Problems of Social Hygiene, Public Health and History of MedicineProblems of Social Hygiene, Public Health and History of Medicine0869-866X2412-2106Joint-Stock Company Chicot55510.32687/0869-866X-2021-29-3-430-436Научная статьяThe factors of birth of second child in contemporary Russia: The analysis of sociological survey resultsRostovskayaT. K.rostovskaya.tamara@mail.ruArkhangelskiyV. N.-KuchmaevaO. V.-SudinS. A.-The Institute for Demographic Research - Branch of the Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology of the Russian Academy of SciencesThe Economic Faculty of The Federal State Budget Educational Institution of Higher Education “The M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University”The Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education “The N. I. Lobachevsky Nizhni Novgorod State University”, 603950, Nizhni Novgorod1512202129343043614072021Copyright © 2021,2021The article considers the factors determining the orientation of Russians in relation to the birth of second child in single-child families. The analysis is based on the sociological survey data of the first wave of the All-Russian survey “The Demographic Well-being of Russia”, carried out at the turn of 2019 - in the beginning of 2020 by the research team headed by Professor Rostovskaya T. K. The emphasis on the determination of namely second births is determined by the fact that it is just this determination that has social psychological and social economic character, while the dynamics of indices of first births is primarily associated with changes in nuptiality. Moreover, the two children continues to be the modal value of the ideal, the desired and the expected number of children in Russia and in the most other economically developed countries. The conclusions of the study are based on the distribution of respondents according a number of characteristics that stand as factors of second births. The analysis demonstrated that a more expressed orientation to the birth of second child occurs with relatively greater value of two children, perception of it as a factor contributing to marriage consolidation, significantly greater first of all in women. The importance of such motives for the birth of second child as strong desire in male spouse and desire to have an infant in the family again is emphasized. Besides, the results of the study demonstrated that high valuation of the standard of living promotes the formation of intention to have second child, without any delaying of its birth, but only among those ones who want to have one. It is established that the second births rate is effected by both the demographic factors (age and marital status), social factors (education level, the number of children in families of parents and friends, the nearest environment) and social psychological factors, motives of second child birth and the system of values of Russians. In the context of implementation of the strategy of family demographic policy, it is important that probability of second births is effected primarily by the improvement of quality of medical institutions functioning, development of personal services and provision of preferential credits depending on the number of children in family.fertility factorsprobabilitysecond birthmotivesRussiademographic policyvaluechildrenфакторы рождаемостивероятность вторых рождениймотивы рождаемостирождаемость в Россиидемографическая политикаценность детейДемографическое развитие России: тенденции, прогнозы, меры. Национальный демографический доклад - 2020. Отв. ред. С. В. Рязанцев. М.: ООО «Объединенная редакция»; 2020. 156 с.Антонов А. И., Медков В. М. Второй ребенок. М.: Мысль; 1987.Тындик А. О. Репродуктивные установки и их реализация в современной России. Журнал исследований социальной политики. 2012;(3):361-76.Levin V., Besedina E., Aritomi T. Going Beyond the First Child: Analysis of Russian Mothers' Desired and Actual Fertility Patterns, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper. No.7643. World Bank, Washington. 2016. Режим доступа: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303373080_Going_beyond_the_first_child_analysis_of_Russian_mothers'_desired_and_actual_fertility_PatternsИванова В. С., Петрова Г. В. Вторичное материнство: социокультурный контекст репродуктивных планов. Вестник науки Сибири. 2015;17(2):171-8. Режим доступа: http://sjs2.tpu.ru/journal/article/view/1339/896Рощина Я. М., Черкасова А. Г. Дифференциация факторов рождаемости для различных социально-экономических категорий российских женщин. SPERO. Социальная политика: экспертиза, рекомендации. 2009;(10):159-80.Schoumaker B. A Stata module for computing fertility rates and TFRs from birth histories: tfr2. Demograph. Res. 2013;(2):1093-144.Vézina H., Gauvreau D., Gagnon A. Socioeconomic fertility differentials in a late transition setting: A micro-level analysis of the Saguenay region in Quebec. Demograph. Res. 2014;30:1097-128.Klüsener S., Goldstein J. R. A Long-Standing Demographic East-West Divide in Germany. Popul. Space Place. 2016;22(1):5-22.Синявская О. В., Бирюкова С. С., Фаттахова А. А. Влияние новых мер российской демографической политики на вероятность рождения вторых и последующих детей? Демоскоп. Электронный журнал. 2015;625. Режим доступа: http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2015/0625/analit05.phpЗахаров С. В. Специальные таблицы рождаемости с учетом очередности рождения для поколений российских женщин, родившихся в 1955-1989 гг.: методика построения, интерпретация результатов. XVII Апрельская международная научная конференция по проблемам развития экономики и общества, НИУ ВШЭ, 19-22 апреля 2016 г. Режим доступа: https://www.hse.ru/data/2016/04/27/1128684755/%D0%97%D0%B0%D1%85%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2_%D0%94%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4_%D0%90%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F2016.pdfZeman K., Beaujouan É., Brzozowska Z., Sobotka T. Cohort fertility decline in low fertility countries: Decomposition using parity progression ratios. Demograph. Res. 2018;38:651-90.Wood J. Essays on socioeconomic differentiation in European fertility: Theimpact of economic context and social policy [PhD thesis]. Antwerpen: Universiteit Antwerpen; 2016.Козлов В. А. Изменение модели рождаемости в некоторых республиках Северного Кавказа: только ли социальная политика важна? Журнал исследований социальной политики. 2019;17(1):89-102.Gauthier A. H., Hatzius J. Family benefits and fertility: аn econometric analysis. Popul. Stud. 1997;51:295-306.Can Policies Boost Birth Rates? The OECD Policy Briefs. 2007.Rindfuss R. R., Guilkey D. K., Morgan S. P., Kravdal O., Guzzo K. B. Child Care Availability and First-Birth Timing in Norway. Demography. 2007;44(2):345-72.Малева Т., Макаренцева А., Третьякова Е. Пронаталистская демографическая политика глазами населения: десять лет спустя. Экономическая политика. 2017;12(6):124-47.Slonimczyk F., Yurko A. Assessing the Impact of the Maternity Capital Policy in Russia Using a Dynamic Model of Fertility and Employment. IZA Discussion Paper. 2013. № 7705.