Fallas de agencia y desajuste reproductivo en América Latina: un análisis de las brechas entre ideales y resultados en Bolivia, México y Perú (2023-2024)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20947/S0102-3098a0331%20Palavras-chave:
Agencia reproductiva, Desajuste reproductivo, Fecundidad deseada, América Latina, Enfoque de capacidadesResumo
Este artículo analiza el desajuste reproductivo -entendido como la brecha entre la fecundidad efectiva y la deseada- desde el enfoque de las capacidades y la noción de agencia reproductiva. Utilizando microdatos de las encuestas de Demografía y Salud (DHS) más recientes de Bolivia, México y Perú (2023-2024), se examina este fenómeno en mujeres de 40 a 49 años mediante modelos probit (dicotómico y multinomial) y regresiones por mínimos cuadrados ordinarios. Los resultados revelan que el equilibrio reproductivo constituye una situación minoritaria y que el desajuste es un fenómeno extendido en los tres países analizados. Asimismo, la evidencia es consistente con la idea de que dicho desajuste no presenta un carácter homogéneo, sino que adopta formas diferenciadas según su dirección. En particular, el exceso de fecundidad se asocia con contextos de mayor vulnerabilidad estructural y con la experiencia de pérdida de hijos, mientras que el déficit aparece con mayor frecuencia en sectores con mayores niveles de recursos materiales y educativos. En conjunto, la evidencia sugiere que los bajos niveles agregados de fecundidad en la región coexisten con restricciones en la capacidad de las personas para concretar sus preferencias reproductivas, lo que subraya la relevancia de considerar las condiciones estructurales y los entornos habilitadores en el análisis de la fecundidad.
Downloads
Referências
BEN-PORATH, Y. Fertility response to child mortality: micro data from Israel. Journal of Political Economy, v. 84, n. 4, part 2, p. S163-S178, 1976.
BERRINGTON, A.; PATTARO, S. Educational differences in fertility desires, intentions and behavior: a life course perspective. Advances in Life Course Research, v. 21, p. 10-27, 2014.
BLOOM, D.; KUHN, M.; PRETTNER, K. The debate over falling fertility. F&D Special Report, p. 50-53, June 2025.
BONGAARTS, J. The measurement of wanted fertility. Population and Development Review, v. 16, n. 3, p. 487-506, 1990.
BONGAARTS, J. The end of the fertility transition in the developed world. Population and Development Review, v. 28, n. 3, p. 419-443, 2002.
BONGAARTS, J. Fertility transitions in low- and middle-income countries: the role of preferences. Population and Development Review, v. 51, n. 1, p. 163-180, 2025.
BUENO, X.; PARDO, I. Gender-role attitudes and fertility ideals in Latin America. Journal of Population Research, v. 40, n. 1, art. 2, 2023.
CARVALHO, A.; BONIFÁCIO, G.; COSTA, I. Panorama del déficit de fecundidad en América Latina basado en indicadores. Notas de Población, v. 47, n. 110, p. 127-156, 2020.
CARVALHO, A. A.; BONIFÁCIO, G. M. Reflections on mismatches in the fertility preferences in Latin America. Revista Latinoamericana de Población, v. 18, p. 1-29, 2024.
CARVALHO, A.; WONG, L.; MIRANDA-RIBEIRO, A. Fecundidade abaixo do desejado no Brasil: um estudo das mulheres que tiveram menos filhos do que gostariam. Revista Latinoamericana de Población, v. 10, n. 18, p. 83-106, 2016.
CASTERLINE, J. B.; EL-ZEINI, L. O. The estimation of unwanted fertility. Demography, v. 44, n. 4, p. 729-745, 2007.
CHACKIEL, J. La transición de la fecundidad en América Latina 1950-2000. Papeles de Población, v. 10, n. 41, p. 9-58, 2004.
CEPAL - Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe. Observatorio Demográfico 2025. LC/PUB.2025/19-P, 2025.
FERNÁNDEZ SOTO, M.; PARDO, I.; PEDETTI, G. Intenciones reproductivas ambiguas y dudosas en la progresión al segundo hijo: un estudio con métodos combinados en el Uruguay. Notas de Población, v. 46, n. 109, p. 173-202, 2020.
GÜNTHER, I.; HARTTGEN, K. Desired fertility and number of children born across time and space. Demography, v. 53, n. 1, p. 55-83, 2016.
HEERINGA, S.; WEST, B.; BERGLUND, P. Applied survey data analysis. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2017.
IBITOYE, M.; CASTERLINE, J. B.; ZHANG, C. Fertility preferences and contraceptive change in low- -and middle-income countries. Studies in Family Planning, v. 53, n. 2, p. 361-376, 2022.
KARHUNEN, O.; JOKELA, M.; GOLOVINA, K. Associations between early family environment and ideal number of children. International Journal of Psychology, v. 58, n. 6, p. 574-583, 2023.
LAPPEGÅRD, T.; KRISTENSEN, A. P.; DOMMERMUTH, L. Disentangling the relative importance of subjective economic uncertainty for fertility intentions and realization in Norway. Genus, v. 81, n. 1, art. 37, 2025.
LAZZARI, E.; BEAUJOUAN, E. Infertility and unrealized ideal family size. Population and Development Review, v. 52, p. 70-93, 2026.
LEOCÁDIO, V.; VERONA, A. P.; WAJNMAN, S. Exploring the association between gender equality in the family and fertility intentions: an explanation of the findings in low-fertility countries. Genus, v. 80, n. 1, art. 26, 2024.
MARGOLIS, R.; MYRSKYLÄ, M. A global perspective on happiness and fertility. Population and Development Review, v. 37, n. 1, p. 29-56, 2011.
MORGAN, S. P.; RACKIN, H. The correspondence between fertility intentions and behavior in the United States. Population and Development Review, v. 36, n. 1, p. 91-118, 2010.
NASRABAD, H.; ABBASI-SHAVAZI, M. Ideal fertility in Iran: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Women’s Health and Reproduction Sciences, v. 8, n. 1, p. 10-18, 2020.
NUSSBAUM, M. Capabilities and social justice. International Studies Review, v. 4, n. 2, p. 123-135, 2002.
OSBORN, F. Excess and unwanted fertility. Eugenics Quarterly, v. 10, n. 2, p. 59-72, 1963.
PARDO, I.; SACCO, N.; ACOSTA, E.; CASTRO, A. Fertility decline to low and lowest-low levels in Latin America. Population Research and Policy Review, v. 44, n. 1, art. 9, 2025.
PRESTON, S. Mortality, morbidity, and development. Population Bulletin of the United Nations Economic Commission for Western Asia, v. 15, p. 63-75, 1978.
ROBEYNS, I. The capability approach: a theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development, v. 6, n. 1, p. 93-117, 2005.
SCHULTZ, T. W. The value of children: an economic perspective. Journal of Political Economy, v. 81, n. 2, part 2, p. S2-S13, 1973.
SEN, A. Freedom and agency. The Journal of Philosophy, v. 82, n. 4, p. 203-221, 1985.
SEN, A. The concept of development. In: CHENERY, H.; SRINIVASAN, T. N. (Ed.). Handbook of development economics. v. 1. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1988. p. 9-26.
SEN, A. Capability and well-being. In: NUSSBAUM, M.; SEN, A. (Ed.). The quality of life. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993. p. 270-293.
SHUKLA, A.; KARABCHUK, T.; AL NEYADI, L. M. Gender roles perceptions and ideal number of children: case study of Emirati youth. Reproductive Health, v. 20, n. 1, art. 138, 2023.
SOBOTKA, T.; BEAUJOUAN, E. Two is best? The persistence of a two-child family ideal in Europe. Vienna: Vienna Institute of Demography, Austrian Academy of Sciences, 2014. (Vienna Institute of Demography Working Papers, n. 3/2014).
THOMSON, E.; MCDONALD, E.; BUMPASS, L. Fertility desires and fertility: hers, his, and theirs. Demography, v. 27, n. 4, p. 579-588, 1990.
UN - United Nations. World Population Prospects 2024: data sources. New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, 2024.
UNFPA - United Nations Population Fund. State of World Population 2025: the real fertility crisis - the pursuit of reproductive agency in a changing world. [S.l.]: Stylus Publishing, LLC, 2025.
VAN SOEST, A.; SAHA, U. R. Relationships between infant mortality, birth spacing and fertility in Matlab, Bangladesh. PLoS One, v. 13, n. 4, e0195940, 2018.
WOLPIN, K. I. Determinants and consequences of the mortality and health of infants and children. In: ROSENZWEIG, M. R.; STARK, O. (Ed.). Handbook of population and family economics. v. 1. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1997. p. 483-557.
YEATMAN, S.; SMITH-GREENAWAY, E. Unrealized fertility in demography. Demographic Research, v. 53, p. 1145-1172, 2025.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2026 Revista Brasileira de Estudos de População
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Os artigos publicados na Rebep são originais e protegidos sob a licença Creative Commons do tipo atribuição (CC-BY). Essa licença permite reutilizar as publicações na íntegra ou parcialmente para qualquer propósito, de forma gratuita, mesmo para fins comerciais. Qualquer pessoa ou instituição pode copiar, distribuir ou reutilizar o conteúdo, desde que o autor e a fonte original sejam propriamente mencionados.
