Note:
Gunnar Myrdal died in 1987, less than 70 years ago.
Therefore, this work is protected by copyright,
restricting your legal rights to reproduce it.
However, you are welcome to view it on screen, as you do now.
Read more about copyright.
Full resolution (TIFF) - On this page / på denna sida - III. Population and Migration - 7. Population - 1. The Growth of the Negro Population - 2. Births and Deaths
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has never been proofread. / Denna sida har aldrig korrekturlästs.
Chapter 7. Population 161
While in the country as a whole, around 1930, the net reproduction
rate for Negroes and for whites was about the same, the Negro rate was
significantly below the white rate in each region of the country and in rural
and urban areas taken separately. This situation occurred, of course, because
Negroes were concentrated in the South and in rural areas, which have
high rates for both whites and Negroes compared to other areas. In other
words, it was only because of their unusual geographic distribution that
Negroes were reproducing themselves as rapidly as whites. During the
1930^8, however, it would seem that a fundamental change took place:
the white rates had dropped until they were no longer above the Negro
rates in each region and in rural and urban areas taken separately.® If the
1940 rates for the whole country are ^^standardized” to show what the
rates would be if both color groups were distributed by residence areas
in the same proportion as the total population, the whites rise from 94 to
97 and the nonwhites drop from 107 to 102."^ That is, even if differences
in regional and rural-urban residence are ‘‘held constant,” Negroes now have
a higher net reproduction rate than whites. Since the errors in the census
are greater for Negroes than for whites and, therefore, the discrepancy
is greater—if anything—than shown by the figures we have presented, we
feel justified in presenting the following as a fourth conclusion from the
net reproduction figures: (4) Even within regions and rural-urban areas
taken separately, Negroes are no longer reproducing themselves at a lower
rate than whites. In fact, the figures suggest that they are reproducing them-
selves more—thus reversing the position they held in 1930 and earlier.
2, Births and Deaths
To determine the causes of these diflFerentials and trends, we shall first
have to go to the birth and death rates which compose the net reproduction
rates. Unfortunately these rates are even more unreliable than the composite
net reproduction rate.® Certain general conclusions are justified, however,
even if we cannot rely on the exact magnitudes.
The Negro birth rate, like the white birth rate, has been falling at least
since 1880 and perhaps longer.® And since 1850 it has been consistently
higher than the white birth rate. These important generalizations about
the birth rate have held true in recent years: in 1928-1932 the corrected
gross reproduction rate® was 136 for Negroes—as compared to 122 for
whites (1930)—and by 1933-1937 the Negro rate had fallen to 130.^®
‘These rates apply in the North only to the urban areas.
**The gross reproduction rate is a refined birth rate adjusted to a stable age distribution.
It is the number of girl babies born to the average woman throughout her reproductive
period. It is computed by applying crude birth rates to a life table population of 1,000
women and summing the age specific fertility rates thus obtained. The rates for Negroes
were calculated and corrected for under-registration by Kirk, and the rates for whites
were calculated by Lotka from the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s files. (See
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
