1 / 59

THE CLOSING OF THE WESTERN FRONTIER: A HALF CENTURY OF MIGRATION AND REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT CHANGE

THE CLOSING OF THE WESTERN FRONTIER: A HALF CENTURY OF MIGRATION AND REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT CHANGE IN THE UNITED STATES Michael J. Greenwood University of Colorado at Boulder.

socrates-flavian
Download Presentation

THE CLOSING OF THE WESTERN FRONTIER: A HALF CENTURY OF MIGRATION AND REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT CHANGE

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. THE CLOSING OF THE WESTERN FRONTIER: A HALF CENTURY OF MIGRATION AND REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT CHANGE IN THE UNITED STATES Michael J. Greenwood University of Colorado at Boulder

  2. “Up to our own day American history has been in a large degree the history of the colonization of the Great West. The existence of an area of free land, it continuous recession, and the advance of American settlement westward explain American development.” Frederich Jackson Turner, 1893.

  3. Except for the period from 1890 to 1930, the Northeast was characterized by a steadily declining share of total U.S. population. Inasmuch as the nation was settled from east to west, this declining share of population is not surprising. Since 1890 the North Central region has also experienced a steadily declining share of U.S. population. The South has, since 1870, maintained its share at slightly over 30%. (The South's share has ranged from 30.7 to 32.9% during this 100-year period.) … continued…

  4. … Thus, the increasing share of population held by the West has been almost solely at the expense of the Northeast and North Central regions. In the sense that the West's share of U.S. population has apparently not peaked or stabilized, but rather continues to grow steadily, it may be concluded that the western settlement of the United States has not ended. Michael J. Greenwood,Migration and Economic Growth in the United States,1981.

  5. Notes • Before the 1970s, the previous historical high percentage of incremental national population accruing to the South and West was 65% during the 1930s. This percentage was 61% during the 1960s. • In 1980, 17 seats in the House of Representatives shifted to the South and West. The previous high since 1910 when Congress went to 435 seats was 9. • For the first time in U.S. history, a majority of House seats were in the South and West. • In the early 1980s Business Week published an issue with the title “The Second War between the States.”

  6. Sources of Regional Population Change: A. Immigration, B. Natural increase, and C. Internal migration.

  7. TABLE 2 Foreign-Born Population by Region of Residence, Selected Years (thousands) Change Source: Schmidley, A. Dianne, U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports, Series P23-206. Profile of the Foreign Born Population in the United States: 200. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C., 2001.

  8. TABLE 3 Location of Immigrants, 1980 and 1990 (thousands)

  9. TABLE 4 Births per 1,000 Women 18 to 44 Years Old, by Census Division: June, 1982

  10. Why should birth rates differ across regions? Among other factors A. Differing ethnic and religious concentrations (Hispanic, Catholic, Mormon populations), and B. The age selectivity of internal and international migration.

  11. Table 5 Percentage 20 to 44 Years of Age Region All Persons 1970-80 Immigrants Northeast 35.9 55.8 Midwest 36.5 58.8 South 37.0 54.9 West 39.6 56.5

  12. TABLE 6 Propensities to Migrate Interstate, 1975-1980 and 1980-1985, by Age and Education a Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-20, No. 368, “Geographical Mobility: March 1975 to March 1980,” (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1981), Table 24 and No. 420, “Geographical Mobility: 1985,” (Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1987), Table 17. a The base population is the relevant number of nonmovers over the 1975 to 1980 (1980 to 1985) period, plus put migrants. Age is defined as 1980 (1985)

  13. TABLE 7 In-Migration, Out-Migration, and Net-Migration for Regions: 1955-60, 1965-70, 1970-75, 1975-80, 1980-85, 1985-90, 1990-95, and 1995-2000 (thousands of persons 5 and over) • SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-20, “Geographical Mobility,” Washington D.C., • U.S. Government Printing Office, various years.

  14. TABLE 7 (Cont.)In-Migration, Out-Migration, and Net-Migration, by Region, 1990-95, 1995-2000, and 2000-05 • 1990-951995-20002000-05 • Northeast • In-migration 1,162 1,537 1,209 • Out-migration 2,478 2,808 2,313 • Net-migration -1,316 -1,271 -1,024 • Midwest • In-migration 2,191 2,410 1,909 • Out-migration 2,643 2,951 2,328 • Net-migration -452 -541 -420 • South • In-migration 4,682 5,042 4,124 • Out-migration 2,653 3,243 2,701 • Net-migration +2,029 +1,800 +1,422 • West • In-migration 2,269 2,666 2,294 • Out-migration 2,530 2,654 2,273 • Net-migration -261 +12 +21

  15. Notes 1. In 14 of 16 years prior to 1968, the South had net out-migration; 2. During the 1950s, the West was the only region to experience substantial net in-migration; 3. The South’s increase in net in-migration between 1955-60 and 1960-65 was almost entirely at the expense of the West; 4. Net out-migration from the Northeast and Midwest doubled between 1965-70 and 1970-75; net in-migration to the South tripled.

  16. 5. Net out-migration from the Northeast and Midwest nearly doubled between 1965-70 and 1970-75, but whereas the Northeast remained at about 1.2 to 1.4 million out through 2000, the Midwest fell back to about 0.5 million, so that by the late 1990s net out-migration from the Northeast was over twice that of the Midwest.

  17. 6. Net migration to the West remained positive, but started a decline during the 1980s, and then fell sharply during the 1990s, even turning negative for 1990-95.7. During 1965-70 net migration to the South and West was about 1 to 1; during 1975-80, it was about 2 to 1 in favor of the South, and during 1980-85 it was about 3 to 1 in favor of the South. By the early 1990s, the South had net migration of over 2 million whereas the West experienced net out-migration.

  18. TABLE 9 Components of Population Change by Region, 1970-80 and 1980-85 (thousands) Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1987 (107th edition). Washington DC, 1986, Table No. 27. a. Note that for the 1970-1980 period absolute population change does not equal births minus deaths plus (negative) migration. The difference is the “error of closure,” or the unexplained difference between the estimated population at the end of the decade and the census count for that date.

  19. Table 10

  20. TABLE 11 United States Age Distribution, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, and Decadal Changes (in thousands)

  21. We see that during the 1970s and beyond the US had a very large number of people who had matured into the young and highly mobile age cohorts. Now we need to discuss the motives for this young and mobile group to make an interstate move.

  22. Table 13 Relationship Between Age and Unemployment, 1981 Age Unemployment Rate 20-24 12.3% 25-34 7.3 35-44 5.0 45-55 4.2

  23. TABLE 12 Absolute Nonagricultural Employment Change and Shares of Absolute Nonagricultural Employment Change, by Census Division Absolute Employment Change (in thousands) Shares of Absolute Employment Change

  24. Refers to South and 1970-1980 ∆POP = 12.5 million (from 62.8 to 75.4 million)‏ ∆EMP = 8.7 million (from 20.4 to 29.1 million)‏ ∆(E/P) = 0.07 (from 0.32 to 0.39)‏ Counterfactual: 1. What if the South’s E/P had remained at 0.32 in 1980? What kind of population increase would have been required to accommodate 29.1 million jobs? 2. Answer: 90.9 million people would have been required in 1980 to accommodate 29.1 million jobs with an E/P of 0.32. 3. 90.9 million would have been 15.5 million more people than the South had in 1980. 4. Where would these people have come from? Answer: migration. a. better than 4 times as much internal migration to the South would have been required; or b. better than 2 times as much total migration would have been required.

  25. Conclusion:Low E/Ps in the South served as a buffer between employment change and migration. Employment growth could be accommodated by increased LFPRs in the South that necessitated less migration than would otherwise have been required.Note: This potential is now largely exhausted.

  26. While the baby boom was importantly responsible for the regional population and employment shifts of the 1970-1990 period, it also provided a cushion against even greater declines in the Northeast and Midwest.

  27. TABLE 16 Total U.S. Population and Households, and Annualized Rates of Growth of Each 1950-1981 Population 1950-1965: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, Bicentennial Edition, Part 2 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975), Tables A 23-28. Population 1970-1981: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-25, No. 917. “Preliminary Estimates of the Population of the United States, by Age, Sex, and Race: 1970 to 1981” (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982), Table 1. Households: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-20, No. 371. “Household and Family Characteristics: March 1981” (Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982), Table 20; also see corresponding publications No. 213 and No. 140. Sources:

  28. Table 17 Percent Change in Population 1970-81 0.5 4.1 22.5 26.7 Percent Change in Households 1970-81 16.1 21.1 43.6 45.8 Share of Housing Permits Issued 1970-80 Northeast Midwest South West › 34% › 66%

  29. Household expansion due to the baby boom provided a cushion that allowed some employment growth and some investment to occur in the Northeast and Midwest.

  30. What happened, especially in the South, but also in the West, to cause such dramatic changes that the regional landscape of the nation?

  31. For the South Atlantic Division 1955-1960: 43,203 net in-migrants (25 years old and over) who were non-native college graduates 1965-1970: 93,680 net in-migrants (25 years old and over) who were non-native college graduates

  32. TABLE 22 Components of Projected Population Change by Region, 1995-2000, 2000-2005, and 1995-2025 (thousands) Migration 1995-2000 2000-2005 1995-2025 Source: U.S Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, “Population Projections: States, 1995-2025,” P-25, No. 1131, May 1997.

  33. TABLE 24 Regional Migration in the United States: 1980-2001 (in thousands) Northeast

  34. TABLE 25 Regional Migration in the United States: 1980-2001 (in thousands) Midwest

  35. TABLE 23 Regional Migration in the United States: 1980-2001 (in thousands) South

  36. Table 8

  37. What are the prospects fora continuation of these powerful trends during the early 21st century?

  38. A. Internal migration of the native born to the South and West has slowed: 1) Due to the aging of the baby-boom cohort, the pool of potential internal migrants has fallen considerably. B. Employment growth differentials that favored the South and West may not remain as strong as in the past: 1) The pool of potential internal migrants to accommodate the differential growth rates will not be available. 2) The differential pool of labor force entrants from the indigenous population, which strongly favored the South, is largely exhausted. (E/P) 3) However, immigration is a positive force in maintaining the employment growth differentials as long as the newcomers continue to locate in these regions.

  39. TABLE 10 Age-Specific Population Projections for the United States, 2000-2020 change Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, “Population Projections of the United States by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 1995-2050,” P25-1130, Table 2

  40. According to Randell Filer (1991), the location of immigrants in the U.S. significantly discourages in-migration to the areas of immigrant settlement, but native out-migration from such areas is only marginally affected: “An increase of one-percent in the fraction of an SMSAs labor force who arrived in the U.S. between 1975 and 1980 results in a decrease in net native migration into that labor market equal to about 1.25 percent of its work force.” Filer further argues that the impacts are biggest on native whites with less skill and lower education, who avoid such places.

  41. What Does the Future Hold? U.S. interregional migration: 5-year flowSum of 1-year flows 1955-60 7.7 million (4.3%) 1965-70 8.7 million (4.3%) 18.0 million 1970-75 9.2 million — 1975-80 10.1 million (4.5%) — 1980-85 10.2 million 17.4 million 1985-90 11.5 million (4.6%) 17.4 million 1990-95 10.3 million — 1995-00 11.7 million (4.2%) 16.3 million

More Related