• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Main
 Tables
 Bibliography














Title: The economic activity of women in Latin America
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00081835/00001
 Material Information
Title: The economic activity of women in Latin America
Physical Description: 29 p. : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Gendell, Murray
Rossel U., Guillermo
Inter-American Commission of Women -- Assembly
Publisher: Pan American Union
Place of Publication: Washington D.C
Publication Date: 1967
 Subjects
Subject: Women -- Employment -- Latin America   ( lcsh )
Genre: international intergovernmental publication   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: by Murray Gendell and Guillermo Rossel U.
General Note: "Organization of American States, Inter-American Commission of Women, fourteenth annual assembly, Montevideo, Uruguay, November 1967."
General Note: "DCAA/Doc. 21, 6 November 1967."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00081835
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 80935049

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Title Page
    Main
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
    Tables
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
    Bibliography
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
Full Text

SOrganization of American States
NTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION OF WOMEN

FOURTEENTH ANNUAL ASSEMBLY
Montevideo, Uruguay November 1967


A-(R~ /


A J


Di tribution: Limited


DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)
6 November 1967
Original: English












THE ECONOMIC ACTIVITY OF WOMEN
IN LATIN AMERICA



















PAN AMERICAN UNION
General Secretariat of the Organization of American States
Washington, D.C. 1967





DCAA/Doc. 21(English)


THE ECONOMIC ACTIVITY OF WOMEN
IN LATIN AMERICA

by

Murray Gendell and Guillermo Rossel U.l/
Center for Population Research
Georgetown University (Washington, D.C.)

Anthropology was once described as the study of man--embracing woman.
This definition is more than a scholar's facetious paraphrase of the colloquial
wisdom that "love makes the world go 'round." It also implies that the links
between men and women as lovers, spouses, parents and co-workers constitute much
of the foundation of social life. Whether one believes that the relationship
has been largely man's exploitation of woman or a partnership, it ought to be
recognized that an important change in that relationship has been occurring where
the old tie of co-worker has been loosening under the impact of industrializa-
tion.

Perhaps the most fundamental aspect of the modernization process associated
with industrialization was the change in attitude toward innovation. As new
criteria, such as efficiency and profitability, became increasingly accepted in
economic affairs, and as empirical science provided a firmer basis for the devel-
opment of more productive technology, the grip of tradition weakened and new
political and social ideas were advanced. The resulting ideals of freedom and
equality are still powerful engines of change in the world today, not only in the
developing nations, but also in the industrialized countries, where they have
already had considerable but hardly final effects.

As a consequence of these forces, women in the most modernized societies\ //)
have come increasingly to be regarded as persons and citizens entitled to the) 74L,'
same degree of freedom, equality and opportunity as men. Although these ideals
are far from fully implemented, let alone unanimously and unequivocally accepted,
the record does show a measure of progress: women have gained the right to own
property in their own name, to attend school, to vote and to hold office, to
mention only some of the main advances. In addition, through a combination of.
circumstances, only one (but an important one) of which was the growing strength
of these ideals, these societies have become increasingly permissive about women
working away from home. And as this permissiveness has come to be extended more
and more to wives and mothers, increasing proportions of them have taken jobs.




I/ Doctor Murray Gendell is Associate Professor of Sociology and Research
Associate, Center for Population Research, Mr. Guillermo Rossel U. is
Research Assistant, Center for Population Research.


- 1 -






DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


The significance of this phenomenon, via its potential effects on women them-
selves, their spouses, their families and the societies in which they live,
has grown apace.

In the poor countries, on the other hand, the wrenching struggle to over-
come poverty and wretchedness has only recently begun, and the inertia of ;
tradition still constitutes a massive obstacle to success. Some changes,
nevertheless, in at least some countries have occurred, and it is worthwhile
to seek periodically to ascertain and assess the extent, nature and signifi-
cance of these changes. This report has been prepared for just such a purpose
with respect to the gainful employment of women in Latin America during the
1950's.

The information on which the report is based comes almost completely from
the various national censuses of population taken around 1950 (Peru, 1940) and
1960. Earlier censuses rarely provide useful or reliable data. The extent
and naturefi e 5y woul re ar6jpparent if useable infor-
mation for earlier dates were also available. But the disadvantage is probably
not great, since changes are more likely to have occurred or taken place more
rapidly during the fifties than earlier. In light of the trends in industry,
alized countries, the available data should permit an assessment of the degree
to which Latin American women's participation in economic activity may be taken
as a sign of the modernization of this region.

Most of the report presents the facts, as best as they can be ascertained,
in answer to the following questions: how many women were economically active?
which women were they (young or old, married or single, etc.)? and what kinds
of work did they do? Beyond this, it is possible at present to add little more
than speculation regarding the determinants and consequences of their gainful
employment, but some comments are addressed to these central issues.

Ao How many women have been economically active in Latin America?

Taking the census data at face value, there were about 10.5 million women
around 1950 and approximately 13 million in the early sixties counted as
economically active (Table 1). Roughly one in every twenty of these females
were (at both dates) actually girls less than 15 but not less than 10 years of
age, except in four countries. Girls younger than 10 years of age--as young
as six or seven in some cases-- were included in the count of the economically
active in the Dominican Republic (1950 only), Guatemala, Mexico (1960 only)'
and Peru. The relative number of economically active girls, as Table 2 shows,
varied considerably among the different countries, ranging from about two per-
cent to more than 10 percent.

There was, thus, an increase of roughly 2.5 million in the number of
females enumerated as economically active, a gain of about 24 percent. Since
the number of working-age females grew at approximately the same pace, the
activity rate (i.e., the number of active women divided by the number of


- 2 -





- 3 -


DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


working-age women) for the whole region must have remained at about the same
level during the fifties. The activity rates for the countries for which a
comparison may be made reveal, with some exceptions, that this was the case
(Table 3).

As for the levels of the rates, except for Chile (1952), Ecuador (1950),
and Peru (1940)_U theydid not at either date exceed 25 percent. If the de-
clines for the three countries just mentioned anad' i-large~increase in
Nicaragua are real (rather than a result of changes in definitions or census
procedures), then the range of variation among the countries has narrowed.
All the countries reported, except Guatemala and perhaps the Dominican
Republic /, had rates at the last census in the range 17-25 percent. Around
1950, except for Guatemala, the range was 14-43 percent, or 14-34, if Peru is
also excluded because its census was taken in 1940.

It is necessary to be cautious about the reality of the large changes
indicated by the data in the several countries just mentioned for at least
three reasons. In the first place, rapid change in activity rates are unusual,
and they require satisfactory explanation in order to be accepted, &Secondly,
since there was little or no change in most of the countries for which change
can be measured, the magnitude of the apparent shifts in the "exceptional"
countries seems even more surprising. Finally, the comparability of the data
for both dates in each country (let alone inter-country comparisons) is in no
case well established. k

The government agencies responsible for gathering and publishing the
census data on economic activity are, or should be, aware of the definitions
and procedures used and of the significance of these for the interpretation of
the data. The need for detailed, explicit information is especially pronounced
when changes in definitions and procedures have been made. Yet the information
provided is, in our judgment, in all cases inadequate, typically to an extreme
degree.



2/ The official rates for Bolivia and Haiti in 1950 were very high, 60
and 83 percent respectively. Much of this, however, was due to the
inclusion of very many more family workers than in the other countries.
Neither country has taken a census after 1950.
}/"Perhaps" because the decline, as in the case of the other countries for
which the rates seem to have changed substantially, may be more apparent
than real.
/ Strictly speaking, one may therefore, also question whether the lack of
change in most countries is real.







DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


Some of the problems are:

1. Was there a change from the gainful worker concept of economic
activity to the labor force one? (Or vice versa.) If so, how
mudh difference does this seem to have made? Which particular
groups (men, women, the young, the old, etc.) were affected?

2. Was there a change in the reference period of activity (i.e.,
the time interval in which activity status is judged: one day,
one week, one month, indefinite, etc.)? If so, is it possible
to estimate the effect of the change?

3. How much effect has a change in the minimum age had? (The three
changes which were made are s~own in Table 1.)

4. Were the unemployed, first job seekers, and unpaid family workers
included among the economically active to an equal extent in both
censuses?

Until clear answers to these and other relevant questions are supplied,
the extent of changes in economic activity in Latin America, as measured by
census data, will remain uncertain. And while researchers may seek to answer
them to some extent through careful and clever analyses, much of the needed
information can be supplied only by the agencies that have gathered the data.

B. Which women were economically active?

This question will be answered by supplying information about the age,
marital status, residence and education of economically active women. It
would be desirable to have information about other characteristics, such as
own or spouse's income and the number and age of children, but we have not
(at least yet) encountered published census data providing such information.

1. Age

The first thing to note (Table 4) is that the direction and magnitude,
whether little or much, of changes were fairly similar throughout the age
range. Hence, the changes observed for all working-age women were not the
net result of opposing trends among different ages or of large changes in
some age categories and small shifts in others. The next, and most striking,
feature of these data is the pattern of age variation in the rates. They
were very low at the youngest ages, increasing with age until a peak was
reached, typically among women aged 20-24 years, after which they usually
became smaller at each succeeding age level. The one pronounced exception to
this pattern appears to have occurred in Mexico (1960). Unless, however, this
unusual pattern (a high positive correlation of age and activity rate) can be
satisfactorily explained, it would be difficult to believe that it reflects


- 4 -





DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


reality.,/ Finally, except for Ecuador (1950), age-specific activity rates
rarely exceeded 30 percent. When they did, it was among women 20-30 years
old,

2. Residence

Activity rates were considerably lower in rural than in urban areas
(Table 5). Except for Peru (1961), urban rates were about 2-4 times larger
than rural rates. In a few instances (at least so far), it has been possible
to measure activity rates by degree of urbanization and not merely in terms
of a dichotomy. These data show that the activity rates increased with the
degree of urbanization. For instance, the rate for women (7+) in Guatemala
City (1964) was 28.2 percent, while the rate for women (7+) living in urban
places outside of Guatemala City was 13.7 percent. In rural areas, as Table
5 reveals, it was 4.9 percent. Similarly, in Venezuela (1961), the rates
were: Caracas Metropolitan Area, 29.1 percent; other urban, 16,6 percent; and
rural 8.2. percent.

For women at least 10 years old, rates ranged from about 21 to 33 percent.
Rural rates also seemed to have a characteristically narrow range, which
(except for Guatemala in 1964) varied from around 8 to approximately 16 percent.
Activity rates by age, not shown in any tables in this report, generally resem-
ble the age patterns for the countries as a whole. However, the relationship
was usually more pronouncedly inverse (i.e., the rates got smaller, from about
age 20 on, as age increased) among urban than among rural working-age women.
Another fairly consistent difference was that the age at which the rates were
highest was 20-24 in the urban but 15-19 in the rural category. By age, urban
rates frequently exceeded 30 percent, but considerably less 6ften 40 percent.
In the major urban areas, however, as indicated by data for Guatemala City,
Panama City and Caracas, at least two out of every five women in their twenties
were economically active.

Data for both dates were available for only a small number of countries
(all located in Middle America). In Costa Rica, El Salvador and Panama, the
very small changes in the rates for the whole country were not the net result
of substantial increases and decreases in the rates for urban and rural areas.
The residence--s~eific rates also changed little. In Nicaragua, however, the
apparently large (relative) increase in the country rate was also observed
among both urban and rural women.

In Guatemala, the interesting point is that although the urban rate fell
about five percentage points and the rural rate about 1.5 points, the country
rate dropped only around a single percentage point. The explanation lies in




2/ The 1950 data for Ecuador also display a somewhat deviant age pattern,
but they are not nearly so dubious as those for Mexico.


- 5 -







DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


the rapid urbanization of Guatemala's working-age women (Table 5A). Whereas
little more than a fourth of women 15 years old or more lived in urban places
in 1950, almost two out of five were urban residents by 1964. And since the
activity rate for urban women was at both dates much higher than the rate for
rural women, the increased urbanization exerted an upward pressure on the rate
for the country. The same process was at work in the other countries, but it
appears to have been strongest in Guatemala.

Among the countries shown in Table 5A, except Venezuela, 40 to 50 percent
of working-age women were urban residents by the early sixties. In Venezuela,
which has been urbanizing very rapidly in the past few decades, about two out
of every three working-age women were living in urban localities. The propor-
tion of active women residing in urban places was, however, much greater than
the percentage of working-age women. By 1960, except for Peru (in which less
than 60 percent were urban), the percentage of active women in urban areas was,
for the countries reported, in the range around 70-80 percent0

3- Marital status

Except for Colombia, the information presented in Table 6 refers only to
the censuses of 1960, and then just for eight countries. Divorced women (15+)
had the highest activity rates in all but two of the nine countries shown,
Colombia (1951) 6/ and Costa Rica (1963). In these two, the rates for single
women were slightly greater than the rates for divorced women. The lowest
rates, on the other hand, were displayed, except in Colombia (1951) and Peru
(1961), by women reported as living in consensual unions. In Colombia and Peru,
married women had the lowest rates.

In five of the nine countries the rates for divorced women exceeded 40 per-
cent, reaching as high as 66 percent in Panama. Six of the nine countries had
'single' rates greater than 30, but not more than 40 percent. The rates for
wives and consensual mates were, in most countries, less than 10 percent.

Age patterns in each marital status had the same general form as that for
all working-age women, increasing from relatively low rates at the youngest ages
to a peak and then declining thereafter as age increased. There were two inter-
esting differences, however, with respect to the age at which the highest rate
occurred. One, in all marital statuses the peak age was older than the one (20-
24) typically observed for all working-age women. Since the activity rate for
all women is the weighted average, at each age, of the rates in each marital
status, much of the explanation must be that the weight of the relatively large
rate for single women was considerably greater at 20-24 years of age than at the
succeeding ages. Two, the peak age among women in consensual unions tended to
be around 40-50 years, whereas it was about 25-34 years in the other marital
statuses.


6/ This refers to separated women only.


- 6 -






DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


Well over half of the active women was single in each of the nine
countries, except the Dominican Republic, where only one-third wassingl6e,
Another third in that country vas in consensual unions, reflecting the
unusually large proportion of all working-age women in that marital status.
In the other eight countries from 56 to 69 percent of active women were
single. Except for Colombia (1951), in which the percentage was 13, there
were in the countries shown in Table 6 from 18-29 percent of active women who
were married.

4. Education

Of the four characteristics discussed in this report, the least infor-
mation available was for education. Table 7, nevertheless, contains data for
five countries (two of 1950) and two major urban areas. These figures reveal,
that activity rates were positively correlated to a high degree with education
level: as education increased, so did. the activity rate.

Women with no schooling in four of the five countries had rates under 15
percent. In Colombia (1951) their rate was 18 percent. At the primary school
level the rates were in the range 16-21 percent. At the higher educational
levels, except in Colombia, the rates increased sharply, reaching a range of
58-74 percent at the level of university education. In Colombia, however, even
at this level the rate was only 35 percent.

In the two large urban areas--the Federal District of Brazil (1950), which
was Rio de Janeiro, and the Caracas Metropolitan Area (1961)--women with no
schooling had the same rates as those who had gone to primary school. But the
better educated women had successively higher rates. These higher level rates
were about the same as those for the whole country. Much of this was due to the
concentration in each country.of educated- women in the large urban places.
Thus, the percentage of all working-age women in each country who lived in the
urban area of the capital 6ity increased sharply as the educational level
increased. In Venezuela (1961), for example, only 13 percent or so of women
(10+) with no schooling lived in the Caracas Metropolitan Area, but at the
other extreme about two-thirds of the women (10+) with university education
lived in the Area. The urban concentration of better educated women and their
higher activity rates are part of the explanation for the fact activity rates
were higher, the greater the degree of urbanization.

Active women in Panama (1960) and Costa Rica (1963) seem to have been
better educated than their counterparts in Colombia (1951) and Venezuela (1961)
--in which two countries the educational distribution of active women was very
similar-- and especially in Brazil (1950), where 70 percent of the active women
had not gone to school. In general, however, the great majority of active
women had not gone beyond primary school, largely reflecting the low average
educational level of working-age women in each country. The situati~$ is
probably the same in all or almost all Latin American countries


- 7 -







DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


C. What kind of work did the economically active women do?

As anyone familiar with Latin America would expect, they were chiefly
service workers. At both dates in most countries, about two of every five
women were engaged as service workers (Table 8). Ahd most of these were apa-enitly
providing domestic service (Table 8A). Where change can be measured, there
appeared to have been little or no shift in the proportion of service workers.
In the other broad classes of occupations, however, there were changes which
indicate a modest but definite upgrading. The relative number of active women
in agriculture and related occupations dropped, in some cases sharply, and
that in the blue collar occupations, although more stable, tended to decline.
The proportions in the white collar occupations, on the other hand, in all
measurable cases increased, often rather sharply. This was somewhat more
apparent among 'professional, technical and related workers' than among other
white collar (administrative, office, sales and related) workers.

The percentage of teachers, retail sales workers and office workers varied
considerably among themselves and from one country to the next for the five
countries shown in Table 8A. But they constituted approximately one-fifth to
one-quarter of all active women in those countries. Even as recently as the
early sixties, however, the combined total of domestics, farm workers and dress-
makers and related workers was twice as large. Altogether these six categories
comprised about 60-70 percent of all active women in the five categories shown.
It would not be surprising if the situation were similar in most of the other
countries.

There was a pronounced difference among the various major occupational
categories in their age pattern. Service workers as a percentage of all active
women almost always declined steadily with age from a high level at the youngest
ages. On the other hand, there was some tendency for the proportions to in-:-.
crease with age among blue collar, farm, and sales workers. The main qualifi-
cation to this is that for farm workers the percentage was usually also rela4i
tively high at the young ages, especially the youngest, though rarely as high as
among the oldest active women. The pattern was broadly similar for clerical as
for professional and related workers, with a peak among women in their twenties
and smaller percentages in these occupational categories at both younger and
older ages.

Changes in the industrial distribution of active women (Table 9) appear to
confirm the trends just noted. There were generally declines in agriculture
and manufacturing, while the percentages in commerce and services tended to
increase. Since there was, on the whole, little or no change in domestic
service, the increases must have occurred in other service sectors. The gains
among professional and related workers noted above suggest increase in the public
services, such as teaching, health and social welfare.

Finally, turning to status (Table 11), we see that, except for Bolivia (91'
(1950), Haiti (1950) and Peru (1940), most active women have been employees.


- 8 -








DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


The range at the last census extended from one half in Peru to almost seven-
eighths in Costa Rica. Except in the three countries just specified and in
Brazil (1950), almost all the other active women were own account workers.
Virtually none were employers, and relatively few were family workers. There
was no clear pattern of change, but there was in most countries a well-defined
age pattern. Employees and own account workers as a percentage of all active
women declined with age, while the relative number of own account workers and
employers increased.

D. Discussion

As we have seen, the generally low rates of economic activity among women
in Latin American countries remained low throughout the 1950's. There may have
been a considerable increase in Mexico and Nicaragua, depending on the compar- \
ability of the data over time. In most of the other countries, however, there
was apparently little or no change. In the few other countries, the suspi-
ciously large declines are probably (to a considerable extent, if not wholly)
the result of changes in census definitions and procedures.

Since activity rates have been positively correlated with urbanization,
and the trend in the region has been toward increased urbanization, it would
appear strange that activity rates have scarcely increased. A closer exami-
nation of the data, however, suggests hat a cliange in the residential distri-
u o'; _f working-agewomen cannot by itself h-'ve a.striong influence on the
rate for the whole country. The much more important influence is the trend of
tne rates in the urban and rural areas, And, as we have noted above, in the
five countries (all in Middle America) for which change can be measured, rural
rates declined in all but one (Nicaragua, about which the question of compara-
bility remains to be answered)whle urban rates scarcely changed in three and
declined substantially in Guatemala, (If it had not been for the rapid pace
of urbanization in Guatemala, the declines in both urban and rural rates would have
meant a considerably larger drop in the country rate than the modest fall which
the census data indicate.)

Part of the reason, it was pointed out, for the positive correlation of
activity rates and degree of urbanization is that the better educated women,
who have higher activity rates than women with little or no education, are
concentrated in urban areas, probably more so in the main cities or their
suburbs than in the smaller urban places. Again, one would expect that as the
average educational level of women increases, the urban (and perhaps the rural)
activity rates would rise. But the distribution effect may be no more potent
for education than for residence. More significant will be whether employment
opportunities for better educated women will expand quickly enough to absorb the
increase in supply which the current educational expansion is producing and
whether increases in educational attainment will begin to have an effect on
fertility as the evidence of a strong negative correlation between fertility
and attainment suggest it might,

We have not been able to obtain census data (at least as yet) demonstrating
that the number and age of children have a depressing effect on activity rates







- 10 -


DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


in Latin America. But the markedly lower rates for wives and women living in
consensual unions than for other women could and may reflect such a relation-
ship. On the other hand, this fact may reflect no more than the prevailing
attitude toward the gainful employment of wives and mates outside the home.
Nor is the presence of children, even if numerous or young, in the household
necessarily a major obstacle to the mother's employment. Much would depend
on whether she could arrange for the children's care while she works, which
would be greatly facilitatcd if other more or less adult women were living in
the household and not working. Little is known about the structure of families
and households in Latin America, so this is a potentially important question
about which we can now do little more than speculate.

In short, the prevailing high levels of fertility may not by themselves
be hindering many mothers from taking outside employment. The view that
mothers belong at home and, in some cases, the higher labor costs which labor
regulations concerning mothers bring about may be the more important obstacles
to higher activity rates for wives and mothers. But a reduction in fertility,
especially if large, could and probably would facilitate an increase in activity
rates--provided employment opportunities would be available. And this is apt
to be the most important factor affecting the future trend of Latin American
women's rate of economic activity.

Labor force surveys are still rare in Latin America, but there is evidence
that unemployment and underemployment have been increasing. To the extent that
'this is true and the situation does not improve, the prospects for a rise in
iwomen's activity rates are dim. Industrialization has been taking place at
varying rates and in somewhat different fashions in the different Latin American
countries. (Table 10 provides one standard measure of changes in the structure
of the economy, shifts in the industrial distribution of economically active
men, the most striking of which was the movement during the fifties out of
agriculture.) But in general the pace of economic expansion has been slow,
while the rate of growth of the male working-age population has been accelerat-
ing, increasing the surplus of male labor.

E. Conclusion

Women in Latin America were in the middle of the twentieth century still
largely tied to traditional patterns. They were not likely to be economically
active even if young and single, unless perhaps they were also living in an
urban place, especially if it were large, or they had had at least some
secondary school education. However, once they married, with very few exceptions
(probably chiefly among the very small number of highly educated wives living in
the major urban centers) they scarcely took outside employment. When they did
work, it was at a job which was rarely other than a task traditionally regarded
as a women's work, cooking, sewing, cleaning and serving. This was mitigated
somewhat by a trend toward higher status, though still more or less traditional,
Jobs, teaching, typing, and supplying social services.

There is obviously a "leading sector" of female modernity in Latin America
among the highly educated big-city women. The extent and pace of expansion of
this sector depends, as so much else in the region, on the pace of social and
economic modernization. The future of Latin American women lies in the future
of their societies.







DCAA/
TABLE 1

Number of economically active women, censuses
around 1950 and 1960, Latin America

Minimum Number
Country Year Age (000's) Year

Argentina 1947 14 1,283 1960

Bolivia 1950 10 580 n.c.

Brasil J 1950 10 2,705 1960

Colombia J' 1951 12 701 1964

Costa Rica 1950 12 42 1963

Cuba 1953 14 256 n.c.

Chile 1952 12 539 1960

Ecuador 1950 12 318 1962

El Salvador 1950 10 109 1961

Guatemala 1950 7 124 1964

Haiti 1950 14 856 n.c.

Honduras 1950 n.s. 286 1961

Mexico/ 1950 12 1,138 1960

Nicaragua 1950 14 46 1963

PanamaV/ 1950 10 52 1960

Paraguay 1950 12 100 1962

Peru 1940 6 877 7 1961

Rep. Dominicana 1950 7 131 1960

Uruguay n.c.. -- ----- 1963

Venezuela" 1950 10 303 1961


Doc. 21 (English)



taken


Minimum
Age

14



10

n.y.r.

12



12

12

10

7



10

8

10

10

12

6

10

10

10


Number
(000's)

1,715



4,074

n.y.r.

64


-----


235

144

167



73

2,035

96

72

142

679

93

248

422


n.s. not stated
n.c. no census
n.y.r. not yet reported






DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


Country

Bolivia

Brasil

Colombia

Costa Rica

Chile

Ecuador

El Salvador

Guatemala

Honduras

Mexico

Nicaragua

Panama

Paraguay

Peru

Rep. Dominican;

Venezuela


Active females less than 15 years of age: number and
percentage of all active women, 1950 and 19601

Number 1950 Number 1960
under 15 Percentage of under 15 Per
(000's) all active women (000's) all

64.8 11.2 n.c.

275.8 10.2 n.s.

40.8 5.8 n.y.r.

1.6 3.8 2.4

10.9 2.0 9.6

18.4 5.8 14.8

8.5 7.8 8.0

12.2 9.8 16.2

n.s. ---- 4.2

n.s. ---- 77.8

1.0 2.2 4.3

2.2 4.2 2.3

4.3 4.3 n.y.r.

74.5 8.5 38.5

a n.s. ---- 4.2

14.5 4.8 15.3


centage of
active women


3.8

1.8

6.3

5.6

9.7

5.8

3.8

4.5

3.2



5.7

4.5

3.6


1
For exact year, see Table 1.

n.c. no census
n.s. not shown in census report
n.y.r. census results not yet reported


12 -
TABLE 2






13 DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)
TABLE 3

Percentage of women 15 years of age or more that were
economically active, 1950 and 1960


Country

Argentina

Brasil (10 years or more)

Costa Rica

Chile '

Ecuador

El Salvador

Guatemala

Mexico

Nicaragua

Panama-

Paraguay (12 years or more)

Peru (If/o)

Rep. Dominicana

Venezuela


1950 1960

23.5 24.02

14.6 16.5

17.3 17.5

27.5 -..- 2 2.7

34.4 17.6

17.8 18.9

13.9 13.1

13.13 19.8

14.4 22.3

23.2 24.7

22.7 Ca.24

43.0--- 22.4.

16.04 11.0

19.8 20.2


Difference

0.5

1.8

0.2

-4.8

-16.8

1.1

-0.8

?

7.9

1.5

Ca.1.3

-20.6


?4
0.4


For exact year, see Table 1.

14 years or more.


12 years or more. The rate for those 8 years or more was 11.6.


7 years or more. This implies a decline of at least 5 percentage
points which is about one-third of the 1950 rate.








TABLE 4


Percentage of working-age women that were economically active in
by age and country, 1950 and 1960*


Costa Rica Chile Ecuador El Salvador Guatemala


Latin America,


Nicaragua


Panama Venezuela


1960

Minimum age and older*

Minimum age 14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 and over


1950


Minimum age and older*

Minimum age 14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 and over


16.1 C 25.52

5.8 5.8
22.5 30.0
22.6 35.6
17.2 29.4
15.7 27.6
13.3 25.6
9.1 21.0
5.6 13.2


30.3

16.3
33.9
34.9
33.8
35.6
36.6
34.9
28.2


16.2

7.9
20.7
20.9
17.4
17.3
15.9
13.5
10.6


11.6

4.7
15.8
14.9
13.1
13.9
13.5
12.3
8.7


14.1

8.3
15.0
16.3
14.5
14.3
13.7
13.1
8.9
(Continued


*For exact year and minimum ages, see Table 1.


16.0

5.0
19.7
24.4
19.5
17.3
13.8
9.6
4.1


16.7

9.4
20.2
21.2
17.2
16.4
16.3
15.4
12.0


16.5

5.3
19.9
23.3
20.6
18.1
16.8
13.8
9.5


10.4

3.7
15.5
14.4
12.6
12.2
13.2
11.1
7.5


19.0

4.5
20.9
24.2
23.3
24.0
24.6
19.8
12.2


21.0

3.8
23.5
31.2
28.1
27.0
24.3
15.3
6.6


17.2

3.4
17.9
25.8
23.9
21.6
18.3
13.2
7.2


20.3

5.3
23.4
29.6
25.2
24.6
20.8
14.8
8.3
on next


17.6

5.2
22.0
23.5
20.2
19.7
18.2
15.2
10.2
page.)


. *












1960


Minimum age and older


Minimum age 14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 and over


1950


Minimum age and older

Minimum age 14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 and over


TABLE 4
Honduras


11.9

3.7
16.6
18.5
13.5
12.0
11.7
9.2
4.6


Argentir


23.5"


36.7
31.3
22.3
21.6
19.5
14.2
7.3


(Continued)
Mexico /Peru Rep. Dominicana

15.6 17.0 9.3

2.5 / -f 3.. 2.2
16.7 27.1 9.0
19.4 28.0 12.2
15.8 22.0 12.2
18.7 20.5 12.5
23.6 20.7 11.6
28.4 19.0 10.1
29.6 11.9 4.3



ia Brasil Colombia Paraguay


14.6

8.8
23.4
18.9
12.8
10.9
10.1
8.7
5.4


17.7

6.2
23.6
23.9
19.7
19.1
18.0
15.7
10.3


22.7

9.3
25.8
27.7
24.7
25.5
24.9
19.9
12.5


**15 years of age and older.


D I






16 DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)







TABLE 5

Percentage of working-age women that were economically
active, by residence, nine Latin American countries,
1950 and 1960


Urban


Rural


Country


Age 1950 1960


1950 1960


1950 1960


Costa Rica
El Salvador
Guatemala

Nicaragua



Panama
Colombia
Ecuador
Peru

Venezuela


12+
10+
7+
15+
14+
10+


10+
10+
12+
10+
15+
10+


27.8
26.3
24.3
31.4
22.7
n.a.


31.7
24.5
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.


27.3
27.6
19.8
25.3
n.a.
27.8


32.8
n.a.
24.7
23.6
26.9
21.43


8.4
9.2
6.9
7.8
8.0
n.a.


11.5
12.1
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.


8.2
8.3
4.9
5.5
n.a.
11.0


9.1
n.a.
11.6
16.1
18.1
8.2


16.1
16.2
11.6
13.9
14.1
n.a.


20.3
17.7
30.3
n.a.
43.0
17.6


16.0
16.5
10.4
13.1
n.a.
18.72


21.0
n.a.
16.7
19.7
22.4
17.2


n.a. not available.


1For exact years, see Table 1.


2Table 4 shows 19.0, because it is based on numbers estimated from
a sample of the census returns. The figure shown in this table is
based on numbers obtained from a complete count of the census returns.

3
About 30 percent of the urban women of working age,who lived in the
Caracas metropolitan area,had an activity rate of 29.1 percent.


4Less than five percent of Venezuela's working-age women,who were
classified as living in areas "intermediate" to urban and rural areas
(and hence not included in either of them),had an activity rate of 14.7
percent.


Country








- 17 -


DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


TABLE 5A

Percentage of working-age women and of active women that were
urban, nine Latin American countries, 1950 and 19601


Percent Urban


Of working-
age women

1950 1960


Of active
women

1950 1960


Costa Rica
El Salvador
Guatemala
Nicaragua

Panama

Colombia
Ecuador
Peru
Venezuela


(12+)
(10+)
(15+)
(14+)
(10+)
(10+)

(10+)
(12+)
(10+)
(10+)


39.5
40.9
28.6
40.8
n.r.
43.9

45.0
n.r.
n.r.
n.r.


41.1
42.8
38.2
n.r.
46.1
50.2

n.a.
38.9
48.8
65.8


n.r. not relevant
n.a. not available


For exact years, see Table 1.


68.2
66.5
64.7
67.0
n.r.
68.2

62.3
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.


69.8
71.4
73.9
n.r.
68.4
78.4

n.a.
57.6
58.2
81.9







DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


TABLE 6

Percentage of women aged 15 years or more that were economically
active, by marital status (A) and marital-status distribution
of economically active women (B),
nine Latin American countries, 1960


A. Activity rates, by marital status


Consensual
Single Married Union


Colombia (1951) 34.4
Costa Rica 33.0
Ecuador 31.4 1i
Guatemala 27.7
Honduras (10+) 16.6

Panama 38.4 2
P eru 38.7 1
Rep. Dominicana 18.0
Venezuela 32.6 1i


B. Distribution of active women

Colombia (1951) 69.1 1;
Costa Rica 65.8 2
Ecuador 56.3 2
Guatemala 59.5 1i
Honduras (10+) 67.9 1

Panama 56.8 2
VPeru 56.5.. 2
Rep. Dominicana 32.1 2
Venezuela 60.1 2


1For exact years, see Table 1.

2
Separated.

3
Divorced and separated.


6.6
7.6
0.7
3.6
7.4

0.7
1.7v^
3.3
3.3


2.7
0.6
7.7
7.7
5.1

5.8
3.2-
).2
3.0


10.2
6.8
6.5
4.6
6.0

10.7
11.8
5.7
8.4


4.8
3.0
5.2
12.7
11.3

11.4
-`7.9
31.7
8.6


Widowed Divorced


21.0
11.5
20.9
12.4
11.3

17.1
25.8
10.9
18.9


9.7
4.4
9.5
7.5
4.4

3.8
10.5
5.0
6.0


32.4
29.1
39.3
41.1
40.3

65.6
48.7
24.1
51.4


3.62
6.3
1.3
2.6
1.3

2.2
1.8
1.93
2.3


1 ,


Total


20.0
17.5
17.6
13.1
11.9

24.7
22.4.
11.0
20.8


100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0


- 18-







- 19 -


DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


TABLE 7

Percentage of working-age women that were economically active,
by educational level (A) and educational distribution of
economically active women (B), five countries and two
metropolitan areas, 1950 and 1960


A. Activity rates, by education

Educational Level

Date Age None Primary Secondary Higher
1
Brasil 1950 10+ 11.5 21.1 36.8 62.8
Colombia 1951 10+ 17.7 16.1 24.7 34.8
Costa Rica 1963 15+ 7.7 16.7 26.9 66.3
Panama 1960 10+ 8.7 18.5 42.3 73.8
Venezuela2 1961 10+ 14 17 42 58

Federal District
of Brasil (Rio) 1950 10+ 24.3 22.4 33.6 63.5
Caracas Metropoli-
tan Area2 1961 10+ 28 27 39 56 _.


B. Distribution of active women3

Number of
active women Percent

Brasill 2,505.7 100.0 69.8 22.6 7.2 0.3
Colombia 682.7 100.0 45.1 45.1 9.5 0.4
Costa Rica 62.0 100.0 7.4 66.1 16.3 10.2
Panama 71.7 100.0 8.8 53.7 32.6 4.9
Venezuela 407.3 100.0 43.0 45.9 9.8 1.3

Federal District
of Brasil (Rio)1 243.8 100.0 46.8 35.7 16.4 1.1
Caracas Metropoli-
tan Area2 136.2 100.0 31.6 52.9 13.2 2.3


The categories of educational level are: no schooling or some elementary, completed
elementary or some secondary, completed secondary or some higher, completed higher.

Because the numerators and denominators could not be perfectly matched, the activity
rates and the number active, except for those at the primary level, are approximate
estimates.

3Date and age are the same as in Part A.

In thousands.






TABLE 8
Percentage distribution of all economically active women according
to major occupational category, by country, 1950 and 19601,2


Professional
1950 1960


Bolivia
Colombia
Costa Rica
Chile

Ecuador
El Salvador
Guatemala
Haiti

Honduras
Mexico
Nicaragua


Panama
Paraguay
Republican
Dominicana
Uruguay
Venezuela


(10+)
(12+)
(12+)
(15+)

(12+)
(10+)
( 7+)
(14+)

(10+)
( 8+)
(14+)
(10+)


1.0
4.6
11.9
7.7

3.3
4.6
5.4
0.4

ns
ns
6.5


nc
nyr
18.0
11.5-


9.3
7.4
7.2
no


11.2
7.6

5.8


Other
White Collar3
1950 1960


5.2
11.0
16.6
18.9

9.4
18.3
14.9
6.4

ns
ns
13.0


(10+) 9.4 12.7
(12+) ns 8.9


(15+)
(10+)
(10+)


* 13.9
nc 13.8
8.3 15.0


nc
nyr
18.4
18.9

14.3
21.4
18.6
nc

17.2
25.2

22.5


Services
1950 1960


1.9
44.7
45.2
42.2

17.9
37.6
36.3
4.2

ns
ns
45.7


20.7 24.7
ns 14.3

19.0
nc 21.5
9.9 18.4


nc
nyr
40.8
42.3

29.6
36.6
40.1
nc

43.9
25.6

39.6


37.7 39.9
ns 3.4


*
nc
39.3


4
Blue Collar
1950 1960


15.2
26.3
14.3
23.9

44.7
23.9
29.8
6.0

ns
ns
23.9
-


no
nyr
15.8
19.6

28.4
23.6
22.2
nc

17.0
11.0

19.6


13.2 9.9
ns 31.1


41.7
34.1
39.7


*
nc
19.8


Agriculture
1950 1960


75.1
12.4
11.9
7.3

19.8
11.0
12.9
79.7

ns
ns
10.9


nc
nyr
4.7
4.2

16.8
10.0
11.4
no

3.9
30.7

12.2


13.2 5.9
ns 21.4

9.8
nc 1.4
9.9 6.0


14.5
20.8
17.6


nc No census
nyr Census Results not yet reported
ns The appropriate data were not shown in the census report.
* Omitted because 43 percent of the active women were
reported in the category "not specified".


For Exact years, see Table 1.
2 H
For each date, the figures shown for each country
do not always add to 100 percent. For example, for
Bolivia (1950) the figures shown are:
1.0 + 5.2 + 1.9 + 15.2 + 75.1 498.4. The remaining
1.6 percent were in the category "not specified."


Sum of categories (a) managers or administrators,
(b) office.workers, and (c) sales workers.

Includes all the other major categories, except
the "not specified."


*1* ;


O ~ f









TABLE 8A

Percentage of all economically active women in selected occupations,
six countries, 1960


Costa Rica


Domestic Service
Cooks and Related Workers
Dressmakers and Related Workers
Teachers
Office Workers
Agricultural Workers
Retail Sales Workers or owners
Total


El Salvador


Honduras


Uruguay


Venezuela


1963 1961 1961 1963 1961

33.1 19.1 35.9 24.0 24.9
9.5 11.9
6.4 10.4 10.4 15.5 8.4
12.7 5.1 8.6 7.7 8.3
7.8 4.7 3.1 10.2 11.7
4.4 8.7 4.0 1.4 3.5
6.8 10.9 6.5 2.6 4.4
71.2 68.4 68.5 61.4 73.1


All economically active women = 100 percent. The difference between the total percentages
shown above and 100 percent is accounted for by all the other occupations in which women were
economically active. For many reasons -for example, differing systems of classification and
differing degrees of detail- these data are not strictly comparable or precise. They should be
taken as approximations.


2Includes wholesale.






TABLE 9
Percentage distribution of all economically active women according to major


industrial category, by country,


1950 and 1960-1,"


Agriculture

1950 1960


Manufacturing

1950 1960


Commerce


1950 1960


Services


1950 1960


Other


1950 1960


Argentina
Bolivia
Brasil
Colombia
Costa Rica

\,Chile
Ecuador
El Salvador
Guatemala
Haiti

Honduras
Mexico.
Nicaragua

Panama


(14+)
(15+)
(10+)
(15+)
(15+)

(12+)
(12+)
(15+)
( 7+)
(14+)

(15+)
( 8+)
(14+)
(10+)
(15+)


Paraguay (12+)
\-LPeu (/ 4Yo) (6+)
Republica
Dominicana (15+)


Uruguay
Venezuela


(10+)
(10+)


7.3
74.5
30.7
13.6
10.4

7.8
27.8
10.7
14.5
79.7

ns
ns
11.1

15.5

23.7
55.4

*
nc
11.9


6.8
no
30.0
nyr
5.0

4.4
16.9
9.0
12.3
nc

4.7
32.6

15.0
6.4


33.2
8.5
14.9
23.2
16.0

24.5
34.0
23.7
27.9
5.6

ns
ns
23.3

13.4


nyr
31.7 CfOW)


10.0
2.9
6.7


24.5
nc
12.2
nyr
16.8

19.1
28.1
23.9
22.0
nc

17.7
12.3

18.3
10.1


29.7 nyr
24.5 17.1


*
nc
16.0


8.9
4.7
4.0
6.8
10.0

10.4
8.1
17.1
13.7
6.3

ns
ns
11.2

13.1


9.9
ne:
4.3
nyr
11.0

11.0
9.7
18.4
14.2
nc

13.0
14.3

18.0
15.3


12.0 nyr
4.1 11.6

13.5
nc 10.8
5.6 8.8


13.2
22.8
17.9


nc no census.
nyr census results not yet reported.
ns The appropriate data were not shown in the census report.
* Omitted because 44 percent of the active women were reported in the
category industry "not specified."
For exact years, see Table 1.
2For each date, the figures shown for each country add to 100 percent.
For example for Argentina (1950) the percentage are: 7.3 + 33.2 + 8.9 + 49.2 + 1.4 = 100.0


S1 ,


1.4
3.5
1.9
6.4
2.1

4.2
6.3
4.0
0.9
3.2

ns
ns
0.6

2.6


49.2
8.8
48.5
50.0
61.5

53.1
23.8
44.5
43.0
5.2

ns
ns
53.8

55.5

34.1
12.7


nc
56.5


12.4
nc
18.0
nyr
2.8

7.1
3.2
1.4
1.2
nc


46.7
nc
35.5
nyr
64.4

58.4
42.1
47.3
50.3
nc

57.8
37.7

47.6
63.9

nyr
346

0.5
54.8
61.1


6.8
3.1

1.1
4.3


0.5 nyr
3.3 5.1


*
nc
10.0


2.8
8.7
5.5




A .4


TABLE 10
Percentage distribution of all economically active men according to major
industrial category, by country, 1950 and 1960-J
Manufacturing
and
Agriculture Construction Commerce Services
1950 1960 1950 1960 1950 1960 1950 1960


Other
1950 1960


Argentina
Bolivia
Brasil
Colombia
Costa Rica

Chile
Ecuador
El Salvador
Guatemala
Haiti


(14+)
(10+)
(10+)
(12+)
(12+)

(12+)
(12+)
(10+)
( 7+)
(14+)


29.7
69.0
65.0
63.2
62.6

37.5
62.2
73.3
76.1
86.6


22.9
nc
56.6
nyr
57.6

,34.-4
63.1
71.1
73.1
nc


Honduras (10+) ns 75.9
Mexico ( 8+) ns 58.9
Nicaragua (14+) 76.9 -
(10+) 70.9
Panama (10+) 58.6 61.3
Paraguay (12+) 62.9 nyr
Peru ( 6+) 66.4 54.8
Republica
Dominicana ( 7+) 65.3 67.6
Uruguay (10+) nc 23.4
Venezuela (10+) 47.7 42.0


26.3
11.6
12.4
14.2
15.2


32.5
nc
12.3
nyr
17.5


23.4 24.9
17.0 15.8'
12.5 15.4
12.2 12.8
5.3 nc


ns
ns
12.5

9.1
15.3
13.2

8.7
nc
15.3


8.6
18.3

14.2
13.6
nyr
16.53

10.4
27.2
15.6


No census.
Census results not yet reported.
The appropriate data were not shown in the census report.
1For exact years, see Table 1.
2For each date, the figures shown for each country add to 100 percent.
For example, for Chile (1950) the percentages are: 37.5 + 23.4 + 10.3 + 11.9 + 16.9 =100.0


12.5
no
7.2
nyr
9.6


41A

N


15.1
2.3
9.6
7.7
6.3

11.9
7.4
5.5
5.0
4.0


14.5
4.2
6.7
5.2
7.5

10.3
5.6
3.4
4.2
0.8

ns
ns
3.6

6.9
5.5
4.8

4.7
nc
9.5


9.8
6.2
4.0
5.1
no

3.6
8.4

4.6
8.5
nyr
8.3


12.2
nc
6.9
nyr
8.1

12.5
7.6
5.7
5.6
nc

5.4
8.2

5.8
10.8
nyr
9.9

5.2
19.1
16.3


14.4
12.8
6.4
9.7
8.4

16.9
7.8
5.3
2.5
3.2

ns
ns
3.4

18.4
6.2
12.4

16.6
nc
15.5


19.9
nc
16.9
nyr
7.3

18.3
7.3
3.8
3.4
nc

6.4
6.2

4.5
5.9
nyr
10.7

11.0
16.3
12.1


nc -
nyr -
ns -


ns
ns
3.6

7.1
10.2
3.4

4.7
no
12.2


5.8
14.1
14.0


*.








TABLE 11
Percentage distribution of all economically active women
according to status, by country, 1950 and 19601,'


Employee
1950 1960


Employers
1950 1960


Own account
workers
1950 1960


Family
workers
1950 1960


Bolivia
Brasil
Colombia
Costa Rica
Chile

Ecuador
El Salvador
Guatemala
Haiti
Honduras

Mexico
Nicaragua

Panama

Peru
Republica
Dominicana
Uruguay
Venezuela


(10+)
(10+)
(12+)
(12+)
(12+)

(12+)
(10+)
( 7+)
(14+)
(10+)

( 8+)
(14+)
(10+)
(10+)

( 6+)

(15+)
(10+)
(10+)


22.6
59.3
65.7
86.0
68.9

80.8
65.2
55.6
10.0
ns

ns
67.2

68.6


no
nyr
nyr
87.4
76.0

54.9
71.7
61.6
nc
67.2

56.7

60.1
65.0


35.4 50.4


*
nc
74.3


72.7
73.1
73.6


a
0.8
3.6
1.9
1.0

0.0
1.6
2.2
0.8
ns

ns
7.3

1.0


no
nyr
nyr
0.8
0.8

0.7
0.9
2.2
no
0.8

0.6

1.7
0.9


19.4 1.1

0.6
nc 3.3
1.2 0.9


b
13.6
23.0
8.5
26.0

10.7
23.0
30.4
30.2
ns

ns
23.2

17.1


no
nyr
nyr
8.1
18.5

35.4
23.8
25.3
nc
21.4

18.5

31.9
11.6


21.5 33.4


*
nc
14.4


22.4
17.7
22.2


68.1
18.7
4.9
3.0
0.0

3.6
5.0
11.8
55.9
ns

ns
2.4

13.3


nc
nyr
nyr
2.8
0.9


6.1
2.4
11.0
no
3.7

0.7

5.4
5.0


22.7 12.9

4.3
nc 1.0
3.5 1.2


No census.
Census results not yet reported.
These figures were not shown in the census report.
9.1 percent.
Not shown because 44 percent of the economically active
women were classified as "not classified."


1
For exact years, see Table 1.
2 -I.
For each date, the sum of the figures shown for.
each country do not always add to 100 percent. -
For example, the figures for Mexico (1960) are:
56.7 + 0.6 + 18.5 + 0.7= 76.5 percent. The
remainders, 23.5 percent were in "status not
classified."


,1 I


nc
nyr
ns
a+b
*







DCAA/Doc, 21 (English)


BIBLIOGRAPHY

INTERNATIONAL SOURCES

Organization of American States (OAS)


1) Informe Presentado por la Comisi6n Interamericana de Mujeres
sobre la Condici6n Econ6mica de la Majer Trabajadora en las
Repdblicas Americanas. Uni6n Panamericana,Secretaria General
de la Organizaci6n de los Estados Americanos, Washington,
D.C.,- 1959.

2) America en Cifras,, 1965. Situaci6n Social: Hogar, Habitaci6n,
Mejoramiento Urbano, Previsi6n Social, Asistencia M|dica .y de
Salud. Institute Interamericano de Estadistica Uni6n t r.aam
ricana, Washington, ;DCV, 1967

3) La Estructura Demogrdfica de las Naciones Americanas: AnAlisis
Estadistico Censal de los Resultados Obtenidos Bajo el Progra-
ma del Censo de las Americas de 1950 (COTA 1950).
Volumen II, Caracteristicas Econ6micas de la Poblaci6n. Tomos
1 y 2. Institute Interamericano de Estadistica. Uni6n Pana-
mericana, Washington, D.C,, 1959o

United Nations (U.N.)

4) Demographic Yearbook 1963. Annuaire Demographique 1963. Special
Topic: Population Census Statistics II. Statistical Office bf
the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
New York, 1964.

5) Demographic Yearbook 1964. Annuaire Demographique 1964. Special
Topic: Population Census Statistics IIIo Statistical Office of
the United Nations. Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
New York, 1965,

6) Ducoff, Louis J. Himan resources of Central America% ,P&nama and
Mexico, 1950-1980, in relation to some aspects of economic develoomento
Economic Commission of Latin America, 1960.

National Sources

ARGENTINA:

7) IV Censo General de la Nacion, 1947: Tomo I, Censo de Poblaci6n,
Buenos Aires, Tall, Graficos de Guillermo Kraft, (date?) Ministerio
de Asuntos T~cnicoso Direcci6n Nacional del Servicio Estadistico.


- 25







DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


BOLIVIA:

8) Censo Demografico, 1950. La Paz: Editorial Argote, 1955. Direcci6n
general de Estadistica y Cenboo

BRASIL:

9) VI Recenseamento Geral do Brasil, 1950, Serie Nacional: Volume I,
Censo DemogrAfico. Rio de Janeiro; Servigo GrAfico do IBGE', 1956.
Institute Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatistica. Conselho Nacional
de Recenseamento. Servigo Nacional de Recenseamento.

10) VII Recenseamento Geral do Brasil, 1960: Censo DemogrAfico. Resul-
tados Preliminares. Rio de Janeiro, 1965. Servigo Nacional de
Recenseamento. Serie Especial, Volume II.

COLOMBIA:

11) Censo de Poblaci6n de Colombia, 1951 Mayoo 9):
Resumen. Bogota, D.E., Multilith Estadinal,(date?) Departamento
Administrative Nacional de Estadistica.

COSTA RICA:

12) eCoeo e.d Pobaci6n de Costa Rica., 22 de mayo de 1950, Ministerio de
E':cnomia y Hacienda.: Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos.
Washington, D.C.:'- U.S... Government Printing Office, 1953.

13) Censo de Poblaci6n 1963, Ministerio de Industria y Comercio.
Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censo, abril, 1966.

CHILE:

14) XII Censo General de Poblaci6n y I de Vivienda, levantado el 24
de abril de 1952: Tomo I, Resumen del Pals. Santiago ; Empresa
Periodistica Gdtemberg,(date?) Servicio Nacional de Estadistica
y Censos.

ECUADOR:

15) Primer Censo de Poblaci6n del Ecuador, 1950. Resumen de Caracte-
teristicas. Quito, 1960. Ministerio de Economia, Direcci6n General
de Estadistica y Censos.

16) Segundo Censo de Poblaci6n y Primer Censo de Vivienda, 25 de noviem-
bre de 1962. Quito, 1964. Junta Nacional de Planificaci6n y Coor-
dinaci6n Econ6mica. Divisi6n de Estadistica y Censos. Volumenes II
y III,


- 26 ,







DCAA/Doc, 21 (English)


EL SALVADOR:

17) Segundo Censo de Poblaci6n, junio 13 de 1950_ San Salvador : Imprenta
Nacional, 1954. Ministerio de Economia. Direcci6n General de Esta-
distica y Censos.

18) Tercer Censo Nacional de Poblaci6n, 1961, San Salvador,1965. Minis-
terio de Economia, Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos.

GUATEMALA:

19) Sexto Censo de Poblaci6n, abril 18 de 1950. Guatemala, 1957.
Direcci6n General de Estadistica.

20) Censo de Poblaci6n, 1964: Resultados de Tabulaci6n por Muestreok
Guatemala, 19664. Direcci6n General de Estadisticao Departamento
de Censos y Encuestas.

HAITI:

21) Recensement G&n6ral de la Rfpublique d'Haiti, AoGt, 1950o D.imar:-.F3,
6conomie, famille et habitation, agriculture et 6levageo Port-au-
Prince, (date?)Departemedt de 1'Economie Nationale. Institute Haitian
de Statistique.

HONDURAS:

22) Resuman General del Censo de Poblaci6n, levantado el 18 de junio de
120 Tegucigalpa: Talleres TipogrAficos Nacionales, 1952. Secreta-
ria de Estado en el Despacho de Gobernaci6n. Direcci6n General de
Censos y Estadisticas,

23) D&cimo Tercer Censo Nacional de Poblaci6n y Segundo de Vivienda, 161l
Volumen II. Caracteristicas Econ6micas de la Poblaci6no Tegeigglp',
DoCo, 1964o Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos. Secretariado
de Economic y Hacienda.

MEXICO:

24) Estados Unidos Mexicanos, S6ptimo Censo General de Poblaci6n, 6 de
junio de 1950: Resumen Generalo M6xico, DFo. Talleres Gr&ficos
de la Naci6n, 19533 Secretaria de Economia. Direcci6n General de
Estadistica.

NICARAGUA:

25) Censo General de Poblaci6n de la Repdblica de Nicaragua, mayo 1950:
Volumen XVII, Informe General y Cifras de la Repdblica de Nicaragua.
Managua, D.oN Talleres Nacionales, 1954. Ministerio de Economia,
Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos.






DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


26) Censos Nacionales 1963. Censo de Poblaci6n. Volumen III. CarActeris-
ticas Econ6micas de la Poblaci6n por Derartamentosy Municipios. Managua,
1964. Ministerio de Economla. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y
Censo.

PANAMA:

27) Censos Nacionales de 1950: Quinto Censo de Poblaci6n, Volumen III,
Caracteristicas Econ6micas. Panama, 1954. Contraloria General de la
Republica. Direcci6n de Estadistica y Censo.

28) Censos Nacionales de 1960: Sexto Censo de Poblaci6n y Segundo de
Vivienda, 11 de noviembre de 1960. Volumen V. Caracteristicas Econ6-
micas y Compendio General de Poblaci6n. Panama, 1964-1965. Contra-
loria General de la Repiblica. Direcci6n de Estadistica y Censos.

PARAGUAY:

29) Anuario Estadistico de la Repbblica del Paraguay 1948-1953. Asunci6n,
T1955. Ministerio de Hacienday Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos.

PERU:

30) Censo Nacional de Poblaci6n y Ocupaci6n 1940. Lima, 1944. Volumen I.
ResC.menes Generales. Direcci6n Nacional de Estadistica.

31) VI Censo Nacional de Poblaci6n,levantado el 2 de julio de 1961. Volumen
IV. Caracteristicas Econ6micas. Lima, 1964, Instituto Nacional de
Planificaci6n. Direcci6n Nacional de Estadistica y Censos.

REPUBLICAN DOMINICANA:

32) Tercer Censo Nacional de Poblaci6n, 1950. Ciudad Trujillo, D.N., 1958.
Direcci6n General de Estadistica.y Censos.

33) Cuarto Censo Nacional de Poblaci6n, 7 de agosto de 1960: Resumen Geners1c.
Santo Domingo, D.No, 1966. Secretariado T6cnico de la Presidencia.
Oficina Nacional de Estadistica.

URUGUAY:

34) Muestra de Anticipaci6n de Resultados Censales del IV Censo General d.
Poblaci6n y II de Vivienda, 16 de octubre de 1963. Montevideo, (date?)
Ministerio de Hacienda. Direcci6n General de Estadistica y Censos.


- 28 -







S29 DCAA/Doc. 21 (English)


VENEZUELA:

35) Octavo Censo General de Poblaci6n. 26 de noviembre de 1950Z,
Volumen XII, Resumen General de la RepGblica, Parte A, Poblaci6n.
Caracas, 1957. Ministerio de Fomento. Direcci6n General de Esta-
distica y Censos Nacionales.

36) Noveno Censo General de Poblaci6n, 26 de febrero de 1961. Resumen
General de la Repdblica. Parties B y C. Caracas, 1967. Ministerio
de Fomento. Direcci6n General de Estadlstica y Censos Nacionales.
Oficina Central del Censo.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs