Skip to main content

Changes in Families and Households in East Africa

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Family Demography and Post-2015 Development Agenda in Africa

Abstract

This chapter examines changes in families and households in East Africa (the study is limited to Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda). It covers changes in the family structure and functions and also in marriage in the three countries over the last two decades. The chapter uses secondary data and information from population censuses and demographic and health surveys conducted in the three countries during the review period.

The results show that families and households in East Africa have been undergoing gradual change as a consequence of social and economic changes taking place. In Kenya the household size has declined from 5.7 in 1969 to 4.4 members in 2009. In Tanzania the household size has changed from 4.8 in 1970s to 4.7 in 2012, while in Uganda it has remained at 4.7 since 1960s to 2014. In all three countries, the family size is still fairly large, averaging about five children, having declined from around seven children in the 1970s. Fertility has also been on the decline in the three countries. In Kenya fertility has declined from 7.6 in 1969 to 3.5 children per women in 2014. In Tanzania fertility is 5.5 children, having declined from 6.9 children per woman in 1978, while in Uganda fertility is 5.97 in 2013, having declined from 7.4 children per women in 1980s.

Marriage is still early and universal in the three countries. However, over the years the three countries have experienced a gradual increase in monogamous marriages, a decline in polygamous unions, and an increase in age at first marriage, particularly among women. Currently, the median age at first marriage among women in Tanzania, Kenya, and Uganda is 19.2, 20.2, and 18.2 years, respectively. The median age at first marriage for men is, on average, 5 years higher than that of women in each of the three countries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Family, as defined by the US Census Bureau, includes a householder and one or more people living in the same household who are related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. All people in a household who are related to the householder are regarded as members of his or her family. “A family household may contain people not related to the householder, but those people are not included as part of the householder’s family in census tabulations” (Census 2000 Profiles of General Demographic Characteristics, United States, US Census Bureau, Washington, DC (2001). p. A-1. Archived at: http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/doc/ProfilesTD.pdf).

    Statistics Canada defines a family as “a now-married couple, a common-law couple or a lone-parent with a child or youth who is under the age of 25 and who does not have his or her own spouse or child living in the household. Now-married couples and common-law couples may or may not have such children and youth living with them. Now-married couples and common-law couples are classified as husband-wife families and the partners in the couple are classified as spouses” (Census Family Definition, Statistics Canada. Accessed at http://www.statcan.ca/english/concepts/definitions/cen-family.htm).

    The contemporary Japanese term for family, following post-World War II changes in the nation’s laws and society, may refer to a nuclear family of parents and unmarried children, but it can also mean a household as a unit of production or consumption (Ronald E. Dolan and Robert L. Worden (eds), Library of Congress Country Study: Japan (1994). Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress under the Country Studies/Area Handbook Program sponsored by the Department of the Army. Online edition at http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/jptoc.html).

  2. 2.

    Classification of families is generally done on the basis of organization, forms of marriage (monogamous or polygamous), authority (matriarchal or patriarchal), residence, etc.

    1. 1.

      On the basis of organization, families may be of two broad types: the nuclear family and the extended/joint family. (i) Nuclear family is a unit composed of husband, wife, and their unmarried children. This is the predominant form in modern industrial societies. This type of family is based on companionship between parents and children. There are additions or modifications in nuclear family structure such as (a) couple with or without children and (b) nuclear family plus one or more unmarried, separated, or widowed relatives of the parents, other than their unmarried children. (c) Subnuclear family is defined as a fragment of a former nuclear family, for instance, a widow/widower with her/his unmarried children or siblings (unmarried or widowed or separated or divorced) living together. (d) Single-person household. (e) Supplemented subnuclear family refers to a group of relatives and members of a formerly complete nuclear family along with some other unmarried, divorced, or widowed relative who was not a member of the nuclear family.

      (ii) Extended/joint family used to indicate the combination of two or more nuclear families based on an extension of the parent-child relationships.

    2. 2.

      On the basis of authority, the family may be either patriarchal or matriarchal on the basis of authority:

      1. (i)

        Patriarchal family is a type of family in which all authority belongs to the paternal side. In this family, the eldest male or the father is the head of the family. He exercises his authority over the members of the family. He presides over the religious rites of the household; he is the guardian of the family goods. In the developed patriarchal system of the past, the patriarch had unlimited and undisputed authority over his wife, sons, and daughters.

        There have been various forms of the patriarchal family. Sometimes it is part of a joint family, and sometimes it is part of a “stem family,” with only one of the sons bringing his family within the paternal household.

      2. (ii)

        Matriarchal family is a form of family in which authority is centered in the wife or mother. The matriarchal family system implies rule of the family by the mother, not by the father. In this type of family, women are entitled to perform religious rites, and the husband lives in the house of the wife.

    3. 3.

      On the basis of residence types, families include:

      1. (i)

        Patrilocal family: when the wife goes to live with the husband’s family.

      2. (ii)

        Matrilocal family: when the couple after marriage moves to live with the wife’s family. The husband has a secondary position in the wife’s family where his children live.

      3. (iii)

        Neolocal residence: when the couple after marriage moves to settle in an independent residence which is neither attached to the bride’s family of origin nor bridegroom’s family of origin.

    4. 4.

      On the basis of descent, families may be divided into two types such as patrilineal and matrilineal:

      1. (i)

        Patrilineal family is that type of family when descent is traced through the father. In this type of family, inheritance of property takes place along the male line of descent. The ancestry of such family is determined on the basis of male line or the father. A patrilineal family is also patriarchal and patrilocal. This is the common type of family prevalent today.

      2. (ii)

        Matrilineal family type of family descent is traced along the female line, and inheritance of property also takes place along the female line of descent.

    5. 5.

      On the basis of marriage, family has been classified into two types such as monogamous and polygamous:

      1. (i)

        Monogamous family: A monogamous family is one which is consisted of one husband and one wife. In this type of family, one man has one wife or one woman has one husband at a given time. Hence a husband and a wife living together constitute a monogamous family.

      2. (ii)

        Polygamous family occurs when one man marries several women or one woman marries several men and constitutes the family. Again polygamous family is divided into two types such as polygynous family and polyandrous family:

        1. (a)

          Polygynous family is a type of family in which one man has more than one wife at a given time and lives with them and their children together.

        2. (b)

          Polyandrous family is a type of family when one wife has more than one husband at a given time and she lives with all of them together or each of them in turn. Polyandrous families are found among some Australians, the Sinhalese (Sri Lankans), the Tibetans, some Eskimos, and the Todas of Nilgiri Hills in India.

    6. 6.

      On the basis of in-group and out-group affiliation, families may be either endogamous or exogamous:

      1. (i)

        Endogamous family: endogamy is the practice of marrying someone within a group to which one belongs. An endogamous family is one which consists of a husband and wife who belong to the same group such as caste or tribe.

      2. (ii)

        Exogamous family: exogamy means marriage with someone outside his group.

    7. 7.

      On the basis of blood relationship:

      1. (i)

        Consanguine family

        The consanguine family is built upon the parent-child relationship (on blood descent). The family is a descent group through the male line which is firmly vested with authority. The consanguine family comprises a nucleus of blood relatives surrounded by a fringe of wives and others who are incidental to the maintenance of the family unit.

      2. (ii)

        The conjugal family is a nucleus of the husband, the wife, and their offspring, who are surrounded by a fringe of relatives only incidental to the functioning of the family as a unit. In this type of family, the authority and solidarity of the family group reside solely in the conjugal (husband and wife) pair. In contrast to consanguine type of family, the conjugal family is much more isolated from wider kinship relationships.

        The consanguine family, which is typical of an agricultural society, is large, stable, secure, self-sufficient, and authoritarian. On the other hand, the conjugal family, typical of a modern society, is small, transient, isolated, and relatively insecure but democratic.

  3. 3.

    The UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) was established in 1947, and the Statistical Division (UNSD) has been concerned with the systematic organization and compilation of country-level statistics and indicators (UNSD 2013). The UNSD has encouraged postindependence African states to standardize and streamline their data collection and has provided definitions and guidelines to be used in data collection and training (Ching’anda and Ntozi 1998).

  4. 4.

    According to Principles and Recommendations for Population and Housing Censuses, Revision 2, page 100, a household may be either (a) a one-person household, that is to say, a person who makes provision for his or her own food or other essentials for living without combining with any other person to form part of a multi-person household, or (b) a multi-person household, that is to say, a group of two or more persons living together who make common provision for food or other essentials for living. The persons in the group may pool their resources and have a common budget; they may be related or unrelated persons or a combination of persons both related and unrelated. The family within the household is defined as those members of the household who are related, to a specified degree, through blood, adoption, or marriage.

  5. 5.

    Ruggles (2012) reported that there were no substantial public datasets describing family and household composition in sub-Saharan Africa or South Asia before 1960. Ruggles in the same paper argues that before the mid-twentieth century, theorizing about family change took place without the benefit of statistical evidence.

  6. 6.

    Such studies include works of Mair, Lucy P., “African Marriage and Social Change,” in Survey of African Marriage and Family Life. Edited by Arthur Phillips, London: Oxford University Press, 1953. Goode, William J. “Changing Family Patterns: Sub-Saharan Africa,” in World Revolution and Family Patterns. New York: The Free Press, 1963. Evans-Pritchard, J.J., “Some Aspects of Marriage and the Family Among the Nuer,” The Rhodes-Livingstone Papers, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1945, 1969.

References

  • Adegboyega, O., Ntozi, J. P., & Ssekamatte-Ssebuliba, J. B. (1997). The African family: Data, concepts and methodology. In A. Adepoju (Ed.), Family, population and development in Africa (pp. 25–40). London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aghajanian, A., & Thompson, V. (2013). Household size and structure in Iran: 1976–2006. The Open Family Studies Journal, 5, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agwanda, A. T. (2012). Patterns of female first marriage in sub-Saharan Africa (Unpublished Research Paper). Population Studies and Research Institute (PSRI), University of Nairobi, Nairobi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambert, A.-M. (2001). Families in the new millenium. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayiemba, E. H. O. (1990). Kenyan marriages in transition: A research agenda. Nairobi: Population Studies and Research Institute, University of Nairobi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belsey, M. A. (2005). AIDS and the family: Policy options for a crisis in family capital. New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, B. (1968). Demographic analysis. London: George Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bocquier, P., & Khasakhala, A. (2009). Factors influencing union formation in Nairobi, Kenya. Journal of Biosocial Science, 41(4), 433–455. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021932009003319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bongaarts, J. (2001). Household size and composition in the developing world (Population Council Working Paper No. 144).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bongaarts, J., Burch, T. K., & Wachter, K. W. (Eds.). (1987). Introduction family demography: Methods and their application. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brass, W. (1983). The formal demography of the family: an overview of proximate determinants (Occasional Paper Number 31. London Office of Population and Censuses) (pp. 37–49). London: The British Society for Population Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burch, T. K. (1980). The index of overall headship: A simple measure of household complexity standardized for age and sex, demography (Vol. 17, pp. 93–107).

    Google Scholar 

  • Casterline, J. B. (1982). The study of family and fertility issues of measurement and analysis (Unpublished Paper). World Fertility Survey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherlin, A. J. (2003). Family demography. In P. Demeny & G. McNicoll (Eds.), Encyclopedia of population (pp. 355–361). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ching’anda, E. F., & Ntozi, J. P. M. (1998). Training employees for African statistical offices. International Statistical Review, 66, 235–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cliquet, R. (2003). Major trends affecting families in the new millennium – Western Europe and North America. Background paper on tenth anniversary of the international year of the family. http://81.47.175.201/flagship/attachments/family_trends.pdf. Also in http://undesadspd.org.dnnmax.com/Family/Publications/MajorTrendsAffectingFamilies.aspx. Accessed 16 Jan 2017.

  • Cohen, M. L. (1976). House united, house divided: The Chinese family in Taiwan. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, M. L. (1992). Family management and family division in contemporary rural China. The China Quarterly, 130, 357–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DaVanzo, J., & Rahman, M. O. (1993, Autumn). American families: Trends and correlates. Population Index, 59(3), 350–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans-Pritchard, J. J. (1969). Some aspects of marriage and the family among the Nuer (The Rhodes-Livingstone Papers). Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1945, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • García, B., & Rojas, O. (2003). Recent transformations in Latin American families: A sociodemographic. Perspective paper presented at the XXIV general population conference of IUSSP. Session S45 “The demography of Latin America”.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerene, M. (2005). Age at marriage and modernization in sub-Saharan Africa. South African Journal of Demography, 9(2), 59–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goode, W. J. (1963). Changing family patterns: Sub-Saharan Africa. In World revolution and family patterns. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajnal, J. (1982). Two kinds of preindustrial household formation system. Population and Development Review, 8, 449–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Encyclopedia of Marriage and Family. (2003). Extended families. Encyclopedia.com. http://www.encyclopedia.com. Accessed 19 July 2016.

  • Jacobsen, V., Fursman, L., Bryant, J., Claridge, M., & Jensen, B. (2004). Theories of the family and policy (New Zealand Treasury Working Paper 04/02). www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/.../07.htm/. Accessed 14/07/2016

  • Jejeebhoy, S. J. (1995). Women’s education, autonomy, and reproductive behavior: Experience from developing countries. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jelin, E., & Díaz-Muñoz, A. R. (2003). Major trends affecting families: South America in perspective. Report prepared for United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Social Policy and Development Programme on the Family.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kabeer, N. (1996, June). Gender, demographic transition and the economics of family size: Population policy for a human-centred development (Occasional Paper 7). United Nations Research Institute for Social Development United Nations Development Programme.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS). (2012). 2009 Kenya population and housing census. Analytical report on household and family dynamics, Volume IV, Nairobi, Kenya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS), National AIDS Control Programme, Ministry of Public Health and Sanitation (Kenya), Kenya Medical Research Institute, National Council for Population and Development and MEASURE DHS, ICF Macro. (2010). 2008/9 Kenya Demographic and Health Survey. Nairobi: KNBS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keyfitz, N. (1987). The family that does not reproduce itself. In K. Davis, M. S. Bernstam, & R. Ricardo-Campbel (Eds.), Below-replacement fertility in industrial societies: Causes, consequences, policies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laslett, P. (1969). Size and structure of the household in England over three centuries. Population Studies, 23, 199–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laslett, P. (1983). Family and household as work group and kin group: Areas of traditional Europe compared. In R. Wall & J. Robin (Eds.), Family forms in historic Europe (pp. 513–563). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lauras-Lecoh, T. (1990, November). Family trends and demographic transition in Africa. International Social Science Journal, 42(4), 475–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, G. R. (1999). Comparative perspectives. In M. B. Sussman, S. K. Steinmetz, & G. W. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and the family (2nd ed.). New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesthaeghe, R. (1983). A century of demographic and cultural change in Western Europe: An exploration of underlying dimensions. Population and Development Review, 9, 411–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesthaeghe, R. (1985). Value orientations, economic growth and demographic trends: Toward a confrontation? (I.P.D. Working Paper, 1985/7). Brussel: Vrije Universiteit Brussel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesthaeghe, R. (2014). The second demographic transition: A concise overview of its development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(51), 18112–18115. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1420441111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, C. B. (1998). Household structure and poverty: What are the connections? In M. Livi-Bacci & G. De Santis (Eds.), Population and poverty in the developing world (pp. 84–102). Oxford: Clarendon Press, Murphy (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Locoh, T. (1988). Evolution of the family in Africa. In E. van de Walle, M. D. Sala-Diakanda, & P. O. Ohadike (Eds.), The state of African demography (pp. 47–65). Liege: IUSSP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mair, L. P. (1953). African marriage and social change. In A. Phillips (Ed.), Survey of African marriage and family life. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, M. (2011). Long-term effects of the demographic transition on family and kinship networks in Britain. Population and Development Review, 37, 55–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ntozi, J. P., & Zirimenya, S. (1999). Changes in household composition and family structure during the AIDS epidemic in Uganda. In I. O. Orubuloye, J. C. Caldwell, & J. P. M. Ntozi (Eds.), The continuing HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa: Responses and coping strategies (pp. 193–209). Canberra: Health Transition Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pilon, M. (2004). Chapter 90: Démographie des ménages et de la famille: application aux pays en développement. In G. Caselli, J. Vallin, & G. Wunsch (Eds.), Démographie Analyse et Synthèse (Vol. VI). Paris: INED.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quisumbing, A. R., & Hallman, K. (2003). Marriage in transition: Evidence on age, education and assets from six developing countries (Population Council, Working Paper No. 183). New York: Population Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Randall, S., & Coast, E. (2015). Poverty in African households: The limits of survey and census representations. The Journal of Development Studies, 51(2), 162–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2014.968135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randall, S., Coast, E., & Leone, T. (2011). Cultural constructions of the concept of household in sample surveys. Population Studies, 65(2), 217–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randall, S., Coast, E., Antoine, P., Compaore, N., Dial, F.-B., Fanghanel, A., Gning, S. B., Thiombiano, B. G., Golaz, V., & Wandera, S. O. (2015, April–June). UN Census “Households” and Local Interpretations in Africa Since Independence. SAGE Open, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015589353. sgo.sagepub.com.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggles, S. (2010). Stem families and joint families in comparative historical perspective. Population and Development Review, 35, 249–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggles, S. (2012). The future of historical family demography. Annual Review of Sociology, 38, 423–441. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-071811-145533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryder, N. (1992). The centrality of time in the study of the family. In E. Berquo & P. Xenos (Eds.), Family systems and cultural change (International Studies in Demography). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, J. (1984). The background of recent fertility trends in the member states of the Council of Europe (Population Studies No. 15). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shah, A. M. (1998). The family in India: Critical essays. Hyderabad: Orient Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, B. (1996). “African family and kinship” anthropology publications (Paper 3). http://scholarexchange.furman.edu/ant-publications/3

  • Silverstein, S. B. (1984). Igbo kinship and modern entrepreneurial organization: The transportation and spare parts business. Studies in Third World Societies, 28, 191–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBS). (2006a). 2002 Uganda population and housing census analytical report population dynamics. Entebbe: Uganda Bureau of Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBS). (2006b). 2002 Uganda population and housing census analytical report population composition. Kampala: Uganda Bureau of Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBS). (2016). The national population and housing census 2014 – Main report. Kampala: Uganda Bureau of Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (1999). World population monitoring 1999: Population growth, structure and distribution. New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNSD. (2013). https://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic-social/products/dyb/#statisticsSD2013

  • URT. (2014). Report on 2012 Population and housing census basic demographic and socio-economic profile. Zanzibar: National Bureau of Statistics and Office of Chief Government Statistician.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Republic of Tanzania (URT). (2013). Population distribution by age and sex. 2012 Population and Housing Census (PHC). Zanzibar: National Bureau of Statistics, Ministry of Finance, Dar es Salaam and Office of Chief Government Statistician President’s Office, Finance, Economy and Development Planning.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Republic of Tanzania (URT). (2015a, May). Report on 2012 population and housing census basic demographic and socio-economic Profile. Zanzibar: National Bureau of statistics (NBS) and Office of Chief Government Statistician (OCGS).

    Google Scholar 

  • United Republic of Tanzania (URT). (2015b, May). Thematic report on 2012 population and housing census, housing conditions and amenities. Zanzibar: National Bureau of statistics (NBS) and Office of Chief Government Statistician (OCGS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Waite, L. J. (2000). The family as a social organization: Key ideas for the twenty-first century. Contemporary Sociology, 29(3), 463–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westoff, C. F. (2003). Trends in marriage and early childbearing in developing countries (DHS Comparative Reports No. 5). Calverton: ORC Macro.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willekens, F. J., & van Imhoff, E. (2015). Formal demography of families and households. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 8(2), 725–730. Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute (NIDI).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lawrence Ikamari .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ikamari, L., Agwanda, A. (2020). Changes in Families and Households in East Africa. In: Odimegwu, C. (eds) Family Demography and Post-2015 Development Agenda in Africa. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14887-4_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14887-4_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-14886-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-14887-4

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics