Abstract
Transition Theory provides the theoretical underpinning for many explanations for past population changes and, more importantly, for many population projections. Our paper proves, through the use of symbolic logic, that Transition Theory does not contain principles strong enough to support population projections. Such projections, consequently, must be based upon their author’s intuition rather than a reasoned application of Transition Theory. We follow our proofs with a brief discussion of various ways in which the Theory may be modified. Our emphasis is upon and only upon the logical characters of these modifications.
The text of this article is only available as a PDF.
References
Becker, Gary S. (
1960
). National Bureau of Economic Research
An Economic Analysis of Fertility
Demographic and Economic Change in Developed Countries
(pp. 209
–240
). Princeton
: Princeton University Press
.Carlsson, Gosta (
1966
). The Decline of Fertility: Innovation or Adjustment Process
. Population Studies
, 20
, 149
–174
. 10.2307/2172980Cowgill, Donald O (
1963
). Transition Theory as General Population Theory
. Social Forces
, 41
, 270
–274
. 10.2307/2573170Davis, Kingsley (
1963
). The Theory of Change and Response in Modern Demographic History
. Population Index
, 29
, 345
–366
. 10.2307/2732014Davis, Kingsley, & Blake, Judith (
1956
). Social Structure and Fertility: An Analytical Framework
. Economic Development and Cultural Change
, 4
, 211
–235
. 10.1086/449714Loschky, David J., & Wilcox, William (
1973
). Transition Theory: A Mode of Analysis
. Review of Social Theory
, 2
, 16
–50
.Notestein, Frank W. (
1945
). Population-the Long View
. In Schultz, Theodore W. (Ed.), Food for the World
(pp. 36
–57
). Chicago
: University of Chicago Press
.Stolnitz, George J. (
1955
). A Century of International Mortality Trends
. Population Studies
, 9
, 24
–55
. 10.2307/2172340© Population Association of America 1974
1974
