Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Migration stock and the issue of competing and complementary flows in United States interstate migration

  • Published:
Journal of Population Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to study the determinants of interstate migration in the United States from 1965–1970 when a new change in direction of migration has started, and to examine the flow creation or flow diversion that results from migration to some appealing regions. Several related variables have been selected and tested for gross interstate migration flows. The results show that overall both push and pull factors have not been important. People from higher income regions migrate more, and migrants tend to move to states with higher incomes and larger population. Distance was not found to act as a significant deterrence to migration, whereas population density of origin and destination was significant. Previous migration was found to have a very strong effect on migration. The results of the study also suggested that there has been a major change in the location of growth areas in the United States during 1955–1970.

The study of concurrent flow showed that the states of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and Florida combined have positively influenced migratory flow between origin and destination states. Empirical results, however, also showed that California did not have flow creation or flow diversion effects on interstate migration.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Crown WH (1991) Migration and regional economic growth: An origin-destination model. Econ Dev Q 5:45–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Fields GS (1979) Place-to-place migration: Some new evidence. Rev Econ Statist 61:21–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Glejser H, Dramais A (1969) A gravity model of interdependent equations to estimate flow creation and diversion. J Reg Sci0 9:439–449

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon P, Theobold P (1981) Migration and spatial development in the Republic of Mexico. J Dev Areas 15:239–251

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood MJ (1969) An analysis of the determinants of geographic labor mobility in the United States. Rev Econ Statist 51:189–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood MJ (1970) Lagged response in the decision to migrate. J Reg Sci 10:375–384

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood MJ (1975) A simultaneous-equations model of urban growth and migration. J Am Statist Assoc 70:797–810

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood MJ (1985) Human migration: Theory, models and empirical studies. J Reg Sci 25:521–544

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood MJ, Ladman TR (1978) An economic analysis of migration in Mexico. Ann Reg Sci 22:16–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood MJ, Sweetland D (1972) The determinants of migration between standard metropolitan statistical areas. Demography 9:665–681

    Google Scholar 

  • Krumm RJ (1983) Regional labor markets and the household migration decision. J Reg Sci 23:361–376

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead A (1982) A simultaneous equations model of migration and economic changes in nonmetropolitan areas. J Reg Sci 22:512–527

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller CF (1982) The economics of labor migration: A behavioral analysis. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Muth RF (1971) Migration: Chicken or egg. South Econ J 37:295–306

    Google Scholar 

  • Navaratil J, Doyle JJ (1977) The socioeconomic determinants of migration and the level of aggregation. South Econ J 43:1547–1559

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson P (1959) Migration, real income and information. J Reg Sci 1:49–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Olvey LD (1972) Regional Growth and inter-regional migration — Their pattern of interaction. Rev Reg Stud 2:139–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Porell FW (1982) Intermetropolitan migration and quality of life. J Reg Sci 22:137–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson HW (1976) Grwoth pole spillover: The dynamic of backwash and spread. Reg Stud 10:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternlieb G, Hughes JW (1977) New regional and metropolitan realities of America. J Am Inst Planners 43:227–241

    Google Scholar 

  • Vining DR Jr, Kontuly T (1978) Population dispersal from major metropolitan regions. An international comparison. Int Reg Sci Rev 3:49–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, BM (1974) Expectations, information and human migration: specifying an econometric model of Irish migration to Britain. J Reg Sci 14:107–120

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. City and Regional Planning, School of Urban and Public Affairs, The University of Texas at Arlington, P.O. Box 19588, 76019, Arlington, TX, USA

    Ardeshir Anjomani

  2. City of Forth Worth, Department of Planning and Growth Management, 1000 Throckmorton, 76102, Forth Worth, TX, USA

    Vida Hariri

Authors
  1. Ardeshir Anjomani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vida Hariri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This research was supported partly through Organized Research Funds of The University of Texas at Arlington.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Anjomani, A., Hariri, V. Migration stock and the issue of competing and complementary flows in United States interstate migration. J Popul Econ 5, 87–100 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00168269

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00168269

Keywords

Search

Navigation