We explore at the municipality level how the climate of criminal violence has affected the flow of remittances to Mexico. Using a panel of municipalities in the years 2006 and 2010, we find that drug-related crimes and overall rates of homicides have reduced the percentage of families that receive remittances. This result is robust to controlling for net migration, political variables, and traditional socioeconomic explanations of remittance sending. It is also robust to potential threats to validity. We interpret this result as suggestive of self-interested concerns when sending money home amidst a climate of rampant violence. Nonetheless, mixed motivations to remit are evident in our analysis.

We explore the role of workers' remittances in supporting vigilante organisations that emerged in reaction to rising criminal violence in Mexico. Research on remittances posits both a positive and a negative effect on collective action from the reception of remittances. On one hand, remittances sent by relatives abroad provide extra resources for political action at home. On the other hand, the reception of remittances makes recipients less prone to protesting, through a reduction in grievances. As a result, remittances can be associated with both an increase and a decrease of collective political activity. In this paper, we claim that both effects can co-exist and that the predominance of one mechanism or the other depends on the degree of penetration of remittances at the municipal level. Using data on the existence of vigilante organisations, we find that in most remittance-receiving municipalities, through a resource effect, remittance inflows increase the probability of observing self-defense organisations, but this probability declines at high rates of remittance penetration at the local level. Nonetheless, we observe an activation effect in a majority of remittance receiving municipalities. The paper contributes both to our understanding of international social networks as determinants of civilian action and to the research agenda on how workers' remittances shape political behaviour in home countries.

No abstract

Location is one of the main characteristics households consider when buying a property or deciding where to live, since it determines accessibility to transport and hence to jobs and employment. Using a geographically-referenced dataset on new housing developments, this paper estimates how households value accessibility in Mexico City. Results are shown considering road accessibility to formal employment subcenters (private accessibility) and distance to the main public transport stations in the city (public accessibility). Results suggest that accessibility to employment subcenters is valued as an amenity by households but being closer to a Metro station is perceived as a disamenity. Moreover, households located in neighborhoods with a greater proportion of informal workers and with lower education levels give a lower value to private accessibility than households located in neighborhoods with a lower proportion of informal workers or in high-educated neighborhoods. These results are evidence of the existence of spatial segregation in the city where disadvantaged households are segregated, not only because of their economic conditions, but because they are located farther away from employment opportunities. The results in this work stress the importance of thinking about integrated land use and transport policies.

Location is one of the main characteristics households consider when buying a property or deciding where to live, since it determines accessibility to transport and hence to jobs and employment. Using a geographically-referenced dataset on new housing developments, this paper estimates how households value accessibility in Mexico City. Results are shown considering road accessibility to formal employment subcenters (private accessibility) and distance to the main public transport stations in the city (public accessibility). Results suggest that accessibility to employment subcenters is valued as an amenity by households but being closer to a Metro station is perceived as a disamenity. Moreover, households located in neighborhoods with a greater proportion of informal workers and with lower education levels give a lower value to private accessibility than households located in neighborhoods with a lower proportion of informal workers or in high-educated neighborhoods. These results are evidence of the existence of spatial segregation in the city where disadvantaged households are segregated, not only because of their economic conditions, but because they are located farther away from employment opportunities. The results in this work stress the importance of thinking about integrated land use and transport policies.