Gains and losses of migrants and income through intercounty migration in the U.S., 1992–1993

U.S. Intercounty Migration in the 1990s: People and Income Move Down the Urban Hierarchy

“…The majority of the counties shown in Figure 3 are nonmetropolitan counties located in regions renowned for their environmental amenities that have attracted, at least in the past, affluent retirees as well as others whose occupations and/or wealth enable them to live where they wish (Manson and Groop 1988). These include clusters of counties along "snowy slopes" of the Rockies reaching from the Bitterroot Mountains of southwestern Montana to the Sangre de Cristo Mountains of northern New Mexico; the "lakes and forest" counties of northern Michigan-Wisconsin-Minnesota as well as the Ozarks; and the "ocean beach" counties of the Carolinas and Florida.…”

“…In this study we use personal income to characterize economic gains or losses experienced by counties as a consequence of internal migration. We measure income flows by means of income effectiveness (IE), a descriptive statistic analogous to ME that we introduced in an earlier study and we believe is a useful indicator of the degree to which migration is efficacious in redistributing income between places (Manson and Groop 1999). As with ME, for a particular place:…”

“…For example, in 1992-1993, even though cities experienced a net loss of population, they still received more than three million internal migrants. Further, while numerous studies have considered the migration experiences of various types of counties, few have specified the numbers and sources of migrants moving into those counties as well as the numbers and destinations of persons moving out of those counties, relying instead on net estimates and inferences about migration linkages ( Johnson and Beale 1994;Fuggitt and Beale 1996;Manson and Groop 1999).…”

Rural-urban migration, rural household income and local geographical contexts—A case of northwestern Guangxi, China

“…Hence it is historically in developed countries while currently in developing countries (Taylor and Martin, 2001). Various aspects of impact of rural-urban migration on migrants, sending areas, receiving areas, etc., continue to attract researchers' concentration and arouse public concerns (Manson and Groop, 1999;Taylor and Martin, 2001). Especially, the impact of rural-urban migration on the sending areas is becoming one of the research focuses in geography, economics, sociology and demography (Manson and Groop, 1999;Taylor and Martin, 2001;Du et al, 2005;Haas, 2006;Taylor et al, 2006).…”

“…Various aspects of impact of rural-urban migration on migrants, sending areas, receiving areas, etc., continue to attract researchers' concentration and arouse public concerns (Manson and Groop, 1999;Taylor and Martin, 2001). Especially, the impact of rural-urban migration on the sending areas is becoming one of the research focuses in geography, economics, sociology and demography (Manson and Groop, 1999;Taylor and Martin, 2001;Du et al, 2005;Haas, 2006;Taylor et al, 2006). And the new economics of labor migration (NELM), as a framework in researching migration, are examined in various regions of the world (Stark, 1991;Rozelle et al, 1999;Taylor and Martin, 2001;Haas, 2006).…”