[Theoretical views of the fertility transition in Latin America: what is the relevance of a diffusionist approach?]. / Visiones teoricas de la transicion de la fecundidad en America Latina: que relevancia tiene un enfoque difusionista?

PIP: Transition theory has dominated demographic thought since the early 20th century, but recent critiques prompted largely by results of the Princeton European Fertility Project and the World Fertility Surveys have cast doubt on some of its tenets. Greater importance has correspondingly been given to changes resulting from social diffusion of low fertility norms. Many of the elements of diffusion and transition theory are not necessarily contradictory, and much of the theoretical underpinning of past fertility research in Latin America has implicitly incorporated both transition and diffusion theory. The article analyzes general aspects of the diffusion hypothesis and evaluates their relevance for interpretation of fertility decline in Latin America. It adopts a comparative perspective in examining the evolution of fertility at the international level and within Latin American countries. At the international level, indicators of mortality and such development variables as per capita income, literacy and urbanization rates, were related inversely to fertility as predicted by transition theory, but the relationships have shifted and become less strong over the past 3 decades, suggesting that substantial structural changes have been produced that are not explained by changes in these variables. Despite persistence of some socioeconomic differences, once the trend to fertility decline has appeared on the national level, most large population groups have reduced their fertility, and within a relatively short time. From the mid-1970s on, a general decline in ideal family size has occurred, and the trend is not greatly affected by the economic stagnation or regression of the 1980s. A diffusionist approach seems to be useful for describing a process of change in desired and observed fertility, where diffusion within cohorts and across social groups both appear to be important. But there is less certainty about the relevance of diffusion theory as a truly explanatory model, given the difficulty of distinguishing the effects of diffusion from other underlying causes of change. Both socioeconomic factors and social interaction may have played important roles in explanation of pretransition fertility differences that have persisted over long periods of time, as well as in the initiation of fertility decline within countries. Once begun, the transition process may acquire its own dynamics that may be interpreted in general terms as a process of social diffusion conditioned by the socioeconomic particularities of each country. It is difficult to incorporate these socioeconomic factors in a consistent way in diffusion theory, however.^ieng