This paper constructs and tests a model that incorporates relative deprivation into the migration decision. Relatively deprived individuals view their situations as less than a community standard. Another innovation of this paper is the utilization of a cluster approach to wage differentials. This cluster method takes account of individual characteristics while avoiding the severe multicollinearity problems inherent in the standard wage equation approach. Using data from the Mexican Migration Project, relative deprivation is found to be a significant motivating factor in domestic migration decisions. The results also suggest that Mexico-US migration may be increasing relative deprivation in Mexican communities. For policymakers, the results indicate that policies attempting to slow domestic rural-to-urban migration must address both relative and absolute outcomes in communities. Investments in communities that raise aggregate incomes, but increase relative deprivation, could result in an increase in migration out of the community, not in a decrease as intended. Copyright � 2006 The Authors; Journal compilation � 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

No abstract

In this article, we present and test a model that incorporates education-occupation matching into the migration decision. The literature on education-occupation matching shows that earnings are affected by how individuals' education matches that required by their occupation. Accordingly, individuals with more schooling than required by their occupation have an additional incentive to migrate: the increase in earnings that occurs with a more beneficial education-occupation match. Using data from Mexico, we found statistical support for the importance of education-occupation matching in migration decisions. Education-occupation matching provides a plausible explanation for the mixed findings in the literature on the relationship between educational attainment and migration.

No abstract

With the blossoming of research on corporate social performance (CSP), the data produced by Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini (KLD) have become the standard to measure firms’ social and stakeholder actions. However, to date, only a few studies have focused on examining the data directly, and have done so largely in terms of validating the concepts and methods in the data set’s construction. The present study seeks to complement these efforts by contributing knowledge about what the KLD data report on firms’ actions toward primary and secondary stakeholders, and the dimensions of CSP that firms generally engage in, together or sequentially. With data on 3,073 firms over the period 2000-2010, results show that firms expend more resources on garnering strengths in primary stakeholder dimensions, although this trend is sharply deteriorating to the benefit of secondary stakeholders—notably the natural environment. Results also show that firms generally approach CSP with a mixed behavior, with strengths and concerns in the same dimensions, especially as it pertains to secondary stakeholders. These are the same dimensions in which firms show the longer, more intrinsic commitments, suggesting that secondary stakeholder strengths and concerns may be structural in nature. However, there is also evidence of relationships across dimensions, indicating that firms’ involvement in CSP can generate momentum. The rich implications of these findings are discussed.