Advertisement

Demography

, Volume 40, Issue 2, pp 201–216 | Cite as

Decomposing change in life expectancy: A bouquet of formulas in honor of Nathan Keyfitz’s 90th birthday

  • James W. Vaupel
  • Vladimir Canudas Romo
Article

Abstract

We extend Nathan Keyfitz’s research on continuous change in life expectancy over time by presenting and proving a new formula for decomposing such change. The formula separates change in life expectancy over time into two terms. The first term captures the general effect of reduction in death rates at all ages, and the second term captures the effect of heterogeneity in the pace of improvement in mortality at different ages. We extend the formula to decompose change in life expectancy into age-specific and cause-specific components, and apply the methods to analyze changes in life expectancy in Sweden and Japan.

Keywords

Life Expectancy Life Table Covariance Term Demographic Research Remain Life Expectancy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andreev, E.M. 1982. “Method Komponent v Analize Prodoljitelnosty Zjizni” [The Method of Components in the Analysis of Length of Life]. Vestnik Statistiki 9:42–47.Google Scholar
  2. Andreev, E.M., V. Shkolnikov, and A.Z. Begun. 2002. “Algorithm for Decomposition of Differences Between Aggregate Demographic Measures and Its Application to Life Expectancies, Gini Coefficients, Health Expectancies, Parity-Progression Ratios and Total Fertility Rates.” Demographic Research 7:499–522. Available on-line at http://www.demographic-research.org/CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arriaga, E.E. 1984. “Measuring and Explaining the Change in Life Expectancies.” Demography 21:83–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berkeley Mortality Database. University of California, Berkeley (USA). Available on-line at www.demog.berkeley.edu/wilmoth/mortality/ (data downloaded on September 18, 2001).Google Scholar
  5. Das Gupta, P. 1978. “A General Method of Decomposing a Difference Between Two Rates Into Several Components.” Demography 15:99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. — 1993. Standardization and Decomposition of Rates: A User’s Manual. Current Population Reports, Series P-23, No. 186. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.Google Scholar
  7. Demetrius, L. 1979. “Relations Between Demographic Parameters.” Demography 16:329–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Goldman, N. and G. Lord. 1986. “A New Look at Entropy and the Lifetable.” Demography 23:275–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hill, G. 1993. “The Entropy of the Survival Curve: An Alternative Measure.” Canadian Studies in Population 20:43–57.Google Scholar
  10. Hokkert, R. 1987. Lifetable Transformations and Inequality Measures: Some Noteworthy Formal Relations. Demography 24:615–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Human Mortality Database. University of California, Berkeley (USA), and Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research (Germany). Available on-line at www.mortality.org or www.humanmortality.de (data downloaded on May 23, 2002).Google Scholar
  12. Keyfitz, N. 1977. “What Difference Does it Make if Cancer Were Eradicated? An Examination of the Taeuber Paradox.” Demography 14:411–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. — 1985. Applied Mathematical Demography. 2nd ed. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Kim, Y.J. and D.M. Strobino. 1984. “Decomposition of the Difference Between Two Rates With Hierarchical Factors.” Demography 21:361–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kitagawa, E.M. 1955. “Components of a Difference Between Two Rates.” American Statistical Association Journal 50(272):1168–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mitra, S. 1978. “A Short Note on the Taeuber Paradox.” Demography 15:621–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pollard, J.H. 1982. “The Expectation of Life and Its Relationship to Mortality.” Journal of the Institute of Actuaries 109:225–40.Google Scholar
  18. — 1988. “On the Decomposition of Changes in Expectation of Life and Differentials in Life Expectancy.” Demography 25:265–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pressat, R. 1985. “Contribution des Écarts de Mortalité par Âge à la Différence des Vies Moyennes” [The significance of variations in mortality by age on differences in life expectancy]. Population 4–5:765–70.Google Scholar
  20. Preston, S.H., P. Heuveline, and M. Guillot. 2001. Demography: Measuring and Modeling Population Processes. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. United Nations. 1982. Levels and Trends of Mortality Since 1950, Study 74. New York: United Nations, Department of International Economic and Social Affairs.Google Scholar
  22. Vaupel, J.W. 1986. “How Change in Age-Specific Mortality Affects Life Expectancy.” Population Studies 40:147–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Vaupel, J.W. 1992. “Analysis of Population Changes and Differences.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Population Association of America, Denver, April 30–May 2.Google Scholar
  24. Vaupel, J.W. and V. Canudas Romo. 2000. “How Mortality Improvement Increases Population Growth.” Pp. 350–57 in Optimization, Dynamics and Economic Analysis: Essays in Honor of Gustav Feichtinger, edited by E.J. Dockner, R.F. Hartl, M. Luptacik, and G. Sorger. Heidelberg: Springer. Available on-line at http://www.demogr.mpg.de/Papers/Working/wp-1999-015.pdfGoogle Scholar
  25. Vaupel, J.W. 2002. “Decomposing Demographic Change into Direct vs. Compositional Components.” Demographic Research 7:1–14. Available on-line at http://www.demographic-research.org/Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Population Association of America 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • James W. Vaupel
    • 1
  • Vladimir Canudas Romo
    • 2
  1. 1.Max Planck Institute for Demographic ResearchRostockGermany
  2. 2.Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research and Population Research CentreUniversity of GroningenGermany

Personalised recommendations