Abstract
A longitudinal survey approach is used in a largely rural area in the Philippines to examine consistency between migration intentions and subsequent migration behavior. Inconsistencies in movement behavior, the timing of a move, and the destination are analyzed. Discrepancies between intentions and behavior are explained in terms of unanticipated constraints and facilitators as well as changes in the conditions that precipitated the migration intention in the first place. Intended international movers who did not actually move in a 2-1/2 year period were thwarted mainly by legal hurdles that could not be overcome. Intended internal migrants who did not actually move remained in their origin area primarily because of changes in job opportunities or family relationships. Methodological and theoretical implications of the findings are discussed.
The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men Gang aft agley, An' la'e us nought but grief an' pain, For promis'd joy!
⋯ we must bear in mind the distinction between direct and facilitating factors involved in migration processes⋯ . migration analysis should consider some factors that facilitate or impede migration rather than determine migration directly (Goldscheider, 1971:38).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bumpass, L., & Westoff, C.F. (1969). The prediction of completed fertility.Demography 6(4), 445–454.
De Jong, G.F., & Fawcett, J.T. (1981). Motivations for migration: An assessment and a value-expectancy research model. In De Jong, G.F. & Gardner, R.W. (eds.),Migration Decision Making: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Microlevel Studies in Developed and Developing Countries (pp. 13–58). New York: Pergamon Press.
De Jong, G.F., Root, B.D., Gardner, R.W., Fawcett, J.T., & Abad, R.G. (1985). Migration intentions and behavior: Decision making in a rural Philippine province.Population and Environment (this issue).
Desbarats, J. (1983). Spatial choice and constraints on behavior.Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 73(3), 340–357.
Fawcett, J.T., & De Jong, G.F. (1982). Reasons for moving and migration behavior. In United Nations (ESCAP),National Migration Surveys, Survey Manuals, No. 10, Guidelines for Analysis (pp. 109–131). New York: United Nations.
Freedman, R.A., Hermalin A.I., & Ming-Cheng Chang (1975). Do statements about desired family size predice fertility?: The case of Taiwan, 1967–1970.Demography 12(3), 407–416.
Gardner, R.W. (1981). Macrolevel influences on the migration decision process. In De Jong, G.F., & Gardner, R.W. (eds),Migration Decision Making: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Microlevel Studies in Developed and Developing Countries (pp. 59–89). New York: Pergamon Press.
Goldscheider, C. (1971).Population, Modernization, and Social Structure. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.
Lee, R.D. (1981). A model for forecasting fertility from birth expectations data. In Hendershot, H.E., & Placek, P.J.,Predicting Fertility: Demographic Studies of Birth Expectations. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
McHugh, K. (1980). A conceptual model of migration decision-making. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Louisville, Kentucky.
McHugh, K. (1983). Incorporating constraints into an attitude-based model of migration intentions. Paper presented at the annual meetings of the Population Association of America, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gardner, R.W., De Jong, G.F., Arnold, F. et al. The best-laid schemes: An analysis of discrepancies between migration intentions and behavior. Popul Environ 8, 63–77 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01263017
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01263017