Voting with their feet migration patterns under the celtic tiger 1996 2002
1 / 22

Introduction - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Voting With Their Feet: Migration Patterns Under The Celtic Tiger, 1996-2002. Peter Connell 1 and Dennis G. Pringle 2 1. Information System Services, Trinity College Dublin

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Introduction' - trevet

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Voting with their feet migration patterns under the celtic tiger 1996 2002

Voting With Their Feet: Migration Patterns Under The Celtic Tiger, 1996-2002.

Peter Connell1 and Dennis G. Pringle2

1. Information System Services, Trinity College Dublin

2. Dept. of Geography and National Institute for Regional and Spatial Analysis, National University of Ireland, Maynooth.

Introduction Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • Recent years have witnessed the construction of several indicators of social deprivation.

  • These create quite different impressions of the geography of deprivation in Ireland.

  • It is suggested that the analysis of migration patterns provides an alternative approach to understanding regional inequalities – on the assumption that people move from areas of disadvantage towards areas of greater opportunity.

Limitations of net migration
Limitations Of Net Migration Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • It is a simple matter to calculate total net migration between census years (i.e population increase – births + deaths).

  • This provides a useful overview, but it may disguise contradictory flows.

  • It is therefore desirable to:

    • Disaggregate by age group;

    • Calculate separate estimates of in and out migration;

    • Make a distinction between internal and external moves.

Census information
Census Information Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • The Census provides information on population by age

  • It also provides information at a county level on:

    • External in migration in the previous 12 months;

    • Internal moves in the previous 12 months.

  • External out migration must be estimated as a residual

    • i.e. internal in – internal out + external in - net migration

  • It is assumed that the pattern of moves in the previous 12 months typifies the entire inter-censal period.

Vital statistics information
Vital Statistics Information Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • The Census does not provide information on births or deaths. This, however, is available from the annual reports on Vital Statistics.

  • The Vital Statistics provides information on the number of deaths in each county each year by 5-year age groups.

Disaggregating by age
Disaggregating By Age Tiger, 1996-2002.

Attempts to disaggregate net migration by age are complicated by:

  • The number of deaths by age cohort at county level is unknown;

  • The 6-year gap between the 1996 and 2002 censuses complicates matters;

  • The census breakdown on moves in the previous 12 months by age is not as detailed as one would desire, either by age group or by area.

Calculating cohort survival 1
Calculating Cohort Survival (1) Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • Deaths in each age group in a given year need to be allocated to a cohort.

  • Over a 6 year period deaths in a 5 year age group will be divided between three 5-year cohorts.

  • Deaths were allocated between cohorts taking account of:

    • Relative sizes of each cohort;

    • Relative risks of death (using 1995-97 life tables)

Calculating cohort survival 2
Calculating Cohort Survival (2) Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • The deaths in age group x to x+4 is equal to:

    rx.nx + rx+1.nx+1 + rx+2.nx+2 + rx+3.nx+3 + rx+4.nx+4

  • In year one, all deaths will be in the same cohort.

  • In year two, the ratio is:

    (rx+1.nx+1 + rx+2.nx+2 + rx+3.nx+3 + rx+4.nx+4) : rx.nx

  • The ratio may be adjusted in a similar manner for subsequent years.

  • Ratios calculated at national level were used to allocate deaths at county level.

Net migration by age
Net Migration By Age Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • Once deaths are allocated to cohorts, the net migration for each cohort may be calculated as:

    Net Migration = Pop02 - Pop96 - Births + Deaths

  • Due to the 6-year gap between the censuses, it is necessary to estimate 1996 populations in age groups 0-3, 4-8, 9-13 etc.

  • The census provides information on age of population by single years at national level. The 1996 cohorts in each county were reallocated assuming national ratios.

External net migration
External Net Migration Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • It is estimated that there were 73,918 male and 78,577 female migrants into the state 1996-2002.

  • This represents 3.8 per cent of the total male population and 4.0 per cent of the female population in 2002.

  • Net in migration represents a reversal of trends since the late 1970s.

External net migration by age
External Net Migration By Age Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • Whilst there was a net flow of people into the country, there were substantial variations by age group.

Net migration patterns
Net Migration Patterns Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • Most counties experienced positive net migration, 1996-2002 – i.e. more people moved in than out.

  • However, there were substantial spatial variations.

Net migration by age1
Net Migration By Age Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • There were considerable variations in the patterns of net migration by age.

External out migration
External Out Migration Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • The net migration patterns in general suggest that the major urban areas attract younger people, who subsequently spill over into adjoining areas when they become home owners.

  • These patterns do not take account of the external out migration in the 15-24 age group.

  • This is not counted in the Census, but can be estimated as a residual.

  • The patterns are quite different from the net migration patterns for the same age groups.

Implications Tiger, 1996-2002.

  • Net migration patterns superficially suggest the need to divert resources away from the major cities, especially Dublin, in the interests of spatial equity.

  • However, closer examination suggests the possible existence of a ‘class’ dimension that remains hidden because external out migration is never counted.

  • Anecdotal evidence suggests that this has always been the case.

The End Tiger, 1996-2002.