.2282 AGE GROUP F(£) F(M) FCI) F<I) F(I) 1 0.1481 0.1939 041868 0.1876 0.1820 2 0.3056 0.4000 0.3853 0.3868 0,3753 - 3 0.2949 0.3861 0.3719 0.3734 0:3622 4 0.2585 0å3385 0.3260 0,3273 0.3175 5 0.1924 0.2519 0.2426 0ö2436 042363 6 0.1068 0.1398 0.1347 0.1352 0.1312 7 0.0383 0.0502 0.0484 0.0486 0.>0471 TOTAL FERTILITY 6.7234 8.8019 8.4788 8.5123 8.2577 BIRTH RATE 0.0472 0.0617 0.0595 0.0597 0.0579 - 178 - Table A 3 3A continued MALAWI NORTHERN P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = NRTH SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) 0.2041 P(2)/P(3) 0.5368 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE G(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(XA GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) Q(3) ACS) 1 14832. 11664. 1 0.2074 6.80 1.15 0.2074 0.2647 0.2998 0.3460 2 54493. 41669. 2 0.2239 8.72727-2.53 0.1746 0.2239 0.2541 0.2939 3 82450. 60344, 3 0.2467 9.04374.48 0.1694 0.2174 0.2467 0.2854 4 94093. 66746. 5 0.2799 9.26iow6.77 0.1660 0.2131 0.2419 0.2799 5 101887. 70390. 10 0.3179 9.404,9.29 0.1640 0.2106 0.2390 0.2766 6 90421. 60468. 15 0.3370 9.4501141.98 0.1632 0.2096 0.2380 0.2753 7 87863. 55796. 20 0.3650 9.23-14114,84 0.1665 0.2137 0.2426 0.2807 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 8.84 0.1726 0.2214 0.2512 0.2906 MALAWI NORTHERN P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION.OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION SOTH SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.2041 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5368 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE 0(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN - ML(X) 1 14832. 11664. 1 0.1999 7.61 1.14 0.1999 0,2823 0.3202 0.3517 54493. 41669. 2 0.2344 10.082 2.55 0 .684 0.2344 0.2649 0.2901 82450. 60344. 3 0.2647 i0.09-tl"4.61 0.1683 0.2343-0.2647 0.299 . 940-, . 66746.. .5 0.2,1.4 .10..02o:;7Z,05Q.1690 .02355.0.;.2642 Q:2916 . 101*887. 70390 o 0 o03169 9.9501t 9.75 0.1698 0.2367 0.2675 0.2931 90421. 60468. 15 0.3334 9.8041112+63 0.1716 0.2394 0.2707 0.2967 7 87863. 55796. 20 0.3627 9.402*115,74 0.1764 0.2468 0.2793 0.3062 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 9.57 0.1745 0.2438 0.2758 0.3024 MALAWI NORTHERN P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION EAST SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.2041 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5368 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 14632. 11664t 1 0.2183 9.90 1.17 0.2183 0.2611 0.2790 02989 2 54493. 41669. 2 0.2388 10.83 2.63 0.2001 0.2388 0.2551 0.2731 3 82450. 60344. 3 0.2639 10.49 4.74 0.2068 0.2470 0.2639 0.2826 4 94093. 66746. 5 0.2888 10.26 7.22 0.2112 0.2524 0.2697 0.288S 5 101887. 70390. 10 0.3144 10.10 9.97 0.2143 0.2563 0.2739 0.2934 6 904214 60468. 15 0.3318 9.89 12,92 0.2186 0,2614 0.2794 0.2992 7 07863. 55796. 20 0.3624 9.41 16.11 0.2284 0.2729 0,2917 0.3124 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 10.13 0.2138 0.2556 0,2732 0.2926 MALAWI NORTHERN P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = WEST SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.2041 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5368 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO Q(1) 0(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 14832. 11664, 1 0.2137 7.88 1,16 0.2137 0.2674 0.2912 0.3182 2 54493. 41669. 2 0.2365 9.24 2.60 0,1886 0.2365 0.2577 0.2919 3 82450, 60344. 3 0.2611 9.10 4.68 0.1910 02396 0.2611 0256 4 94093. 66746. 5 0.2879 9.01 7410 0.1926 0.2415 0,2632 0.2879 5 101887. 70390. 10 0.3123 8+97 9.73 0.1933 0.2423 0.2641 02888 6 90421. 60468. 15 0.3308 8.93 12.49 0.1941 0.2434 0.265 0+2900 7 87863. 55796. 20 043617 8.66 15+37 0.1991 0.2495 O. )#S 4.2972 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 8,83 0.1960 0.2457 0.2677 02927 -179- Table A 3 3A continued MALAWI NORTHEIZRN P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF AN ADJUSTMENT FACTOR ISING INFORMATION ON FIRST BIRTHS. (SEX = BOTH) AGE NUMBER OF ZERO I:J F:RST REPORTED REPORTED F(I) P(I)/F(I) GR(P:1 Wk3M EN PA R ITY B.IRTHS P( I) FERTIL I1TY i. WOMEN 1 37000. 26703. 3275. 0.2783 0.0885 0.2138 1.3015 27740. 4352. 1797. 08431 00648 0.6623 1.2731 2253:1. 1222. 276. 0.9458 0.0:122 0.8168 1 . 1579 ' 4 1.8338., 644.> 60. 0.9649 0.0033 .0.3407 1.1477 5 :16640. 537. 22. 0.9677 0.0013 0.8486 1. 14-04 6 1.3682. 476. 12. 0.9652 0.0009 0.8528 . 1. .1318 7 :13150. 440. 6. 0.9665 0.0005 0.8567 '1. 1283 AiDJUSTED FERTILITY SCHEDULE FOR DIFFERENT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS. 0CNONEi P2/ F2 A VER AGE P2/F2 & P3/F39 4EIGHTED AVERAGE P2/F2 P3/F39 AVE:RAGE P2/F2? F'3/F3 & P4/F4) FACTOR< : f 0000 12731 1.2155. :1...2214. L1929 E G ,UP F(I) F(i F I F I.) F(I) 1 0 é.064 ..54 0 1293 0 1.299 0.1269 0:.0486 8.9 0.059:1. 0 :0594 0.0580 3 00109 1.139 0.0132 0.0133 0.0130 4 0.0031 0 . 0039 0.0037 0 . 0038 0.0037 5 0 l 1.0 3 0> 001.7 0.0 Q 1.6 0.0016 0.>001.6 0 00 9 0.0011 0.0010 0.0010 0.0010 7 ..0 003 0.000(4 C.0004 00004 0.0004 F M0 fPERS 0.5 73 1.0914 41.021 1.:0472 l1.27 引 Table A 3 3B continued MALAWI CENTRAL P,OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS* MLT REGION NRTH SEX BOTH Pu)/P(2) 0.2337 0.5553 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE O(X) MORTo YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO Q (1) U 4 2), Q(3) Q (5) BORN ML(X) 1 51200. 37157. 1 Oo2468 4 2 1,28 0.2468 0.3127 0.3530 0.4062 2 202168. 14OO53 2 Oo2846 5.9415o52.70 0.2235 0.2046 0.3219 0.3711 3 329936. 215924. 3 063151 6620-11114.64 0*2186 0.2785 0.3151 0.3634 4 3379446 210180o 5 0.3635 6.201-66.89 0.2186 0.2785 0.3152 0.3635 5 375228v 224240. 10 0.4145 6.176%,o9,35 0.2193 0.2793 0.3161 0.3645 6 303477o 175591o 15 0.4297 6.44-;N11,97 0.2142 0.2731 0.3092 0.3567 7 311840. 173272. 20 0.4452 6o69s--414.79 0.2094 0.2671 0.3025 0.347-1 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 6.07 O 2212 0.2817 0.3187 Oo3674 MALAWI CENTRAL P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD'MORTALITY USING TRUSSELLIS EQUATIONS. MLT REGION SOTH SEX = BOTH P(I)/P(2) 0.2337 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5553 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO Q(1) Q(2) Q(3) Q(5) . BORN ML(X) 1 51200. 37157, 1 0.2368 5.19 1.27 0,2368 0.3362 0.3821 0.4201 2 202168. .140053. 2 0.2987 6.84,sw2.72 0.2 110 0+2 987 043391,0.3727 3 329936. 215924. 3 043390 6-94 4,78 0.,-109 P 2986 0,3390 0.3725, :4- 337944. 2'10iSO .5 0 .V 9 1 6.'61 yj Vr . 19 0'4 2 1*45 0. 30'313 4 50 *0 . 3 7 91. 5 3752286 2242404 10 0.4130 0.2162 0.3063 0.3479 0.3323 6. 303477. 1755?1, 15 0*424 ? 6-60-5-12,61 0.2146 0.3039 0.3451 0.3793 7 311840. 173272. 20 O 4421 6.73c.,.115.68 0.2126 0.3011 0.35419 0,3757 AVERAGE .:,iRTALITY LEVEL = 6.47 0.2165 0.3068 0.3484 0.3829 MALAWI CENTRAL P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION EAST SEX = BOTH P(I)/F'(2) 0 2337 P(2)/P(3) = 0.55W AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT, YEARS Q VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO Q (1) A(2) Q (--T) 1.4 03 BORN ML(X) 1 51200. 37157o 1 0.2652 7.74 1.29 0,26,52, 0.3159 O 3372 0.360", 2 202168. 140053. 2 0.3066 8.08 2o8O 0.2572 0.3066 0.3274 0.3ti0l-s 3 329936. 215924. 3 0.3385 7+69 4.91 0.2664 0.3172 0 &JB5 0 362:L 4 337944, 2101eO. 5 0,3755 7-25 7.34 0.276e 0.3291 0.3512 O 3755 5 375228. 224240 10 O 4076 6.96 10,02 0.2836 0,3370 0+3595 0.3843 6 303477. 175591. 15 0.-J224 6.95 12.90 0.2833 0.331-2 O 3597 0,3845 7 311840. 173272+ 20 0.4416 6.92 16.06 0.2844 0.3380 Ot3605 043854 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 7.37 0,2739 0.3259 Q 0 - 7 1 MALAWI CENTRAL P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELLIS EQUATIONS, MLT REGION WEST SEX = BOTH P(i)/P(2) 0.2337 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5553 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS Q VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO a(l) Q(2) Q(3) 0(s) BORN ML(X) I 31200o 37157o 1 0.2563 5.84 1.29 0.2563 O 3187 0.3463 0.3-1770 2 202168. 1'40053* 2 0#3024 6,47 2.77 0.2426 0.3024 0,3288 0 35581? 3 329936 215924. 3 0.3345 6 26 4.03 0.2470 0.3076 0.3345 0+3650 4 337944* 210180. 5 Oo3741 5.96 7.22 0,2536 0.3155 0.3-429 OtZ741 5 371522S. 224240, 10 0.4069 5,8t 9,78 O 2572 0#3197 043474 0#17?0 6 303477, 175591, iS 0.4214 5*97 12,47 0+25.3Z 043131 OoZ425 0. i7-;57 7 31i840o 173272. 20 0.4409 6417 15+32 0+2492 0,3102 Oo=7' 0,3680 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL 6.07 Oo=12 0*3126 0-3399 ot370B -182- Table A 3 3B continued MALAWI CENTRAL -P OVER F ETC EST:MATION OF AN AD,JUSTIENT FACTOR USING INFORMATION ON FIRST BIRTI-S. (SEX = BOTH) A GE NUMBER OF ZERO FIR ST RIEPORTED REPORTED F ( I) P (I) /F ( I) GROUP- WOMEN PA R IT Y BIRTIS P( I) FERTILITY 1 WOMEN 1 104498. 71556. 8905. 0.3152 0.0852 0.2053 1.5357 96420. 13316. 6350. 0.8619 0.0659 0.6490 1.3281 3 87386. 4222. :1.097. 0.9517 0.01.26 0.8067 1.1798 4 62885. 2009. 200. 0.9681 0.0032 0.8307 1.1653 5 57544, 1569. 83. 0.9727 0.0014 0,8391 1.1592 6 41914. 1174. 28. 0.9720 0.0007 0.8420 1.1543 7 41983. .1329. 29. 0.9684 0.0007 0.8471 1.1432 A.DJUSTED FERTILITY SCHEDULE FOR DIFFERENT ADJIJSTMENT FACTORS. CONEý P2/F2, AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F3'y WEIGHTED AVERAGE P-2/F2 & P-3/F3! AVERAGE P2/F2y f3/F3 & P.4/F4) ADJUSTMENT F A.C T' 0R 1'40000 '1. 328 L 1.2539 1.2576 1.2244 AGE 33RO0UPF` F(I) FCI FCI),( F(I) F(I) L .030 01368 0.1291 0 ,. 295 0 >. 261 2 0.0499 0 0662 0 0625 0.0627 0 0611 l.0111 0.0148 0.0139 0.0140 0.0136 4 0.0030 0. 00.40 0. 00038 0 ) 0.0037 5 0.00:14 0.001 8 0.0017 0.0017 0.0017 6 0.0007 0. 0010 0.0009 0 0009 0 . 0009 7 0.0005 0. 0007 0. 0006 0 0006 0 . 0006 r f O TI- 0 O N F M· 0. 40 1.1263 1 60634. 1: 0665 1383 - 183 - Table A 3 3C: MALAWI Brass P/F and Child Survival Analysis of 1977 Census - MALAWI SOUTHERN .1- OVER F ETC Data for Southern Region.Print-Out of'AFEMO Progr OPTIONS SELECTED: IANA = - IA-D-= 1 INST = 0 IFAM = 0 ISRB 1030 INTS = 1 - + + + +.+ + + + + + +.+ + + + ++ ++++ ++ ++++ +++ + + + + . + + EL-BADRYIS CORRECTION ATTEMPTED: CORRECTION USED. COVARIANCE = 0.9990 INTERCEPT 0.0012 THE POINTS USED RANGE FROM li = 1 TO 12 = 7 + + + + +i+ + + + + + + + + + + + + +'+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + La 2 03 & @ @ @ @ @ 0 @ @ 0 @ e @ @ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I ***DATA USED*** CEB BOTH 72754. 249462. 416850o 378602. 399843. 331379. 380624. B12 BOTH 18288. 33115. 30462. 16797. 12220. 6104. 4023+1/ CS BOTH 55647. 185720. 295960. 258461. 265023. 211084. 233211." FPOP 138139. 129655. 123027. 79640. 70605. 53255. 58060., FB12 12084. 7617. 1657. 344. 136. 61. 35. ZCEB 89046. 21800. 9224. 4306. 3351* . 2629. 2864. NSPA 5907. 1415. 709. 355. 334. 252. 293. TPOP 2754891. @ @ 9 9 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ *ESTIMAT ION' Of -' EIRT-ILITY UGING INFORMATION ON ALL BIRTHS. (SEX = BO.TH) AGE NUMBER OF CHILDREN BIRTHS REPORTED REPORTED ADJUSTED P(I)/F(I) GROUP WOMEN EVER BORNE IN YEAR P<I) FERTI[LITY F(I) SURV 1 137966. 72754. 18288 0.5273 0.1326 0.3017 1.7478 2 ;129493. 249462. 33115. 1.9265 0,2557 1.4222 1.3546 3 122873* 416850. 30462. 3.3925 0.2479 2,7057 1.2539 4 79541; 378602. 16797. 4.7599 0.2112 3.8277 1.2435 5 70517. 399843. 12220. 5.6702 0.1733 4.7626 1,1906 6 153108. 331379. 6104. 6.2303 0.1148 5.3738 1.1594 7 57987. 380624. 4023. 6.5639 0.0694 5.9434 1.1044 ADJUSTED FERTILITY SCHEDULE FOR DIFFERENT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS. (ONE; P2/F2; AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F3; WEIGHTED AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F3p AVERAGE P2/F2p P3/F3 & P4/F4) ADJUSTMENT FACTOR: 1.0000 1.3546 1.3042 1.3055 1.2840 AGE GROUP F(I) F(I) F(I) F(I) F() 1 0.1546 0.2094 0.2016 0.2018 0.1985 2 0.2587 0.3504 0.3374 0.3377 0,3321 3 0o2461 0.3334 0.3210 0.3213 0.3160 4 0.2080 0.2818 0.2713 0.2716 O2671 5 0.1697 0.2299 0.2213 0.2215 0,2179 6 0*1044 0.1414 0.1362 0.1363 0.1341 7 0.0633 0.0857 0.0825 0.0826 0.0812 TOTAL FERTILITY 6.0240 8.1599 7.8565 7.8645 7.7347 BIRTH RATE 0.0446 0.0605 0.0582 000583 0,0573 - 184 - Table A 3 SC continied MALAWI SOUTHERN P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION - NRTH SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.2737 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5679 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) Q(5) BORN ML(X) 1 72754, 55647. 1 0.1965 7.98 1.47 0.1865 0.2389 0.2709 0.3131 2 249462. 185720. 2 0.2287 8.4811,112.91 0.1784 0.2287 0.2595 0.3001 3 416850. 295960. 3 0.2631 8.32n94.80 0.1810 0.2319 0.2631 0*3042 4 378602. 258461. 5 0.3067 8.23- n6.93 0.1825 0.2339 0.2653 0.3067 5 399843. 265023. 10 0.3505 8,254-5'9.24 0.1821 0.2333 0.2647 0.3060 6 331379. 211084. 15 0.3738 8.2114,11.72 0.1829 02343 0.2658 0.3072 7 380624. 233211. 20 0.3912 8.384i%14.49 0.1801 0.2308 0.2618 0.3027 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 8.26 0.1819 0.2331 0.2644 0.3057 MALAWI SOUTHERN P OVER F ETC ESTiMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = SOTH SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.2737 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5679 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 72754. 55647. 1 0.1773 9.33 .1.46 0.1773 0.2481 0.2808 0.3079 2 249462. 1$5720. 2 0.2411. 9.71--,2.94.0.1727 0.241.1'0.2727 0.298S 13,. . 4t6850-o ....295960. 1.3_Q.2938: *9.19.7z 4..95'0.1979.0 0,4507 0.2838'0.3112 4 -3786(12. 258461. 5 0;3198 8,84-137.22 0.1834 0.2574 0.2915 013198 5 399843. 265023. 10 0.3486 S.76-4-s9.67 0.1845 0.2591 0.2935 0.3220 6 331379. 211084. 15 0.3687 8.52o,12.32 0.1876 0.2638 0.2989 0.3281 7 380624. 233211. 20 0.3876 8.53t-15.34 0.1874 0.2635 0+29e6 0.3277 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 8.98 0.1815 0.2546 0.2883 0.3162 MALAWI SOUTHERN P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = EAST SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.2737 P(2)/P(3) = 0.5679 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE Q(X) MORT* YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO a(1) 0(2) 0(3) 0(5) BORN ML(X) 1 72754. 55647. 1 0.2080 10.42 1.49 0.2080 0.2485 0.2655 0.2844 2 249462. 185720, 2 042499 10.37 3.03 0.2091 0.2499 0.2670 0.2859 3 416850. 295960. 3 0.2835 9.73 5.07 0.2219 0.2653 0.223f5 0.3037 4 378602. 258461. 5 0.3163 9.27 7.37 0.2314 0.2765 0.2954 0.3163 5 399843. 265023. 10 0.3452 9.04 9.87 0.2361 0.2820 0.3012 0.3226 6 331379. 211084. 15 0.3662 8.74 12.60 0.2427 0.2897 0.3095 0,3313 7 380624. 233211+ 20 0.3870 8*62 15.70 0.2454 0.2928 0.312B 0.3348 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL = 9.46 0.2275 0.2719 0.2906 043112 MALAWI SOUTHERN P OVER F ETC ESTIMATION OF CHILD MORTALITY USING TRUSSELL'S EQUATIONS. MLT REGION = WEST SEX = BOTH P(1)/P(2) = 0.2737 P(2)/P(3) 0.5679 AGE CHILDREN CHILDREN AGE 0(X) MORT. YEARS 0 VALUES FOR ML(X) GROUP EVER SURVIVING X LEVEL AGO 0(1) 0(2) 0(3) G(S) BORN ML(X) 1 72754. 55647. 1 0.1965 8.80 1.49 0.1965 0.2463 0.2684 0.2935 2 249462. 185720. 2 0,2451 8.85 3.00 0.1955 0.2451 0+2671 0.2?21 3 416850. 295960t 3 0.2799 8.33 5.01 0.2052 0.2570 0.2799 0.3060 4 378602, 258461. 5 0.3153 7.99 7.26 0.2116 0.2648 0.28S4 0.3153 5 399843. 265023. 10 0.3433 7.89 9.65 0.2136 0.2673 0.2910 0.3181 6 331379. 211084, 15 043658 7.75 12,19 0.2164 0.2707 0.2947 0.3221 7 380624. 233211. 20 0.3871 7.83 15.00 0.2147 0.2686 0.2924 0.3196 AVERAGE MORTALITY LEVEL 8.21 02075 0.2599 02830 0.3094 - 185 - Table A 3 3C continued MALAWI SOUTHERN P OVÆR F ETC ESTIMATION OF AN ADJUSTMENT FACTOR USING INFORMATION ON FIR.ST B81IRT HS. (SEX = BOTH) A GE NUMBER 01F ZERO Fl.. 1 T 0 1:--IRST K:EPORTED REPORTED FI) P(I)/F(I) GROUP WOMEN PARITY BIRTHS P(I) FERTILITY I WOMEN 1 137966 . 89046 . 12084. 0, 3546 0 .0876 0.v2126 1. .4661 2 129493. 21800. 7617. 0.8317 0.088 0 . 6366 :1 >3063 3 122873. 9224, :1657; 0.9249 0.0135 0 .7855 1 J.5 4- 79541. ·4306. 344. 0.9459 0.0043 0157 11.1596 5 70517. 3351. 136. 0.9525 0.0019 0.8275 1.1510 6 53188. 2629. 61. 0.9506 0.0011 0,8336 1>1403 7 57987. 2864.> 35. 0.9506 01.0006 0 .8386 i . i ADJUSTED FERTILITY SCHEDULE FOR DIFFERENT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS. (ONE9 P2/F21 AVERAGE P2/F2 & P3/F3P WEIGHTED AVERAG1E P2/·F2 & P3/F3? AVERAGE P2/F2Y P3/F3 & P4/F4) ADJUSTMENT F)CTOR: .0000. 1 130c3 :2419 •. . 2436 12jt15 AGE RUPFI) An) F(D) F(I)1 F(I) S0>10-39 0.1.357 0.129 . .1292 0.122 20.0443 Q.0579 0.0550 0.0551 0.0538 30.0121 0.0159 0.0151 %.0151 0.0147 40.0041 0.0053 0.0051 %>0051 0,0050 50.0019 0,0025 0.023 0,.0023 040023 6 0.0011 0.o01 0.014 0.0014 0.0014 7 0,0004 0.0006 0.0006 .0006 00005 PROPORTI0iN, QF HOTHERS 0.6.35 1. 09616 1.0426 . 0 .95 - 186 - MALAWI PCS MATERNAL ORPHANHOODP MALE AND FEMALE 'RESPONDENTS Table A 3 4A Malawi: Analysis of Maternal Survival from 1970-71 PCS National Data: Print-Oit of MORPH Programe @ 2 @ 2 @ @ e @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 22@22 2 22222 * DATA USED * TORE BOTH 677330. 614716. 518203. 408148. 332996. 254967o 233090. 212320. 206212. 141446. 155745. 99102. TORE FMLE 348240. 313799. 262523. 218767* 203230. 148196. 136616. 119105. 114416. 74844. 84496o 48975* TORE MALE .329090. 300917. 255680. 189381. 129766. 106771. 96474. 93215. 91796. 66602. 71249. 50127. NORF BOTH 666148. 598718. 494383. 379398. 290115* 196214. 163169. 123596. 94311. 53560, 39423. 16429. NORF FMLE 342334.-. 304839,.- ..251211, .203978.. 171,921*. -112518. 97092.,: 67579. 52825. 27485. 18643. 7467. NORF MALE 323814. 293879. 243172. 175420. 118194. 83696o 66077. 56017. 41486, 26075. 20780o 8962. ORPH BOTH 6194. 13283. 22508. 26087* 39181. 56050. 67820* 86753. 110230. 86367. 115078* 81718. ORPH FMLE 3287. 7706* 10990. 13582. 29384* 34362. 38970. 51019* 61061, 47059. 64933o 41278. ORPH MALE 2907. 5577. .11518. 12505. 9797. 21688.- 28850. 35734o 49169* 39308 50145o 40440, B12T BOTH 26125. 55309. 42520* 35500, 24840* 12816. 7007. 0. 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 - 187 - MALAWI PCS MATERNAL ORPHANHOODY MALE AND FEMALE-RESPONDENTS . Table A 3 4A continued MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD. BRASS METHOD. SEX = BOTH FM = 28.08 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION CENTRAL W(N) 1(25+N)/1(25) MORTALITY 1(25+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN AGE N LEVEL 5- 9 0o97397 10 0.67745 0.96754 16.55 0.78962 10-14 0.95403 15 0.80505 0.94926 16.59 0.77572 15-19 0.92956 20 0.92766 0.92534 16.36 0.75116 20-24- 0.87123 25 1.02418 0.87368 14.52 0.66793 25-29 0.76957 30 108986 0.77582 11.34 0.52448 30-34 0.70003 35 113939 0.71646 , 11.57 0.48909 35-39 0.58212 40 1*12407 0.59760 10#55 0.39013 40-44 0.45735 45 1.07799 0.46349 10.31 0o29913 45-49 0.37866 50 0.90644 0.36691 12.52 0.26092 50-54 0.25313 55 0.66192 0.22359 13.52 0.16535 * * ** *** * * * * * ****** * * ** ****&A&&&& a t t t st t a4t s a MALAWI PCS MATERNAL ORPHANHOODi MALE AND FEMALE RESPONDENTS' MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD. CONDITIONAL REGRESSION METHOD. SEX BOTH FM = 28.08 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION AGE N 1(25+N)/1(25) MORTALITY 1(25+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN LEVEL 15-19 0.92956 20 0.92958 u -16,77 0.76380 20-24 0.87123 25 0.87413 J ~14.55 0.66900 25-29 0.76957 30 0.78271 --11,70 0.53738 30"34 0.70003 35 0,72285 -11.86 0o.49948 35-39 0.58212 40 0.61070 -,--11907 0.40826 40-44 0.45735 45 0o48325 T-11.02 0.32262 45-49 0o37866 50 0.39540 . :--13#53 0.29221 - 188 - MALAWI PCS MATERNAL ORPHANHOODY MALE AND FEMALE RESPONDENTS Table A 3 4A continued MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD. BRASS METHOD. SEX = FMLE FM = 28.08 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION CENTRAL W(N) 1(25+N)/1(25) MORTALITY 1(25+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN AGE N LEVEL 5- 9 0.97145 10 0.67745 0.96676 16.40 0.78548 10-14 0095691 15 0.80505 0.95213 16*95 0.78641 15-19 0.93240 20 0.92766 0.92614 16.44 0*75355 20-24 0.84594 25 1.02418 084804 12.79 0.60846 25-29 0.75925 30 1.08986 0.76361 10.70 0.50164 30-34 0.71069 35 1.13939 0.73067 0 12.22 0.51258 35-39 0.56739 40 1.12407 0.58050 9.89 0.36695 40-44 0.46169 45 1.07799 0.46906 10.51j 0#30576 45-49 0.36723 50 0*90644 0.35351 12.04 0.24620 50-54- 0*22064 55 0.66192 0.19759 12.35 0*13964 MALAWI PCS MATERNAL ORPHANHOODY MALE AND FEMALE RESPONDENTS MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD. CONDITIONAL REGRESSION METHOD. 1 SEX = FMLE FM = 28.08 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION AGE N 1(25+N)/1(25) MORTALITY 1(25+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN -- - LEVEL 15-19 0.93240 20 0.93257 17.05 0.77270 20-24 0.84594 25 0.84849 12.82 0.60950 25-29 0.75925 30 0.77242 11.16 0.51812 30-34 0.71069 35 0.73359 12,36 0.51757 35-39 0.56739 40 0o59527 10.46 0.38690 40-44 0.46169 45 0.48811 11.20 0.32840 45-49 0.36723 50 0.38174 13.04 0.27721 - 189 - MALAWI PCS MATERNAL ORPHANHOODt MALE AND FEMALE RESPONDENTS Table A 3 4A continued MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOODo BRASS METHOD. SEX = MALE FM = 28.08 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION CENTRAL W(N) 1(25+N)/1(25) MORTALITY. 1(25+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN AGE N LEVEL 5- 9 0.97661 10 0.67745 0.96838 16.70 0*79401 10-14 0.95108 15 0.80305 0o94624 16.21 0.76448 15-19 0.92628 20 0.92766 0.92516 16.35 0.75063 20-24 0o91082 25 1.02418 0*91389 17.49 0.76703 23-29 0.78388 30 1.08986 0.79278 12.25 0o55668 30-34 0.68492 35 113939 0.69663 10.66 0.45686 35-39 0.60094 40 1.12407 0.61943 11.42 0,42034 40-44 0o45194 45 1.07799 0.45665 10.06 0.29101 45-49 0o39150 50 0.90644 0.38216 13.06 0.27767 50-54 0.29165 55 0.66192 0.25349 14.77 0.19602 MALAWI.PCS MATERNAL ORPHANHOODY MALE AND FEMA:E RESPONDENTS MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD. CONDITIONAL REGRESSION METHOD. SEX = MALE FM = 28.08 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION AGE N 1(25+N)/1(25) MORTALITY 1(25+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN LEVEL 15-19 0.92628 20 0.92613 16.4i 0.75351 20-24 0.91082 25 0.91428 17.52 0.76800 25-29 0.78388 30 0.79698 12.48 0.56499 30-34 0.68492 35 0.70765 11.16 0.47477 35-39 0o60094 40 0.63042 11.85 0.43555 40-44 0*45194 45 0.47719 10.80 0.31542 45-49 0.39150 50 0.41074 14,07 0.30919 - 190 - MALAWI PCS FATHER SURVIVAL NATIONAL1 Table A 3 4B: Malawi: Analysis of Paternal Survival from 1970-71 PCS National Data: Print-Out of PORPH Programme @ a 0 La @ @ e 0 @ @ G @ a @ G La 99G999G DATA USED * TORE BOTH 677330. 614716. 518203o 408148. 332996. 254967. 233090. 212320. 206212. 141446. 155745. 99102. TORE FMLE 348240, 313799. 262523o 218767. 203230. 148196. 136616. 119105. 114416. 74844. 84496. 48975. TORE MALE 329090. 300917. 255680. .189381o 129766. 106771. 96474. 93215. 91796o 66602. 71249o 50127. NORF BOTH 657875o 578930. 478379. 353825. 258328. 171041. 124127o 90718. 60915. 31740. 21145. 6092. NORF FMLE 338204. 297581. 241135. - 188537. 155415. 96736. .-72562. 50957. 33611. 13377V' 8782., 3130. . NORF MALE 319671. 281349o 237244. 165288. 102913. 74305. 51565. 39761. 27304. 18363. 12363. 2962. ORPH BOTH 13477* 31862. 36832. 50545* 70333, 79863* 105767. 118676. 143084. 107945. 132861. 91790. ORPH FMLE 6657. 14929. 19651. 28403. 45555. 49419. 62705. 07146. 80045. 61202, 74794.- 45615* ORPH MALE . 6820. 16933. 17181. 22142. 24778. 30444. 43062. 51530. 63039. 46743. 58067. 46175. Bi2T BOTH 26125. 55309. 42520. 35500. 24840. 12816. * 7007. 0. 0. 0. 0, 0t - 191 - MALAWI PCS FATHER SURVIVAL NATIONAL Table A 3 4B continued MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD. BRASS METHODo SEX - BOTH PM = 32.90 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION CENTRAL W(N) 1(35+N)/1(32.5) MORTALITY 1(35+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN AGE N LEVEL 5- 9 0.94178 10 0.51441 0993274 16.03 0.71148 ' 10-14 0o92315 15 0.60392 0.90087 16.84 0.70632 15-19 0,866901 20 0.62652 0.83287 63 3-.15.58 0*62514 20-24, 0.77577 25 0.59732 0.73351 -2 a-14.02 0.51897 25-29 0o67084 '30 0.45943 0.59607 1.9 0-12*34- 0.39309 30-34 0.53253 35 0.25303 0.45390 . 3-11.92 '90.29351 35-39 0o42727 40 -0.05087 0.28869 \s-tl 11.37 0.18233 40-44 0.29540 45 -0.35547 0.19916 \'o:r-15.61 0.14677 45-49 0.22440 50 -0.53668 0.08820 N.A. N.A. 50-54 0o13577 55 -0.58508 0.01800 N.A* N.A. MALAWI PCS FATHER SURVIVAL NATIONAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD. BRASS METHOD. SEX =*FMLE PM = .32.90 .J:- .MLT.= SOTH' . RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION CENTRAL W(N) 1(35+N)/1(32*5) MORTALITY 1(35+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN AGE N LEVEL 5- 9 0.94832 10 0.51441 0.93385 16.19 0.71631 10-14 0.91853 15 0.60392 0.89607 16.35 0.69114 15-19 0.86182 20 0.62652 0.82555 15.05 0.60774 20-24 0.76472 25 0#59732 0.71964 13.22 0.49295 25-29 0.65276 30 0.45943 0.58701 11.89 0.37915 30-34 0.53114 35 0*25303 0.45397 1 11.92 0.29359 35-39 0.42783 40 -0.05087 0.28694 11.28 0.18046 40-44 0o29376 45 -0935547 0.13784 10,92 0.08535 45-49 0.17873 50 -0.53668 0.06379 N.A. N.A. 50-54 0.10393 55 -0.58508 0.04049 N.A. N.A. MALAWI PCS FATHER SURVIVAL NATIONAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD, BRASS METHOD. SEX = MALE PM = 32.90 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION CENTRAL W(N) 1(35+N)/1(32.5) MORTALITY 1(35+N) ' AGE GROUP N0 ORPHAN AGE N --- --LEVEL- 5- 9 0.93497 10 0.51441 0.93154 15.87 0t70650 10-14 0.92789 15 0.60392 0.90606 17.36 0.72272 15-19 0.87278 20 0.62652 0.84301 16+33 0.64974 20-24 0.79307 25 0.59732 0v75395 15.23 0.55895 25-29 0.69593 30 0.45943 0.60866 12;97 0.41264 30-34 0.53450 35 0.25303 0.45386 11.92 0.29346 35-39 0.42655 40 -0.05087 0.29087 11949 018466 40-44 0.29744 * 45 -0.35547 0.26799 18,56 0.22277 45-49 0.27571 50 -0.53668 0.11867 N.A. N.A. 50-54 0.17352 55 -0.58508 -0.00786 N.A. N.A. - 192 - MA4LJI MORPH NATIONAL Table A 3 5A: MALWI - Analysis of Maternal Survival from 1977 Census National Data: Print-Out of MORPR Programme * DATA USED * TORE BOTH 1071590. 813206. 560166. 531588. 442403. 429918. 301041, 271496. 199847. 214711. 144281. 475656. NORF BOTH .j 1064534.- 794691. 535938. 488525. 382805. 342574. 212333. 168229. 103903. 92229. 44822, 67830. ORPH BOTH 7056. 18515. 24228. 43063. 59598, 87344. 88708. 103267. 95944. 122482. 99459. 407826. B12T BOTH "1 36853. 71119. 64160. 38803. 28348. 13708. 7830. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *1* * * * * * * * MALAWI MORPH NATTONAL --TTIMATES. 'SED D'Ö ORPIANHOOD BRASS METHOD. SEX = BOTH FM = 27.44 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION CENTRAL W(N) 1(25+N)/1(25) ilORTALITY 1(25+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN AGE N LEVEL 5- 9 0,97723 :10 0.65173 0.97010 17.03 6, 0.80309 10-14 0.95675-ý 15 0.76548 0.94789 16.42 li 0.77062 15-19 0.91899v 20 0.87478 0.91227 :15,20ý, 0.71361 20-24 0.86529 25 0.95865 0.86246 12.74 0.64138 25-29 0.79684 30 :1.01151 0.79789 12.53 -' 0.56678 30-34 0.70533 35 1.04893 0.70952 11.25 0.47782 35-39 0.61964 40 1.02135 0.62177 11.51 · 0.42357 40-44 0.51991 45 0.96333 0.51660 12>23 * 0>36269 45-49 0.42955 50 0.78365 0.40383 13.83 0.30:147 50-54 0.31066-1 55 0.53976 0.23331 13, 6 0.17495 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * MALAWI MORPH NATIONAL * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * .* MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD. CONDITIONAL REGRESSION METHOD. SEX = BOTH FM = 27.44 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION AGE N 1(25+N)/1(25) MORTALITY 1(25+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN LEVEL 15-19 0.91899 20 0.91623 H&i g : 15. 54 0.72482 20-24 0.86529 25 0.86602 196s i 3 13.91 9 0.64953 25-29 0.79684 30 0,80310 %L 5'4 12.82* 0.57705 30-34 0.70533 35 0.71703 11 11.59 0.49002 35-39 0.61964 40 0.63597 j -, 12.07 0.44335 40-44 0.51991 45 0.53528 96 4 12,89 0 38611 45-49 0.42955 50 0.43717 it3 45 14.95 0 33981 州 194 MALAWI- CENTRAL REGIONo MOTHER SURVIVALt Table A 3 5C: MALAWI Analysis of Maternal Survival from 1977 Census Data for Central Region: Print-Out of MORPH Pro&ra=e @ @ e @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ La @ @ L DATA USED TORE BOTH 430777. 307589. 209500, 202651# 173742. 166956* 120808. 110173o 78939, 82549. 52791, NORF BOTH 428095. 300669* 200340* 186066* 149828* 132643. 853114 68106o 40661. 35398. i6O97o ORPH BOTH 2682o 6920. 9160. 16585* 23914. 34313* 35497. 42067. 3827e. 47151* 36694. B12T BOTH 139510 29717. 27021. 17171. 12824. 6018. 3192. 0. 04 00 0. 9 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MALAWI*' CENTRAL REGION4. MOTHER SURVIVAL* HokT# LITY ESfImiATE5 BA SED'ON b§F HANHoOD BRASS METHOD. SEX BOTH FM = 27.73 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S -PROPORTION CENTRAL W(N) 1(25+N)/1(25) MORTALITY 1(25+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN AGE N LEVEL 5- 9 0.97750 10 0.66316 0.97035 17.08 0.80443 10-14 0.95628 is 0478320 0,94801 16.43 0,77107 15-19 0.91816 20 0.89850 0,91250 15.22 O 71426 20-24 0.86236 25 0198808 0186155 13.68 0.63932 25-29 Oo79448 30 1*04666 0.79860 12.37 0.56ele 30-34 Oo70617 35 1.08951 0*71405 11.45 0*48517 35-39 0.61817 40 1.06736 O 62512 11.64 0*42821 40-44 Oo51509 45 1.01449 0*51634 12.22 0.36237 45-49 Oo42881 50 0*83823 0*40877 14*00 O 30691 MALAWI, CENTRAL REGIONo MOTHER SURVIVAL, MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD* CONDITIONAL REGRESSION METHOD. SEX BOTH FM = 27.73 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION AGE N 1(25+N)/1(25) MORTALITY 1(25+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN LEVEL 15-19 0.91816 20 0,91672 15159 0*72619 20-24 O.e6236 25 Oo86512 13*91 0.64746 25-29 0*79448 30 OoSO373 12*8,6 0*57832 30-34 0*70617 35 0.72212 11.82 Oo49829 35-39 0.61817 40 0.,63982 12*23 0,44897 40-44 0*51509 45 O 53631 12o93 0*38742 45-49 0,42881 so 0,44303 15.15 0,34659 , ' - 19S ° � жжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжж�кжжжжжжжжжжж.�� д�-.��" �fALA4!%, SOU7HEFN йEfiIf]iVo hФТНЕй SUйV%VЯI.. жжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжж � . . ТаЪ1е �, 3 5D: kfAL.A�]i ® Avalysiз of Маtегваl Surv3val frnffi 1977 Ceasus )7ata for 5ои¢heru Reцioa: Prfat�0ut of 130RP& Рrо�дrаикде С L t@ G G L С� С@[ L L@ L С� С@@ С� С@ L� С� С� @ С L@@@ G[ С G L� Q L С� ж I1f�iA tJaEl4 ж Т®�гЕ ВоТН - J'�i0051o 407501л �741СЗо ь59134а :?19�:?1. :::д69З• 148469о 131765о 97017о 108806о 73950о АloRF в17Тl� . 516607о 398�11а �62168о 23795б. 1fl9949. 177545о 104357о 815�0. _'� 507й7о 47019о �3696о ойРн воТн . 3444о 9�9оо 1ь9з5. �ь178. �9�72. 45148о . 441i?о 50�45о � 46�9®е 61787е 50�54. в1тТ в4Тн - � 18688о 33115а ь�046�л 16797е 1ыгл.%Оо 6104. 40`3е Оо Оо Ое Оо R 8 La G Сд С� L�P @ С� G G �@ @� L@ С С� С, С, @ Q L� С, @ С, С� Q С� @@ С� 8 L С С� 8 СА С$ � жжжжжжжжжжжжжжлсжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжж мА1.Аwто sоитнЕйи йЕета�о лчотмЕй suй�a�AL. жжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжж ' .. � , . .' .., . . ' . ' • ' - '' i�foFtiAL.II'У"Е'S'ГIiiATES-вRSEiI �1N oaP1iAЛ1H0oD; . . . '.� � •. • ' � RRASS t1ET1ioU. � 5ЕХ = воТН Ft� _ �7.25 , ' йiLT = StЭТН , йESPOidDEt�T'3 PRORDRTION СЕЛlТйАL WCN> 1(25+N)/1С�5) ЛfOйTALITY 1t25-ht�) Ai°аЕ GйoUP tdoT oRPNAi� AGE id LEЧEL 5° 9 Ое977`О 10 О�Ь4Ти83 Оо96981 16г97� Оь801S9 10°14 Оо956$Ь 15 Оо753ь4 Ое94704 16ь31 О,76743 15-19 Оо918�7 е0 0.85840 Оо91094 15.08 0о70485 дб-д4 0.86647 25 Оо9383� 0.86220 13.72 0,64081 �5°i9 Оо797�Ь 30 0.987s�.4 Оо796Об 1�е43 Оь5б316 30-34 1J.70289 35 1.02091 0.704b5 11.03 0.4b990 35°39 Ооб1868 40 0.98958 Ооб1768. 11о35 Оо41791 40-44 Оо5`287 45 до9?.800 O.SZ633 1�.2� Оо36`36 45-49 0.43234 50 0.74595 0о40376 13о83 Ор30139 �` ж� ж ж лс ж ж�г � лs �� ж лг ж дг ас лс ж л; �г �г �� яс л� �� лs яс �ь � ж д; .� �ь дь ль лs d�ALAW2 о 50UTHERt� REOION. �f®ТНЕй S�fйVIVAL о жжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжжж .; � �4oRTAl,TTY EBTIMATES вASED oN OйPNANH00D. � COND2TTAidAL . REGRESSIOid t1ETHODo , хЕХ = воТН Ft� = 27о:?5 �fLT = SoiH RESPQNDE�lТ' S PйoPORTIOiV АГЕ id 1( �S�N )/i ( 2.5 ) NiORTALITY i( 25i�Л! D АGГ� GйoUP АдоТ С1йРF9г41д LE�JEL 15-19 Оо91827 �0 0.91454 15о40 Ooi2003 � й0°'г4 0 о 866'�7 45 0 е 86579 1.�i о 96 0 о 6490д : 5-�9 0.797`�'b 30 0.80142 1� о 73 0.57375 30-34 0.70.'�.$9 35 А.7115? 11о34 0.48114 35-39 0.61868 40 0.63117 11о88 0.43659 40-44 0.5�287 45 0.53414 12.85 Оо38469 45-49 Оо43�14 50 0о43551 14.90 0.33788 � - 196 - � .1; !: ' 1: и .ц • ,ц . � ,г : . ь. •.А „ ,. :+ - � , t � м : � �р К �i, ��. �. j+� .,� гр. .i. :ii г. �ф. . :j0. >�: г�S. :%�i :{ 1�:. , iЛ %у4 :i`. �у: .'г• , ';� :у, �{�. '(•. :i+ ач •i: , ч•� 'г .i•• гi+. '�5 Г`1�'ЙI..t�iW �. i"`lJI'iI''I°� 1�!i`l! .I.01'`�i=1I_ • � L ��/ ql �.V �: в ;7f чь .i, ;, � r�i :i{ :i .��и ��� `�R `k 1�С }�С ;� ?� г�4 `.l •){ �' ,� •!f � •г. ;4 �.i: •.�ь :� ;. ,ц ;� ,А ' /�S i'У �1ч +1. '1ч 1 �i 1 :�'. :jч гjч. 1 ) 1 1 •!� �1• I 1 1 +1• л1• гjч. t :I• :1ч. 1 .)l !1. �1 �I�. 1' ! '1ч .r , TaЫe А 3 6As I+ц�AWI - ь�aag�sis of Paterr�al Sцavival fgom 1977 Census - Natianai %?а�аг Priпt-�hъt of PORPH Programme • Е� �� (г"� 1,7",М (,г3' Е9� �t; �.7.а �� L �г} (г] (Л (7 �� [г7 (� (г7 l:! � L� �' L+ (�1 С' l�? lг? l7 l'J 1!1 I'� (а IL) �.(? l?? 1Л (� 1ri �,г1 Ж Ii(�TF`1 fa:aL••.l.i ?к . т . Tf.J�;i::. .l'�1,��'�: �..+ �, :,-, м г••, i_ г_ �« � г•. ,� �� .1 ' г. '7 1.: �i �?'7 ' '? "7 {ч iw.'А �1 .f !,. ..� %' .'� .�. �� ..г �.�� i �'� �.S м �..} .�. �,1.•1 {� J s •J м1 �'J �. ti� � � г ,:1.ч_ 7� ч.! •'r ч:7 а • � "•г l. �г , �1 о '`� �,:.. • f f:? :г е .,_ . � �. ,S n .... . . г s � ��i� tS r� �' .1.. S •s:.? .L ь! :� г± J 4 .� 'У ь� I� м.! 0 '� !�'У rr "7 ь.! i !'�r_i�"M1�` .l?0 I �"� • г. r„ {� ..?� ^ry г � r.:' + [y t �� •••� [ �+, , �_ 7{.? .м3. ;'7 г) { в1 t (� г { ( . . , �у ��. {«� ч.! ч� •} � .wi } ! f � {,� Гь, w д �..! .1. '7 .L .i� ! 'v � 1.7 .�. V •».� {.З � в�''� и! ! } . .� л« I .7. "Т .I. �ч1 3 .� С.! i .L ��' _« . 1 .i� •. ? " LJ :% 4 ✓ ",'� �� i'? L7 i ,� о J г � � : rG5 !� . .:. ;:7 :ь' �ь� •� s ч� {� i.�i .�. � э ' е f.7�'.�::��«I ��f�.'-',� Е .�. ''i С5 �. ::1 г .« .1. ^� �. s.3 . .:э {')� t•} ч� .� а i3 L7 �:.! {� 1i ,r ,� ^i i3 f �7 а .1. ::� {{5 � J �г г � .�. .:� .: � ��t�'. �. ,�. а �. ^д Ci •'S .� в� о f n{'� i. r. .«у i_. .г .t � г r i� г т г^ •� • " .�::_s?.JC.�.� а .�,.!ь.}., ;�1:} � :�..�t:3.JiJ:�. : •'�,:.�{:S.I.,�.:г а С� :G �? 1« :EtE� •Г 1°1 . .'��«...а �} Cs �. •�• �w:�«i 5 �«�r "'+�.'�"�" 4 �.� t'] {з .'! •.:i о .' .�. .� 3. ? ь i.г �.� s'� t.� м .� ы2 s� 4: .а о ..» ia ::: .:} i'j а , j. г.) � а i{а ,:] J л. J о• �,� а iv' •г '�? е Е+~ э l�� i� ::f �r� �.»� Е.'} t'''�. (:.У �`7 (;? 1� �г} �9 �г? (iJ �,л [Л L (;з С!? l'.5 }� Е��«' I� Е� �7 �� Е:� i? ; t'г1 � (,'•} !Э {��i �'г7 j� �;•у �� ' •. • � _ . ... . • . . � . . , . . ' . . . � . . . . • , � , . . ' . ' . м. ;,i, i ,i. •:�, чь. •.г. .) чi, ..�. Ч, .и •J1 1 чу г ,r .ь i ,т� в�. вL а{ чi. ''i :уч :i: :1t .ri .:jy г�. .(в ��f �;'�i :,. .,, .� :� :�С i�1 .� .�. ;�� `•ц .;. :�i `.k. ;� ;}{ ijL :S, ;1� ;5♦ :W г,С ;�. .у. :,ч ��: :•iC ;)l' .}. .;.. 1"1i�1L«;'iй.I.C i''1,d1�:1''1•� 1'•!(�1•1 ;1:��1`�r��il... . . { .д: �,�, • .�, вц :гr� .�, ..r{ ,i, :k +�г ':� ;�; ' ,�( '( :k ,i: ,i, 7�{ :k� 'i� i ,i. :di :.k 'k yV :ы •.а �{ _.1� �� .ч� ..�• .i� .�, 1 'k у. ач :} � .�, г„ дч .i. ,i. .i. ,�. .��ч � :�С `� :7 .�. .iч :�: i � :1: г�I гР. i � .�. � •�. :�. �. '� .1 :�. .i. � :�. 'iiC ,�. 'i''1 l � 1�; "Г (�� 1_ Т'Г `Т L::а'Г .7. i"1 ��i .Т 1�, f:i ,(',t j=r :j 1_ Гг г`,:J �у,� �:"J 1�: Г' 1°1 f•�t iч.I {•д С! �..� .L� л ' r.:; �? 1�t .:] м'г I` 1 �.[. 1�..� Е.� 1 1.> � 1 �.:. � «.. .i.•у Е.1 � ��1 '"� �'� .«. �: ы� й ь�.J в? �11«.'Г := :�, (7 "i' 1-1 `. �a. �:5 �"� �_� 1`� �� ��. ! :1..I •::7 _ .. ' � ; ге• ,! 1 . . . . г.. � . ,:' ь� ;�. j�yl�E:i°;��yi'i�:;в..� :Ciilч.з i":1г:i�!'Т'1;t�11_ l�J �; ��! i :L : .:! rг?'? i :1. � °3:. ::, ? i'�Sh�F�.''Тiм1.«1:'1"'t� :4. в �•i`�! г ���r t:i 1::. t:s 1�� i:1 !..! l�' �.i �:l "(' i::1:;� �, ��..1 i�i iE! ��1 +�; i�. �( 1.« 1� '•,' 1:" L.. t:,� .«. ±'7 г 5 . . � � л.. '� ,1;� r1 ,,. д� �.' l? .L :у !.� � t: .••':! M1:! : ) ��'� ,ё. . � . � � r:� • ;) ч 1"� ;ti t:} i .. . . ' ti:г .ь • �:. « •.� i.. .�. � :�. „ъ (.а , . '�l �;;� r� �! �' i r" '� ;« '•�„х �,' {;г f t гг «э .-� � . .� ... �1 э +'7 ! ' � �Э :L :J чJ ! ; � l� :! .1 а l � .! s:} :i. . о Е • 4, а !� ,ь �. J ,I. fьп « у.... 1.. . . .., .�. :.'!' :i. :•'у ч? ч � .� 4J �у ч:) :,� 0 �•.) , ;:! %:i .г:} ч � :�. '•.� а � :) ::`., .,,! �:./ {ti 19 4 � � а .�. :�! : r� : � '• � i: т i.) .:} l•} ," �';! •�'.�.- �7,<1 i}. «.'i°�(:iw. г7�.^ i ��д�' ( .t�r '.�. . в')rг�_��.. �4fi�' «т� .i.t} .'г�у �"� �...�..,71:ri,! .... .. . .. S.J t«� в.! .w н! ч� в.! У l � ' У^.ti. f •k ..! .: 1.: ..»�,i.. ...:1:' �.� а {i'?:г.L.�„�,«ь .7jмУ г1 v л'�t'.�ь'�.�., l.� . �7t};г.`�йi.L '�S� �� .�.::} 4'°у.'� ;1.}.:�t.�.:�.ч:7�i. k� ,.i:.�._,:i.гyl i�ja:"!�.:i�::"ч�� ч�i�..! {.�г,�.�':ys:t::i.E. fj.,гA1't�i�}..« 1ЧЬ� А� .�.,:о`г�г'� �.. ....«ч_.гt;? •.�:i.,..4i1з' „ i¢,`�:�';I:r?j .,`.t�} ...�,? . ;L :�.'��.�7'' j..) ,> ;'_ry..<}:L'r��r' 'л5 :� :L,ii .г г::�г,; , �о'.' о ч;'t;1. t�•i:? ь' i ....nh:l f,}и..��«. ,�lf ty�«. y :-�мs 1 ri �?..Х.�..�..; . I � {.., 4 `� .� . _ •} <1 1 и , -ч.1i.. «Ув.� ..�.� •> �{'7:I. �i7 . л... .... ч:� ��ац �i�b ,L t.� � 1 �. ? •У .1. �::мt+� .�. п;.`^j....`itг� S� ...�} J��?i:{ �jS} ....i'i ч;.1w,�.i_�� �.� а,Т..:}.�..ч:.��:} 1'� � h'1 h {;•t ь i Ё, ::J �.J'. • �::! п.} ;� •. .1. .1::! ; � :�. ! � 7 . .. r.� г {;'г :I. i�:i а� i� �.? . �s.� :�. {°.? :: � ''. 1'•l •, t�'1 с 1'� •r (л1 , е 197 :k 4, MALAWI NORTHERN FATHER SURVIVAL .Tabld A 3 6B: MALAWI Analysis of Paternal Survival from 1977 Census Data for Northern Region: Print-Out of PORPH Programme La @ @ @ @ @ @ G @ @ La @ @ @ DATA USED TORE BOTH 120424o 978389 76398,, 69693* 49322,, 40166 31682o 29488,, 21848. 23307,, 17524t NORF BOTH 118440o 93876,, 71061. 60952o 39145o 27793o 18208o 138660 8664. 6122. 2779e. ORPH BOTH 1984* 3962. 5337, 8741* 10177. 12373o 13474* i5622o 15184* 17185o 14745o B12T BOTH 4614,, 8287* 6677s 4835* 3304,, 1586t 615. 06 00 0* 00. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MALAWI NORTHERN FATHER SURVIVAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD,, BRASS METHOD, SEX = BOTH PM = 32o65 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION CENTRAL W(N) 1(35+N)/1(32*5) MORTALITY 1(35+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN AGE N LEVEL 5- 9 Oo95950 10 0*49800 Oo94476 17*77' Oo76354 10-14 0.93014 15 OoSBI29 0090688 17*44 0,72529 15-19 OoS7458 20 Oo59792 0*84204 16.25 0.64734 20-24 0*79366 25 0,56326 0*74924 14*95 Oo54974 25-29 0969195 30 0*42063 Oo62403 13o73 Oo43649 30-34 Oo57471 35 0.21324 Oo49251 13o68 0,34400 35-39 0*47023 40 -OoO9290 0*35337 14*51 0*25526 40-44 0*36330 45 -Ot39402 Ov22302 16438 0o17245 45-49 0*26267 50 -Oo56826 0.09944 N.A* N4,A. - 198 - MALAWI CENTRAL FATHER SURVIVAL Table A 3 6C: MALAWI - Analysis of Paternal Survival from 1977 Census Data for Central Region: Print-Out of PORPH Programme @ @ @ 2 2 @ 2 @ @ 2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @22222 * DATA USED * TORE BOTH 430088. 306860. 208892o 201616. 173044. 166159. 120168. 109612. 78569. 82187. 52613. NORF BOTH 424806. 296040. 195471. 177245. 1;6671. 114333* 68141, 50550. v 28007. 22122* 9145. ORPH BOTH 5282* 10820. 13421. 47t- 36373. 51826. 52027. 59062. 50562. 60065. 43468. B12T BOTH 13951. 29717. 27021. 17171. 12824. 6018. 3192. 0. 01 0, 0. MALAWI CENTRAL FATHER SURVIVAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD. BRASS METHOD. SEX = BOTH PM = 32.50 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION CENTRAL W(N) 1(35+N)/1(32.5) MORTALITY 1(35+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN AGE N LEVEL 5- 9 0.96474 10 0648793 0.94990 18*46 0*78512 10-14 0.93575 15 0.56741 0.91125 17,88 0.73911 15-19 C.87912- 20 0,58038 -0.84164 -T.62) 0.64634 20-24 0-78980 25 0.54236 0.74326 14.60 0.53803 25-29 0.68809 30 0.39684 0.61508 13.29 0.42261 30-34 0.56705 35 0.18883 0.48116 13.17 0.32913 35-39 0.46117 40 -0,11868 0.34404 14.09 0*24416 40-44 0.35646 45 -0.41766 0.23271 16.91 0.18329 45-49 0.26917 50 -0.58763 0.11779 N.A. N,A* - 199 - MALAWI SOUTHERN FATHER SURVIVAL Table A3 6D: MALAWI Analysis of Parental Survival from 1977 Census Data for Southern Region: Print-Out of PORPH Programme @ @ @ e & @ @ 9 & G 9 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ * DATA USED * TORE BOTH 518286. 405787. 272870o 257874o 218104. 221444o 147553. 130979. 96464. 108279. 73628. NORF BOTH 510737. 389151. 252595. 222839. 169977. 149284. 80843. 59050. 33628 29043. 13280. ORPH BOTH 7549, 16636. 20275. 35035. 48127. 72160. 66710. 71929. 62836. 79236. 60348* B12T BOTH 18288. '33115. 30462. 16797. 12220. 6104. 4023. 0. 0 0. 0 MALAWI SOUTHERN FATHER SURVIVAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD. BRASS METHOD* SEX = BOTH PM = 32.54 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION CENTRAL W(N) 1(35+N)/1<32.5) MORTALITY 1(35+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN AGE N LEVEL 5- 9 0.95900 10 0.49036 0.94203 17*37 0.75170 10-14 0.92570 15 0.57076 0.89927 16.67 0.0127 15-19 0.86414 20 0.58462 0,82891 15.29 0.61573 20-24 0.77934 25 0.54741 0.73173 13.92 0.51559 25-29 0.67414 30 0.40259 0.59872 12.48 0.39719 30-34 0.54789 35 0.19473 0.46974 12.64 0.31415 35-39 0.45084 40 -0o11245 0.33711 13.76 0.23623 40-44 0.34861 45 -0.41195 0.23511 17.03 0.18598 45-49 0.26822 50 -0.58295 0.12915 N.A. N.A. - 200 - MALAWI HYPO COHORTS 1971-1977 MATERNAL ORPHANHOOD Table A 3 7A: MALAWI - Analysis of Maternal Survival from 1970-71 PCS and 1977 Census:National Cohort Data:Print-Out of MORPH Programme 98888888888 @ @ R 2 Q @ @ @ @ @ @89 9 9 *.DATA USED * TORE BOTH 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. NORF BOTH 99342. 98710. 96965. 93404. 86946. 79522. 72884. 64514. 57620. 54118. 44399. ORPH BOTH 658. 1290. 3035. 6596. 13054. 20478. 27116. 35486. 42380. 45882. 55601. e e Q e e 9 G R @ a @ @ @ @ e La @ 9La-@ La @ 2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 8 8& 8t a 8 8 8 8 8 8 At 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8. 8 8 $ 8 8 8 8 8t 8 MALAWI HYPO COHORTS 1971-1977 MATERNAL ORPHANHOOD MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD. BRASS METHOD. SEX BOTH FM = 27.76 MLT = SOTH ..RESPONDENTS. P.ROPORTION: CENTRAL ,WCN) -i25+Nr/1(25) AD,RTALITY ?1(28+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN AGE N LEVEL 5- 9 0.98710 10 0.66440 0.98124 19.33 -0.86329 10-14 0.96965 15 0.78512 0.96200 18.21 0.82338 15-19 0.93404 20 0.90108 0.92765 16.58 0.75804 20-24 0.86946 25 0.99128 0.86881 14.17 0.65620 25-29 0.79522 30 1.05048 0.79857 12.57 _.Q56812. 30-34 0.72884 35 1.09392 0.73670 12.51 '0.52290. 35-39 0.64514 40 1.07236 0.65013 12.64, 0.46398 40-44 0.57620 45 1.02004 0.57690 14.36 0.43898 45-49 0.54118 50 0.84416 0.52603 17.87 0.44633 MALAWI HYPO COHORTS 1971-1977 MATERNAL ORPHANHOOD MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD. CONDITIONAL REGRESSION METHOD. SEX = BOTH FM = 27.76 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION AGE N 1(25+N)/1(25) MORTALITY 1(25+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN LEVEL 15-19 0.93404 20 0.93355 17.14 0.77560 20-24 0.86946 25 0.87265 14.44 0.66544 25-29 0.79522 30 0.80483 12.92 0.58048 30-34 0.72884 35 0.74632 12.97 '"053934 35-39 0.64514 40 0.66959 13.41 0.49232 40-44 0.57620 45 0.60562 15.37 0.47683 45-49 0.54118 50 0.57246 19.18 0.50256 - 201 - MALAWI HYPO COHORT PATERNAL ORPHANHOOD 1971-1977 Table A 3 73: MALAWI Analysis of Paternal Survival from 1970-71 PCS and 1977 Census:National Cohort DataPrint-Out of PORPH Programme * DATA USED * TORE BOTH 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. 100000. NORF BOTH 98614. 97595. 96382. 90899. 82317. 72285. 60171. 51654. 42732. 38765. 30285. ORPH BOTH 1386. 2405. 3618. 9101. 17683.' 27715. 39829, 48346. 57268, 61235. 69715. 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 9 9 # 9 9 G 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G 9 9 9 9 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 G MALAWI HYPO COHORT PATERNAL ORPHANHOOD 1971-1977 MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON ORPHANHOOD, BRASS METHOD. SEX = BOTH F'M = 32.72 MLT = SOTH RESPONDENT'S PROPORTION CENTRAL W(N) 1(35+N)/1(32.5) MORTALITY 1(35+N) AGE GROUP NOT ORPHAN AGE N LEVEL 5- 9 0.97595 10 0v50252 0.96992 21.26 0.86854 10-14 0.96382 15 0.58752 0.94120 20.62 0.82961 15-19 0.90899 20 0.60580 0*87516 18.68 0.72877 20-24 0.82317 25 0.57264 0.78030 16.82 0.61164 25-29 0.72285 30 0.43132 0.65396 15.22 0.48470 30-34 0o60171 35 0o22420 0.53563 15.62 0.40286 35-39 0.51654 40 -0.08132 0.42006 17.47 0.33669 40-44 0.42732 45 -0.38340 0.37244 21.90 0.33887 45-49 0.38765 50 -0.55956 0.25540 N.A. N.A. Table A.3.8: Malawi: Selected Coale-Demeny South levels for Childhood and Adulthood for Construction of Life-Tables, 1955-60, 1962-67, and 1970-75 Coale-Demeny South 1955-60 1962-67 1970-75 ----1970-75---- ---1970-75---- ----1970-75---- Model Life Table Level National National National Northern Region Central Region Southern Region Males Childhood Mortality 7.0 7.5 8.3 10.00 6.75 9.25 Adult Mortality 12.0 13.0 14.0 14.25 14.25 14.00 Female Childhood Mortality 7.0 7.5 8.3 10.00 6.75 9.25 Adult Mortality 11.0 12.0 13.0 13.25 13.25 13.00 Table A.3.9A: Malawi: Life Table 1955-1960: (South levels 7 and 12): Males Age x qx dx tax lx Lx Tx ex 0-1 218.28 21828 255.67 100000 85375.2 3692608.3 36.93 1-4 198.16 15491 57.39 78172 269934.1 3607233.1 46.14 0-4 37319 105.03 355309.3 5-9 45.14 2829 9.24 62681 306334.0 3337299.0 55.76 10-14 22.44 1343 4.54 59852 295903.2 3030965.0 50.64 15-19 27.20 1591 5.51 58509 288567.5 2735061.8 46.75 20-24 31.51 1793 6.40 56918 280107.5 2446494.3 42.98 25-29 31.37 1729 6.37 55125 271302.5 2166386.8 39.30 30-34 33.83 1806 6.88 53396 262465.0 1895084.3 35.49 35-39 37.87 1954 7.72 51590 253065.0 1632619.3 31.65 40-44 47.12 2339 9.65 49636 242332.5 1379554.3 27.79 45-49 58.36 2760 12.02 47297 229585.0 1137221.8 24.04 50-54 78.10 3478 16.25 44537 213990.0 907636.8 20.38 55-59 107.09 4397 22.63 41059 194302.5 693646.8 16.89 60-64 156.50 5738 33.96 36662 168965.0 499344.3 13.62 65-69 226.58 7007 51.11 30924 137102.5 330379.3 10.68 70-74 340.18 8136 81.98 23917 99245.0 193276.8 8.08 75-79 494.46 7803 131.37 15781 59397.5 94031.8 5.96 80+ 1000.00 7978 230.35 7978 34634.3 34634.3 4.34 Table A.3.9B: Malawi: Life Table 1955-1960: (South levels 7 and 11): Females Age x qx dx mx ix Lx Tk ex 0-1 198.47 19847 227.86 100000 87099.6 3788614.5 37.89 1-4 204.99 16431 59.69 80153 275247.6 3701514.9 46.18 0-4 36278 100.12 362347.2 5-9 49.24 3138 10.10 63722 310768.4 3426267.3 53.77 10-14 '25.97 1573 5.26 60583 298982.5 3115498.9 51.43 15-19 29.57 1745 6.00 59010 290687.5 2816516.4 47.73 20-24 32.38 1854 6.58 57265 281690.0 2525828.9 44.11 25-29 33.78 1872 6.87 55411 272375.0 2244138.9 40.50 30-34 35.33 1892 7.19 53539 262965.0 1971763.9 36.83 35-39 38.22 1974 7.79 51647 253300.0 1708798.9 33.09 40-44 41.20 2047 8.42 49673 243247.5 1455498.9 29.30 45-49 46.06 2194 9.43 47626 232645.0 1212251.4 25.45 50-54 61.42 2790 12.67 45432 220185.0 979606.4 21.56 55-59 84.84 3618 17.72 42642 204165.0 759421.4 17.81 60-64 135.36 5282 29.04 39024 181915.0 555256.4 14.23 65-69 207.91 7015 46.40 33742 151172.5 373341.4 11.06 70-74 325.08 8688 77.63 26727 111915.0 222168.9 ·8.31 75-79 478.84 8638 125.92 18039 68600.0 110253.9 6.11 80+ 1000.00 9401 225.69 9401 41653.9 41653.9 4.43 Table A.3.10.A: Malawi: Life Table 1962-1967 (1965): (South levels 7.5 and 12): Females Age x qx dx mx ix Lx Tx ex 0-1 191.72 19172 219.01 100000 87538.7 3953494.8 39.53 1-4 194.98 15760 56.32 80828 279821.2 3865956.1 47.83 0-4 34932 95.09 367359.9 5-9 46.70 3039 9.56 65068 317742.5 3586134.9 55.11 10-14 24.57 1524 4.97 62029 306335.0 3268392.4 52.69 15-19 27.02 1635 5.48 60505 298437.5 2962057.4 48.96 20-24 28.94 1704 5.87 58870 290096,0 2663619.9 45.25 25-29 29.99 1714 6.09 57166 281545.0 2373529.9 41.52 30-34 31.54 .1749 6.41 55452 272887.5 2091984.9 37.73 35-39 34.34 1844 6.99 53703 263905.0 1819097.4 33.87 40-44 37.54 1947 7.65 51859 254427.5 1555192.4 29.99 45-49 42.46 2119 8.68 49912 244262.5 1300764.9 26.06 50-54 57.06 2727 11.75 47793 232147.5 1056502.4 22.11 55-59 79.10 3565 16.47 45066 216417.5 824354.9 18.29 60-64 126.42 5247 26.99 41501 194387.5 607937.4 14.65 65-69 195.72 7096 43.39 36254 163530.0 413549.9 11.41 70-74 309.37 9021 73.20 29158 123237.5 250019.9 8.57 75-79 461.48 9293 119.98 20137 77452.5 126782.4 6.30 80+ 1000.00 10844 219.83 10844 49329.9 49329.9 4.55 Table A.3.10.B: Malawi: Life Table 1962-1967 (1965): (South levels 7.5 and 13): Males Age x qx dx mx lx LX Tx ex 0-1 210.98 21098 245.71 100000 85864.3 3840767.2 38.41 1-4 188.91 14905 54.30 78902 274488.1 3754902.9 47.59 0-4 36003 99.91 360352.4 5-9 42.97 2750 8.78 63997 313110.0 3480414.8 54.38 10-14 21.46 1314 4.34 61247 302950.0 3167304.8 51.71 15-19 25.35 1519 5.13 59933 295867.5 2864354.8 47.79 20-24 28.06 1639 5.69 58414 287972.5 2568487.3 43.97 25-29 28.02 1591 5.68 56775 279897.5 2280514.8 40.17 30-34 30.62 1690 6.22 55184 271695.0 2000617.3 36.25 1 35-39 34.44 1842 7.01 53494 262865.0 1728922.3 32.32 40-44 43.31 2237 8.85 51652 252667.5 1466057.3 28.38 ON 45-49 54.29 2683 11.16 49415 240367.5 1213389.8 24.56 50-54 73.50 3435 15.26 46732 225072.5 973022.3 20.82 55-59 101.55 4397 21.40 43297 205492.5 747949.8 17.27 60-64 148.87 5791 32.17 38900 180022.5 542457.3 13.94 65-69 216.57 7170 48.57 33109 147620.0 362434.8 10.95 70-74 327.57 8497 78.35 25939 108452.5 214814.8 8.28 75-79 480.93 8388 126.63 17442 66240.0 106362.3 6.10 80+ 1000.00 9054 225.66 9054 40122.3 40122.3 4.43 Table A.3.11.A: 14alawi: Life Table 1970-1975: (South levels 8.3 and 14): Males Age x qx dx mx ix LX TX ex 0-1 199.59 19959 230.40 100000 86627.4 4045257.6 40.45 1-4 174.47 13965 49.59 80041 281635.0 3958630.2 49.46 0-4 33924 92.12 368262.4 5-9 39.57 2615 8.07 66076 323842.5 3676995.2 55.65 10-14 19.93 1265 4.03 63461 314142.5 3353152.7 52.84 15-19 23.15 1440 4.68 62196 307380.0 3039010.2 48.86 20-24 24.83 1509 5.03 60756 300007.5 2731630.2 44.96 25-29 24.85 1472 5.03 59247 292555.0 2431622.7 41.04 30-34 27.58 1593 5.59 57775 284892.5 2139067.7 37.02 35-39 31.17 1751 6.33 56182 276532.5 1854175.2 33.00 40-44 39.64 2158 8.09 54431 266760.0 1577642.7 28.98 1 45-49 50.35 2632 10.33 52273 254785.0 1310882.7 25.08 C 50-54 69.00 3425 14.29 49641 239642.5 1056097.7 21.27 55-59 96.11 4442 20.19 46216 219975.0 816455.2 17.67 60-64 141.35 5905 30.42 41774 194107.5 596480.2 14.28 65-69 206.68 7413 46.10 35869 160812.5 402372.7 11.22 70-74 3107 8966 74.80 28456 119865.0 241560.2 8.49 75-79' 467.43 9110 122.00 19490 74675.0 121695.2 6.24 80+ 1000.00 10380 220.76 10380 47020.2 47020.2 4.53 Table A.3.11.B: Malawi: Life Table 1970-1975: (South levels 8.3 and 13): Females Age x qx dx mx lx Lx Tx ex 0-1 181.17 18117 205.35 100000 88223.9 4179080.7 41.79 1-4 179.35 14686 51.17 81883 286998.8 4090856.8 49.96 0-4 32803 87.42 375222.7 5-9 42.72 2871 8.73 67202 328832.5 3803858.0 56.60 10-14 22.50 1445 4.54 64331 318037.5 3475025.5 54.02 15-19 24.33 1530 4.93 62884 310595.0 3156988.0 50.20 20-24 25.60 1571 5.19 61354 302842.5 2846393.0 46.39 25-29 26.46 1582 5.36 59783 294960.0 2543550.5 42.55 30-34 27.97 1628 5.67 58201 286935.0 2248590.5 38.63 35-39 30.67 1735 6.23 56573 278527.5 1961655.5 34.67 40-44 34.04 1867 6.93 54838 269522.5 1683128.0 30.69 45-49 38.98 2065 7.95 52971 259692.5 1413605.5 26.69 50-54 52.82 2689 10.85 50906 247807.5 1153913.0 22.67 55-59 73.49 3543 15.26 48217 232227.5 906105.5 18.79 60-64 117.70 5258 25.01 44674 210225.0 673878.0 15.08 65-69 183.76 7243 40.47 39416 178972.5 463653.0 11.76 70-74 293.87 9455 68.90 32173 137227.5 284680.5 8.85 75-79 444.20 10091 114.20 22718 88362.5 147453.0 6.49 80+ 1000.00 12627 213.69 12627 59090.5 59090.5 4.68 Table A.3.12.A: Malawi: Life Table 1970-1975:(South levels 10 and 13.25): Females: Northern Region Age x qx dx mx lx Lx Tx ex 0-1 *160.65 16065 179.39 100000 89557.6 4513082.3 45.13 1-4 148.28 12446 41.30 83935 301375.9 4423524.7 52.70 0-4 5-9 34.38 2458 7.00 71489 351300.3 4122148.8 57.66 10-14 18.82 1299 3.80 69031 341907.5 3770848.5 54.63 15-19 21.90 1483 4.43 67732 334952.5 3428941.0 50.63 20-24 24.26 1607 4.91 66249 327227.5 3093988.5 46.70 25-29 25.64 1657 5.19 64642 319067.5 2766761.0 42.80 30-34 27.13 1709 5.50 62985 310652.5 2447693.5 38.86 35-39 29.81 1827 6.05 61276 301812.5 2137041.0 34.88 C 40-44 33.20 1974 6.75 59449 292310.0 1835228.5 30.87 45-49 38.14 - 2192 7.78 57475 281895.0 1542918.5 26.85 50-54 51.79 2863 10.63 55283 269257.5 1261023.5 22.81 55-59 72.13 3781 14.97 52420 252647.5 991766.0 18.92 60-64 115.58 5622 24.54 48639 229140.0 739118.5 15.20 65-69 180.84 7779 39.76 43017 195637.5 509978.5 11.86 70-74 290.05 10221 67.85 35238 150637.5 314341.0 8.92 75-79 439.91 11005 112.79 25017 97572.5 163703.5 6.54 80+ 1000.00 14012 211.88 14012 66131.0 66131.0 4.72 Table A.3.12.B: Malawi: Life Table 1970-1975: (South levels 10 and 14.25) Males: Northern Region Age x qx dx mx Ix Lx Tx ex 0-1 177.52 17752 201.48 100000 88106.3 4347687.8 43.38 1-4 147.29 12114 40.99 82248 29555746 4259581.5 51.79 0-4 5-9 32.59 2286 6.63 70134 344954.8 3964023.9 56.52 10-14 16.91 1147 3.41 67848 336372.1 3619069.1 53.34 15-19 20.75 1384 4.19 66701 330045.0 3282697.0 49.22 20-24 24.07 1572 4.87 65317 322655.0 2952652.0 45.20 25-29 24.11 1537 4.88 63745 314882.5 2629997.0 41.26 30-34 26.86 1671 5.45 62208 306862.5 2315114.5 37.22 35-39 30.39 1840 6.17 60537 298085.0 2008252.0 33.17 0 40-44 38.76 2275 7.90 58697 287797.5 1710167.0 29.14 45-49 49.40 2787 10.13 56422 275142.5 1422369.0 25.21 50-54 67.90 3642 14.06 53635 259070.0 1147227.0 21.39 55-59 94.78 4738 19.90 49993 238120.0 888157.0 17.77 60-64 139.51 6314 30.00 45255 210490.0 650037.0 14.36 65-69 204.25 7954 45.50 38941 174820.0 439547.0 11.29 70-74 311.98 9667 73.93 30987 130767.5 264727.0 8.54 75-79 464.08 9894 120.86 21320 81865.0 133959.5 6.28 80+ 1000.00 11426 219.48 11426 52094.5 52094.5 4.56 Table A.3.13.A: Malawi: Life Table 1970-1975: (South levels 6.75 and 13.25): Females: Central Region Age x x dx mx lx Lx Tx ex 0-1 202.10 20210 232.66 100000 86863.7 3920153.6 39.20 1-4 210.37 16785 61.52 79790 272832.4 3833289.9 48.05 0-4 5-9 50.61 3189 10.39 63005 307052.5 3560457.5 56.51 10-14 20.15 1205 4.07 59816 296067.5 3253405.0 54.39 15-19 24.13 1414 4.88 58611 289520.0 2957337.5 50.46 20-24 25.58 1463 5.18 57197 282327.5 2667817.5 46.64 25-29 25.64 1429 5.19 55734 275097.5 2385490.0 42.80 30-34 27.13 1473 5.50 54305 267842.5 2110392.5 38.86 35-39 29.81 1575 6.05 52832 260222.5 1842550.0 34.88 40-44 33.20 1702 6.75 51257 252030.0 1582327.5 30.87 45-49 38.14 1890 7.78 49555 243050.0 1330297.5 26.84 50-54 51.79 2469 10.64 47665 232152.5 1087247.5 22.81 55-59 72.13 3260 14.97 45196 217830.0 855095.0 18.92 60-64 115.58 4847 24.53 41936 197562.5 637265.0 15.20 65-69 180.84 .6707 39.76 37089 168677.5 439702.5 11.86 70-74 290.05 8812 67.85 30382 129880.0 271025.0 8.92 75-79 439.91 9489 112.79 21570 84127.5 141145.0 6.54 80+ 1000.00 12081 211.88 12081 57017.5 57017.5 4.72 Table A.3.13.B: Malawi: Life Table 1970-1975: (South levels 6.75 and 14.25): Males: Central Region Age x qx dx mx Ix Lx Tx ex 0-1 222.20 22220 261.07 100000 85112.5 3782983.4 37.83 1-4 203.13 15799 59.06 77780 267529.3 3697870.9 47.54 0-4 5-9 46.31 2870 9.48 61981 302730.0 3430341.6 55.35 10-14 22.97 1358 4.65 59111 292160.0 3127611.6 52.91 15-19 23.33 1347 4.72 57753 285397.5 2835451.6 49.10 20-24 24.07 1358 4.87 56406 278885.0 2550054.1 45.21 25-29 24.11 1327 4.88 55048 271922.5 2271169.1 41.26 30-34 26.86 1443 5.45 53721 264997.5 1999246.6 37.22 35-39 30.39 1589 6.17 52278 257417.5 1734249.1 33.17 40-44 38.76 1965 7.91 50689 248532.5 1476831.6 29.14 45-49 49.40 2407 10.13 48724 237602.5 1228299.1 25.21 50-54 67.90 3145 14.06 46317 223722.5 990696.6 21.39 55-59 94.78 4092 19.90 43172 205630.0 766974.1 17.77 60-64 139.51 5452 30.00 39080 181770.0 561344.1 14.36 65-69 204.25 6869 45.50 33628 150967.5 379574.1 11.29 70-74 311.98 8348 73.93 26759 112925.0 228606.6 8.54 75-79 464.08 8544 120.86 18411 70695.0 115681.6 6.28 80+ 1000.00 9867 219.33 9867 44986.6 44986.6 4.56 Table A.3.14.A: Malawi: Life Table 1970-1975: (South Levels 9.25 and 13): Females: Southern Region Age x qx dx mx 1x Lx Tx ex 0-1 169.42 16942 190.40 100000 88983.4 4355325.0 43.55 1-4 161.76 13435 45.52 83058 295150.2 4266341.6 51.37 0-4 5-9 38.14 2655 7.78 69623 341477.5 3971191.4 57.04 10-14 20.43 1368 4.13 66968 331420.0 3629713.9 54.20 15-19 23.12 1517' 4.68 65600 324207.5 3298293.9 50.28 20-24 25.23 1617 5.11 64083 316372.5 2974086.4 46.41 25-29 26.46 1653 5.36 62466 308197.5 2657713.9 42.55 30-34 27.97 1701 5.67 60813 299812.5 2349516.4 38.64 35-39 30.67 1813 6.23 59112 291027.5 2049703.9 34.67 40-44 34.04 1950 6.92 57299 281620.0 1758676.4 30.69 45-49 38.98 2158 7.95 55349 271350.0 1477056.4 26.69 50-54 52.82 2810 10.85 53191 258930.0 1205706.4 22.67 55-59 73.49 3702 15.26 50381 242650.0 946776.4 18.79 60-64 117.70 5494 25.01 46679 219660.0 704126.4 15.08 65-69 183.76 7568 40.47 41185 187005.0 484466.4 11.76 70-74 293.87 9879 68.90 33617 143387.5 297461.4 8.85 75-79 444.20 10544 114.20 23738 92330.0 154073.9 6.49 80+ 1000.00 13194 213.69 13194 61743.9 61743.9 4.68 Table A.3.14.B: Malawi: Life Table 1970-1975: (South Levels 9.25 and 14): Males: Southern Region Age x qx dx mx lx LX Tx ex 0-1 186.91 18691 213.67 100000 87476.9 4207681.3 42.08 1-4 158.60 12896 44.52 81309 289653.5 4120204.4 50.67 0-4 5-9 35.69 2442 7.27 68413 335960.0 3830550.9 55.99 10-14 18.21 1201 3.67 65971 326852.5 3494590.9 52.97 15-19 22.19 1437 4.49 64770 320257.5 3167738.4 48.91 20-24 24.83 1573 5.03 63333 312732.5 2847480.9 44.96 25-29 24.85 1535 5.03 61760 304962.5 2534748.4 41.04 30-34 27.58 1661 5.59 60225 296972.5 2229785.9 37.02 35-39 31.17 1825 6.33 58564 288257.5 1932813.4 33.00 40-44 39.64 2249 8.09 56739 278072.5 1644555.9 28.98 45-49 50.35 2744 10.33 54490 265590.0 1366483.4 25.08 50-54 69.00 3570 14.29 51746 249805.0 1100893.4 21.27 55-59 96.11 4630 20.19 48176 229305.0 851088.4 17.67 60-64 141.35 6155 30.42 43546 202342.5 621783.4 14.28 65-69 206.68 7728 46.10 37391 167635.0 419440.9 11.22 70-74 315.07 9346 74.80 29663 124950.0 251805.9 8.49 75-79 467.43 9497 122.00 20317 77842.5 126855.9 6.24 80+ 1000.00 10820 220.76 10820 49013.4 49013.4 4.53 APPENDIX 4 Base Fertility Tables Table A.4.1: Malawi 1977 Census: Percent Distribution of Numbers of Children Ever Born: National Level Age of Mean Woman 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+ NS Parity 15-19 63.20 22.30 7.30 2.10 0.70 0.30 0.10 0.05 0.03 0.10 3.80 0.50 20-24 14.80 25.40 27.80 17.40 7.80 3.20 1.40 0.60 0.30 0.40 1.00 1.99 25-29 5.90 9.20 15.40 20.10 19.40 13.80 7.90 3.90 2.00 1.80 0.50 3.56 30-34 4.10 5.00 7.50 10.40 13.70 16.00 15.30 11.50 7.50 8.60 0.40 5.03 35-39 3.50 3.70 5.30 7.10 9.00 11.70 13.30 13.60 12.00 20.20 0.40 6.05 40-44 3.70 3.60, 4.80 5.80 7.30 9.20 10.80 11.70 12.40 30.30 0.50 6.65 45-49 3.80 3.60 4.60 5.70 7.00 8.50 9.90 10.80 11.40 34.30 0.50 6.88 50-54 4.00 3.60 4.50 5.60 6.60 8.40 9.70 9.90 11.10 36.20 0.50 7.01 55-59 4.00 3.70 4.50 5.40 6.60 8.30 9.40 9.80 11.00 36.70 0.60 7.06 60-64 4.10 3.40 4.40 5.40 6.80 8.30 9.60 9.90 10.80 36.60 0.60 7.07 65+ 3.90 3.20 4.30 5.20 6.50 8.50 9.80 10.00 11.00 36.90 0.70 7.13 Mean Agel/ 16.80 25.20 28.60 32.00 35.50 39.20 42.30 44.90 47.60 52.10 24.90 0 1-2 3-4 5-7 8+ NS 15-19 63.00 30.00 3.00 0.50 0.10 4.00 20-24 15.00 53.00 25.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 25-29 6.00 25.00 40.00 26.00 6.00 0.50 30-34 4.00 13.00 24.00 43.00 16.00 0.40 35-39 4.00 9.00 16.00 39.00 32.00 0.40 40-44 4.00 8.00 13.00 32.00 43.00 0.50 45-49 4.00 8.00 13.00 29.00 46.00 0.50 50-54 4.00 8.00 12.00 28.00 47.00 0.50 55-59 4.00 8.00 12.00 28.00 48.00 0.60 60-64 4.00 8.00 12.00 28.00 47.00 0.60 65+ 4.00 8.00 12.00 28.00 48.00 0.70 1 Incl. 10-14 Table A.4.2: Malawi 1977 Census: Percent Distribution of Numbers of Children Ever Born: National Urban Age of Mean Woman 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+ NS Parity 15-19. 66.70 19.30 5.90 1.50 0.50 0.20 0.08 0.04 0.02 0.08 5.80 0.40 20-24 18.80 25.20 26.10 16.90 6.90 2.50 1.00 0.40 0.10 0.20 2.00 1.80 25-29 7.00 10.20 16.20 20.40 19.40 13.30 6.90 3.10 1.30 1.10 1.10 3.33 30-34 4.50 5.50 9.00 11.00 13.20 15.60 15.60 11.50 6.70 6.50 1.00 4.78 35-39 3.80 4.40 6.80 7.80 8.90 11.90 12.10 12.80 11.70 18.70 1.00 5.81 40-44 -4.30 4.30 5.90 7.10 8.00 8.40 10.20 10.70 12.20 28.00 1.00 6.33 45-49 4.90 4.70 6.10 6.30 7.60 7.90 9.90 10.10 11.40 30.00 1.00 6.41 50-54 6.00 4.80 6.00 7.60 7.50 9.40 9.20 8.50 9.40 29.90 1.80 6.28 55-59 6.50 5.90 7.30 7.30 6.30 9.40 9.10 8.70 9.80 28.10 1.60 6.09 60-64 7.30 4.90 5.80 6.60 7.40 9.20 8.90 10.10 10.00 28.20 1.70 6.16 65+ 5.90 4.20 5.50 7.90 7.40 9.40 9.60 9.20 9.20 29.70 1.90 6.34 Mean Agel/ 16.20 24.20 26.90 29.40 31.80 35.00 37.40 39.90 42.50 46.70 23.90 0 1-2 3-4 5-7 8+ NS 15-19 67.00 25.00 2.00 0.30 0.10 6.00 20-24 19.00 51.00 24.00 4.00 0.30 2.00 25-29 7.00 26.00 40.00 23.00 2.00 1.00 30-34 5.00 15.00 23.00 43.00 13.00 1.00 35-39 4.00 11.00 17.00 37.00 30.00 1.00 40-44 4.00 10.00 15.00 29.00 40.00 1.00 45-49 5.00 11.00 14.00 28.00 41.00 1.00 50-54 6.00 11.00 15.00 27.00 39.00 2.00 55-59 7.00 13.00 14.00 27.00 38.00 2.00 60-64 7.00 11.00 14.00 28.00 38.00 2.00 65+ 6.00 10.00 15.00 28.00 39.00 2.00 1/ Incl. 10-14 Table A.4.3: Malawi 1977 Census: Percent Distribution of Numbers of Children Ever Born: National Rural Age of Mean Woman 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+ NS Parity 15-19 62.90 22.60 7.40 2.10 0.70 0.30 0.10 0.05 0.03 0.10 3.70 0.50 20-24 14.30 25.40 28.00 17.50 7.90 3.30 1.40 0.60 0.30 0.40 0.90 2.01 25-29 5.80 9.10 15.30 20.10 19.40 13.90 8.00 4.00 2.00 1.90 0.50 3.58 30-34 4.00 5.00 7.40 10.40 13.80 16.00 15.30 11.50 7.50 8.80 0.40 5.05 35-39 3.50 3.70 5.20 7.10 9.00 11.70 13.40 13.70 12.00 20.30 0.40 6.07 40-44 3.60 3.50 4.70 5.80 7.30 9.30 10.90 11.70 12.40 30.50 0.40 6.67 45-49 3.70 3.50 4.50 5.60 7.00 8.50 9.90 10.80 11.40 34.50 0.50 6.91 50-54 3.90 3.50 4.40 5.50 6.50 8.30 9.70 10.00 11.20 36.40 0.50 7.04 55-59 3.90 3.60 4.40 5.40 6.60 8.20 9.40 9.80 11.10 37.00 0.50 7.09 60-64 4.00 3.40 4.30 5.40 6.70 8.30 9.60 9.90 10.90 36.90 0.60 7.10 65+ 3.90 3.20 4.20 5.20 6.50 8.40 9.80 10.00 11.00 37.10 0.70 7.15 Mean Agel/ 16.90 25.30 - 28.70 32.20 35.80 39.50 42.60 45.20 47.90 52.30 25.00 0 1-2 3-4 5-7 8+ NS 15-19 63.00 30.00 3.00 0.40 0.10 4.00 20-24 14.00 53.00 25.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 25-29 6.00 24.00 40.00 26.00 4.00 0.50 30-34 4.00 12.00 24.00 43.00 16.00 0.40 35-39 4.00 9.00 16.00 39.00 32.00 0.40 . 40-44 4.00 8.00 13.00 32.00 43.00 0.40 45-49 4.00 8.00 13.00 29.00 46.00 0.50 50-54 4.00 8.00 12.00 28.00 48.00 0.50 55-59 4.00 8.00 12.00 27.00 48.00 0.50 60-64 4.00 8.00 12.00 28.00 48.00 0.60 65+ 4.0 7.00 12.00 28.00 48.00 0.70 / Incl. 10-14 Table A.4.4: Malawi 1977 Census: Percent Distribution of Numbers of Children Ever Born: Regional Level: Northern Age of Mean Woman 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+ NS Parity 15-19 70.10 19.90 5.50 1.40 0.50 0.20 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.10 2.20 0.40 20-24 15.10 25.50 28.40 17.50 7.40 2.90 1.40 0.60 0.20 0.30 0.80 1.96 25-29 5.30 7.20 13.70 21.10 22.60 14.50 8.20 3.80 1.80 1,50 0.40 3.65 30-34 3.40 3.60 5.70 9.10 14.40 18.70 18.30 13.20 7.20 6.00 0.40 5.12 35-39 3.10 2.40 3.70 5.90 8.30 12.30 16.10 17.10 14.70 15.90 0.40 6.11 40-44 3.40 2.40 3.40 4.60 6.80 10.40 12.90 14.70 15.80 25.20 0.30 6.59 45-49 3.30 2.80 3.50 5.20 7.00 9.50 12.20 13.90 14.50 27.80 0.30 6.66 50-54 3.80 3.00 3.90 5.00 6.80 9.90 12.40 13.50 14.20 27.10 0.40 6.60 55-59 3.60 2.90 3.60 5.80 7.40 10.80 12.30 13.00 14.30 25.90 0.20 6.52 60-64 4.00 3.20 3.80 5.80 7.90 10.20 12.00 13.40 13.60 25.70 0.40 6.46 65+ 3.60 3.00 4.00 5.70 7.40 11.10 13.20 12.80 13.30 25.30 0.60 6.47 Mean Agel/ 16.20 24.60 28.40 32.80 36.70 41.30 44.10 46.30 48.70 51.50 25.20 00 0 1-2 3-4 5-7 8+ NS 15-19 70.00 25.00 2.00 0.30 0.10 2.00 20-24 15.00 54.00 25.00 5.00 0.50 0.80 25-29 5.00 21.00 44.00 27.00 3.00 0.40 30-34 3.00 9.00 24.00 50.00 13.00 0.40 35-39 3.00 6.00 14.00 46.00 31.00 0.40 40-44 3.00 6.00 11.00 38.00 41.00 0.30 45-49 3.00 6.00 12.00 36.00 42.00 0.30 50-54 4.00 7.00 12.00 36.00 41.00 0.40 55-59 4.00 7.00 13.00 36.00 40.00 0.20 60-64 4.00 7.00 14.00 36.00 39.00 0.40 65+ 4.00 7.00 13.00 37.00 39.00 0.60 1 Incl. 10-14 Table A.4.5: Malawi 1977 Census: Percent Distribution of Numbers of Children Ever Born: Regional Level: Central Age of Mean Woman 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+ NS Parity 15-19 64.70 20.60 7.20 2.20 0.80 0.30 0.10 0.05 0.03 0.10 3.90 0.49 20-24 13.20 24.00 28.50 18.40 8.40 3.60 1.60 0.70 0.30 0.40 0.90 2.09 25-29 4.60 7.30 14.20 20.30 20.50 15.00 8.60 4.50 2.30 2.10 0.50 3.77 30-34 3.00 3.50 5.90 9.20 13.50 16.50 16.80 12.60 8.50 10.00 0.40 5.36 35-39 2.60 2.50 3.90 5.60 7.90 11.40 13.40 14.50 13.40 24.30 0.40 6.50 40-44 2.60 2.40 3.40 4.60 6.20 8.20 10.40 11.70 13.50 36.60 0.50 7.22 45-49 2.90 2.50 3.50 4.40 5.90 7.70 9.50 11.00 12.20 39.90 0.50 7.41 50-54 3.10 2.50 3.40 4.60 5.60 7.90 9.20 9.90 11.70 41.50 0.60 7.50 55-59 3.30 2.60 3.30 4.40 5.90 7.60 9.00 9.70 12.00 41.40 0.60 7.50 60-64 3.10 2.50 3.40 4.50 6.00 8.00 9.60 10.20 11.60 40.40 0.60 7.48 65+ 3.30 2.40 3.50 4.40 6.10 8.20 9.70 10.10 11.60 40.00 0.70 7.43 Mean Agel 16.30 24.30 27.40 30.70 34.5 38.30 41.50 44.10 47.00 51.40 25.10 0 1-2 3-4 5-7 8+ NS 15-19 65.00 28.00 3.00 0.50 1.00 4.00 20-24 13.00 53.00 27.00 6.00 1.00 0.90 25-29 5.00 22.00 41.00 28.00 4.00 0.50 30-34 3.00 9.00 23.00 46.00 19.00 0.40 35-39 3.00 6.00 14.00 39.00 38.00 0.40 40-44 3.00 6.00 11.00 30.00 50.00 0.50 45-49 3.00 6.00 10.00 28.00 52.00 0.50 50-54 3.00 6.00 10.00 27.00 53.00 0.60 55-59 3.00 6.00 10.00 26.00 53.00 0.60 60-64 3.00 6.00 11.00 28.00 52.00 0.60 65+ 3.00 6.00 11.00 28.00 52.00 0.70 1 Incl. 10-14 Table A.4.6: Malawi 1977 Census: Percent Distribution of Numbers of Children Ever Born: Regional Level: Southern Age of Mean Woman 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+ NS Parity 15-19 60.30 24.30 7.80 2.10 0.70 0.30 0.10 0.04 0.02 0.10 43.00 0.53 20-24 15.80 26.40 27.10 16.70 7.40 3.00 1.30 0.50 0.30 0.30 1.10 1.92 25-29 7.00 10.90 16.50 19.80 18.00 12.80 7.40 3.50 1.80 1.60 0.60 3.39 30-34 5.10 6.50 9.20 11.80 13.70 14.90 13.50 10.20 6.70 8.10 0.40 4.75 35-39 4.40 5.10 6.80 8.60 10.10 11.80 12-.60 12.10 10.20 17.90 0.50 5.66 40-44 4.60 4.90 6.20 7.20 8.30 9.70 10.60 10.80 10.50 26.70 0.50 6.22 45-49 4.60 4.60 5.60 6.70 7.80 8.80 9.70 9.80 10.10 31.70 0.50 6.56 50-54 4.70 4.50 5.50 6.40 7.10 8.30 9.30 9.00 10.00 34.60 0.50 6.77 55-59 4.60 4.70 5.60 6.10 6.90 8.10 8.90 9.00 9.50 36.10 0.60 6.87 60-64 4.80 4.20' 5.20 6.00 7.00 8.10 8.90 8.80 9.60 36.80 0.70 6.95 65+ 4.50 3.90 4.90 5.80 6.60 8.00 8.90 9.30 9.90 37.50 0.80 7.06 0 1-2 3-4 5-7 8+ NS 15-19 60.00 32.00 3.00 0.40 0.10 4.00 20-24 16.00 54.00 24.00 5.00 0.60 1.00 25-29 7.00 27.00 38.00 24.00 3.00 0.60 30-34 5.00 16.00 26.00 39.00 15.00 0.40 35-39 4.00 12.00 19.00 37.00 28.00 0.50 40-44 5.00 11.00 16.00 31.00 -37.00 0.50 45-49 5.00 10.00 15.00 28.00 42.00 0.50 50-54 5.00 10.00 14.00 27.00 45.00 0.50 55-59 5.00 10.00 13.00 26.00 46.00 0.60 60-64 5.00 9.00 13.00 26.00 46.00 0.70 65+ 5.00 9.00 12.00 26.00 47.00 0.80 Table A.4.7: Malhwi 1977 Census: Percent Distribution of Numbers of Children Ever Born: Southern Region: Urban Age of Mean Woman 0 1 2 3 4 -5 6 7 8 9+ NS Parity 15-19 66.80 19.20 5.60 1.30 0.40 0.20 0.06 0.02 0.01 0.06 6.30 0.38 20-24 19.90 25.40 25.80 16.40 6.40 2.30 1.00 0.3 0.20 0.20 2.30 1.74 25-29 7.50 11.00 17.00 19.90 18.80 12.90 6.50 3.0 1.30 1.00 1.10 3.24 30-34 4.80 6.40 10.00 11.70 13.00 15.00 14.60 10.8 6.60 6.30 0.80 4.66 35-39 4.00 5.20 7.50 8.40 9.60 11.50 11.80 11.7 10.70 18.40 1.10 5.65 40-44 4.90 5.20 7.00 7.80 8.70 8.30 9.40 10.4 11.20 26.30 0.70 6.10 45-49 5.10 5.20 6.70 6.50 7.30 7.80 10.20 9.8 10.10 30.40 0.70 6.36 50-54 5.60 5.50 6.70 8.40 7.00 9.00 9.50 8.3 9.30 29.00 1.60 6.21 55-59 6.40 5.70 8.60 7.60 6.20 8.80 8.40 8.5 8.60 29.30 1.80 6.12 60-64 8.90 5.30 6.30 7.10 7.70 8.50 7.70 9.0 8.70 28.90 2.10 6.01 65+ 6.50 4.10 5.50 7.60 7.10 8.40 10.10 8.1 8.80 31.60 2.40 6.42 0 1-2 3-4 5-7 8+ NS 15-19 67.00 25.00 2.00 0.30 0.10 6.00 20-24 20.00 51.00 23.00 4.00 0.40 2.00 25-29 8.00 28.00 39.00 22.00 2.00 1.00 30-34 5.00 16.00 25.00 40.00 13.00 0.80 35-39 4.00 13.00 18.00 35.00 29.00 1.00 40-44 5.00 12.00 17.00 28.00 38.00 0.70 45-49 5.00 12.00 14.00 28.00 41.00 0.70 50-54 6.00 12.00 15.00 27.00 38.00 2.00 55-59 6.00 14.00 14.00 26.00 38.00 2.00 60-64 9.00 12.00 15.00 25.00 38.00 2.00 65+ 7.00 10.00 15.00 27.00 40.00 2.00 Table A.4.8: Malawi 1977 Census: Percent Distribution of Numbers of Children Ever Born: Southern Region: Rural Age of Mean Woman 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+ NS Parity 15-19 59.60 24.80 8.00 2.20 0.70 0.30 0.10 0.05 0.02 0.10 4.00 0.54 20-24 15.30 26.60 27.30 16.80 7.50 3.10 1.30 0.60 0.30 0.40 0.90 1.95 25-29 7.00 10.90 16.50 19.80 17.90 12.80 7.50 3.50 1.80 1.70 0.50 3.41 30-34 5.10 6.50 9.10 11.80 13.80 14.90 13.40 10.10 6.70 8.30 0.40 4.76 35-39 4.40 5.00 6.70 8.70 10.10 11.80 12.70 12.10 10.20 17.80 0.40 5.66 40-44 4.60 4.80 6.10 7.10 8.30 9.80 10.70 10.80 10.50 26.80 0.50 6.23 45-49 4.50 4.50 5.60 6.80 7.80 8.90 9.70 9.90 10.10 31.70 0.50 6.57 50-54 4.70 4.50 5.40 6.30 7.10 8.20 9.30 9.00 10.00 34.90 0.50 6.80 55-59 4.50 4.60 5.40 6.00 6.90 8.10 8.90 9.00 9.50 36.40 0.60 6.91 60-64 4.60 4.10 5.10 6.00 7.00 8.10 8.90 8.80 9.60 37.10 0.60 6.98 65+ 4.40 3.90 4.90 5.70 6.60 8.00 8.90 9.30 9.90 37.70 0.70 7.08 0 1-2 3-4 5-7 8+ NS 15-19 60.00 33.00 3.00 0.50 1.00 4.00 20-24 15.00 54.00 24.00 5.00 0.70 0.90 25-29 7.00 27.00 38.00 24.00 4.00 0.50 30-34 5.00 16.00 26.00 38.00 15.00 0.40 35-39 4.00 12.00 19.00 37.00 28.00 0.40 40-44 5.00 11.00 15.00 31.00 37.00 0.50 45-49 5.00 10.00 14.00 29.00 42.00 0.50 50-54 5.00 10.00 13.00 27.00 45.00 0.50 55-59 5.00 10.00 13.00 26.00 46.00 0.60 60-64 5.00 9.00 13.00 26.00 47.00 0.60 65+ 4.00 9.00 12.00 26.00 48.00 0.70 Table A.4.9A: Malawi: Synthetic Cohort Analysis 1970-1977 --------Mean Parity-------- --------Mean Parity-------- 5-year 10-year Age of Synthetic Synthetic Women 1970 1977 Cohort 1970 1977 Cohort 15-19 .2842 .4967 .4967 .2842 .4967 .4967 20-24 1.6602 1.9957 2.2082 1.6602 1.9957 1.9957 25-29 3.4293 3.5629 4.1109 3.4293 3.5629 3.7754 30-34 4.7303 5.0432 5.7248 4.7303 5.0482 5.3787 35-39 6.0609 6.0613 7.0558 6.0608 6.0613 6.4074 40-44 6.5186 6.6681 7.6630 6.5186 6.6681 7.3165 45-49 6.8810 6.8994 8.0438 6.8810 6.8994 7.2459 PI/P2 .1712 .2489 .2249 .2489 P2/P3 .4841 .5601 .5372 .5286 -----Mean Children Dead---- ----Mean Children Dead---- -------Proportion of Children Dead-------- 5-year 10-year 5-year 10-year Age of Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Synthetic Women 1970 1977 Cohort 1970 1977 Cohort 1970 1977 Cohort Cohort 15-19 .1011 .1228 .1228 .1011 .1228 .1228 .3557 .2472 .2472 .2472 20-24 .5424 .5468 .5685 .5424 .5468 .5468 .3267 .2740 .2574 .2740 25-29 1.1762 1.1042 1.1303 1.1762 1.1042 1.1259 .3430 .3099 .2750 .2982 30-34 1.6326 1.7124 1.6665 1.6326 1.7124 1.7168 .3451 .3395 .2911 .3192 35-39 2.3339 2.1931 2.2270 2.3339 2.1931 2.1428 .3851 .3618 .3156 .3344 40-44 2.6266 2.5571 2.4502 2.6266 2.5571 2.6413 .4029 .3835 .3197 .3610 45-49 2.9530 2.8121 2.6357 2.9530 2.8121 2.6210 .4292 .4076 .3277 .3617 Table A.4..9B: Malawi 1970-1977: Synthetic Cohort Child Survival Coale-Demeny North -----------5-Year Synthetic Cohorts----------- ----------10-Year Synthetic Cohorts----------- Propor- Propor- Age of tion tion Women Dead kx 1x CD level Dead kx qx 1x CD level 15-19 .2472 .9102 .2250 .7750 5.87 .2472 .8326 .2058 .7942 6.88 20-24 .2574 .9371 .2412 .7588 7.88 .2740 .9230 .2529 .7471 7.33 25-29 .2750 .9209 .2532 .7468 8.76 .2982 .9263 .2762 .7238 7.76 30-34 .2911 .9691 .2821 .7179 9.17 .3192 .9812 .3132 .6868 7.98 35-39 .3156 1.0370 .3273 .6727 9.06 .3344 1.0523 .3519 .6481 8.21 40-44 .3197 1.0259 .3280 .6720 9.76 .3610 1.0407 .3757 .6243 8.14 45-49 .3277 1.0072 .3301 .6699 10.41 .3617 1.0195 .3688 .6312 9.11 P1/P2 .2249 .2489 P2/P3 .5372 .5286 Coale-Demeny South -----------5-Year Synthetic Cohorts----------- ----------10-Year Synthetic Cohorts-------- Propor- Propor- Age of tion tion Women Dead kx qx lx CD level Dead kx qx lx CD level 15-19 .2472 .8739 .2160 .7840 6.50 .2472 .7944 .1964 .8036 7.86 20-24 .2574 .9831 .2531 .7469 9.06 .2740 .9709 .2660 .7340 8.41 25-29 .2750 .9887 .2719 .7281 9.75 .2982 .9948 .2967 .7033 8.62 30-34 .2911 1.0086 .2936 .7064 9.93 .3192 1.0188 .3252 .6748 8.63 35-39 .3156 1.0315 .3255 .6745 9.63 .3344 1.0427 .3487 .6513 8.75 40-44 .3197 1.0116 .3234 .6766 10.18 .3610 1.0223 .3690 .6310 8.51 45-49 .3277 .9990 .3274 .6726 10.67 .3617 1.0083 .3647 .6353 9.33 Table A.4.10.A: Malawi 1966 Census: Female Cumulated Age Distribution Reported Females Best -------------Fitted Stable Population------------ Age Group 1966 TFR VR=7.0 TFR=7.25 TFR=7.5 TFR=7.75 TFR=8.0 0-4 17.97 7.07 17.83 18.31 18.78 19.24 19.69 5-9 32.22 7.50 30.76 31.51 32.23 32.94 33.63 10-14 42.16 7.11 41.89 42.80 43.67 44.52 45.35 15-19 52.03 7.20 51.59 52.57 53.51 54.42 55.31 20-24 60.42 7.10 60.01 61.00 61.95 62.86 63.75 25-29 68.61 7.35 67.30 68.25 69.17 70.04 70.88 30-34 74.81 7.35 73.58 74.46 75.31 76.12 76.89 35-39 81.09 7.69 78.99 79.78 80.54 81.26 81.94 40-44 85.10 7.54 83.68 84.36 85.01 85.62 86.20 45-49 89.71 7.96 87.74 88.29 88.82 89.32 89.79 50-54 92.43 7.76 91.19 91.61 92.02 92.41 92.77 55-59 94.74 7.60 94.02 94.32 94.62 94.91 95.17 60-64 96.30 7.04 96.27 96.47 96.67 96.87 97.04 65+ 100.04 100.02 99.99 99.99 99.99 100.00 Total 7.41 Total to 55 7.42 CBR 48.17 49.62 51.05 52.44 53.81 Total to 40 7.30 CDR 25.31 25.48 25.67 25.86 26.05 Total to 60 7.44 GR 2.29 2.41 2.54 2.66 2.78 Total to 20 7.23 Table A.4.10.B: Malawi 1966 Census: Male Cumulated Age Distribution Reported Females Best -------------Fitted Stable Vopujlation------------ Age Group 1966 TFR TFR=7.0 TFR=7.25 TFR=7.5 TFR=7.75 TFR=8.0 0-4 19.14 7.65 17.92 18.40 18.87 19.33 19.77 5-9 34.59 8+ 30.88 31.63 32.35 33.05 33.73 10-14 45.96 8+ 42.08 42.99 43.85 44.69 45.50 15-19 55.98 8+ 51.86 52.84 53.77 54.67 55.53 20-24 63.09 7.72 60.37 61.35 62.29 63.19 64.05 25-29 69.77 7.56 67.74 68.68 69.58 70.44 71.26 30-34 75.04 7.27 74.10 74.97 75.80 76.59 77.34 35-39 80.61 7.33 79.59 80.36 81.10 81.79 82.45 40-44 84.25 < 7.00 84.33 84.98 85.61 86.19 86.75 45-49 88.61 7.11 88.39 88.91 .89.43 89.89 90.34 50-54 91.50 < 7.00 91.79 92.19 92.59 92.94 93.28 55-59 .93.99 < 7.00 94.52 94.81 95.10 95.35 95.59 60-64 95.73 < 7.00 96.62 96.83 97.03 97.19 97.35 65+ 100.01 100.00 99.99 100.00 100.00 100.00 CBR 49.00 50.47 51.90 53.30 54.67 CDR 26.11 26.30 26.49 26.68 26.88 GR 2.29 2.42 2.54 2.66 2.78 Table A.4.11.A: Malawi 1977 Census: Female Cumulated Age Distribution Reported Females Best ------------Fitted Stable Population---------- Age Group 1977 TFR TFR=7.0 TFR=7.25 TFR=7.5 TFR=7.75 TFR=8.0 0-4 19.22 76.40 17.99 18.47 18.95 19.40 19.85 5-9 33.74 7.89 31.16 31.91 32.65 33.34 34.03 10-14 43.39 7.26 42.44 43.35 44.23 45.06 45.89 15-19 53.15 7.24 52.20 53.19 54.13 55.02 55.90 20-24 62.01 7.35 60.63 61.63 62.58 63.47 64.34 25-29 70.14 7.61 67.89 68.86 69.97 .70.62 71.44 30-34 75.75 7.47 74.12 75.02 75.86 76.64 77.39 35-39 80.80 7.43 79.46 80.27 81.02 81.71 82.37 40-44 84.60 7.19 84.06 84..76 85.41 85.99 86.55 45-49 88.55 7.23 88.02 88.60 89.13 89.60 90.06 50-54 91.38 7.00 91.38 91.83 92.24 92.60 92.96 55-59 93.71 7.00 94.12 94.46 94.76 95.02 95.28 60-64 95.62 7.00 96.31 96.54 96.75 96.92 97.09 Total 7.39 CBR 47.99 49.43 50.84 52.22 53.57 Total to 40 7,49 CDR 23.45 23.60 23.77 23.94 24.12 Total to 20 7.51 GR 2.46 2.58 2.71 2.83 2.95 Table A.4.1l.B: Malawi 1977 Census: Male Cumulated Age Distribution Reported Males Best -------------Fitted Stable Population------------ Age Group 1977 TFR TFR=7.0 TFR=7.25 TFR=7.5 TFR=7.75 TFR=8.0 0-4 19.81 7.91 18.12 18.60 19.07 19.52 19.97 5-9 35.12 8+ 31.34 32.08 32.81 33.50 34.18 10-14 46.13 8+ 42.69 43.59 44.46 45.29 46.10 15-19 55.90 7.92 52.54 53.51 54.44 55.32 56.19 20-24 63.20 7.57 61.06 62.03 62.96 63.84 64.70 25-29 70.84 7.69 68.40 69.33 70.22 71.05 71.87 30-34 76.28 7.47 74.70 75.56 76.38 77.15 77.88 35-39 81.21 7.37 80.11 80.87 81.60 82.26 82.91 40-44 84.76 7.02 84.75 85.40 86.02 86.57 87.12 45-49 88.71 7.00 88.71 89.24 89.74 90.18 90.62 50-54 91.17 47.00 92.02 92.42 92.81 93.14 93.47 55-59 93.59 <7.00 94.67 94.96 95.24 95.47 95.71 60-64 95.42 <7.00 96.73 96.92 97.11 97.25 97.41 00 CBR 48.91 50.36 51.77 53.16 54.51 CDR 24.33 24.50 24.67 24.84 25.03 GR 2.46 2.59 2.71 2.83 2.95