Data from a 1977 survey of metropolitan and nonmetropolitan origin households migrating to 75 high net inmigration counties of the Midwest are examined to consider the motivational basis for the inmigration component of post-1970 nonmetropolitan migration trends. Findings suggest that the major stated motivations for leaving places of origin, especially among those from metropolitan areas, are "quality of life" considerations. Abouth a fourth of the metropolitan origin migrants' and half of the nonmetropolitan origin migrants' reasons are job-related. Anti-urban push and pro-rural pull responses are prevalent among migrants from metropolitan areas. Subsequent analysis of reasons for leaving metropolitan residences suggests consistency with other objective variables. Among households with a working-age head, those leaving for "quality of life" reasons came disproportionately from the largest metropolitan centers and went to the smallest towns. Those moving for non-employment reasons are not more likely to have taken an initial income loss, though they are less likely to experience immediate income gains.

The extended family's role in economic improvement has been extensively debated. From a modernization theory perspective, the extended family is viewed as an institutional obstacle to economic progress, while a social capital perspective suggests that it is an “engine” insofar as it permits individuals to activate networks and pool resources beyond their own. This paper examines, from these perspectives, extended family influences on the use of remittances from transnational migrants. The research asks whether family influences are positive or negative and are more or less important than other factors in determining business investments. The research draws on interviews with 170 family heads in a small community in Pakistan. The results show that relatively little remittance income from family members working in the Middle East was channeled into business investments, despite government incentives offered to migrant households. Most of the extended family measures used in the research are statistically unimportant in explaining level of business investment. There thus appears to be little support for either modernization theory or social capital arguments on the role of the extended family. Of the five operationalized extended family dimensions only one was related to business investment, and that positively. However, “family” considerations are not irrelevant. The best predictors of business investment were a preexisting level of business exposure/experience within the family and whether or not the family head was aware of business investment opportunities. The results raise questions about the need to reconceptualize family influences beyond the formal dimensions of extended family structure.

No abstract

No abstract