40
School of Geography FACULTY OF EARTH & ENVIRONMENT Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure Oliver Duke-Williams [email protected] www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/people/.o.duke- williams/

Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

  • Upload
    arion

  • View
    30

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure. Oliver Duke-Williams [email protected] www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/people/.o.duke-williams/. Counting migrants and groups of migrants. Migrants move from origins to destinations People may move singly or in groups - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

School of GeographyFACULTY OF EARTH & ENVIRONMENT

Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Oliver Duke-Williams

[email protected]

www.geog.leeds.ac.uk/people/.o.duke-williams/

Page 2: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Counting migrants and groups of migrants

• Migrants move from origins to destinations

• People may move singly or in groups

• Up until the 2001 Census, migrants were counted (in the Census) in two ways

• As individual migrants

• As wholly moving households

Page 3: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

A wholly moving household

Page 4: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Wholly moving households or not?

Page 5: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Counting migrants in the 2001 Census

The 2001 Census introduced the concept of the moving group

• Migrants within households are grouped on the basis of their common origins

Page 6: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Moving groups

Page 7: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Absolute numbers of migrants

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

0-4

5-9

10-1

4

15-1

9

20-2

4

25-2

9

30-3

4

35-3

9

40-4

4

45-4

9

50-5

4

55-5

9

60-6

4

65-6

9

70-7

4

75-7

9

80-8

4

85-8

9

90+

Age

Mig

ran

ts

Male Female

Migrants within UK, 2000-1 Source: 2001 Census Special Migration Statistics

Page 8: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Migration rates

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

3500-

4

5-9

10-1

4

15-1

9

20-2

4

25-2

9

30-3

4

35-3

9

40-4

4

45-4

9

50-5

4

55-5

9

60-6

4

65-6

9

70-7

4

75-7

9

80-8

4

85-8

9

90+

Age

Mig

ran

ts /

100

0 p

erso

ns

Male Female

Migrants within UK – rates per 1000 at destination, 2000-1 Source: 2001 Census Special Migration Statistics

Page 9: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Absolute numbers of migrants by origin type

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

0-4

5-9

10-1

4

15-1

9

20-2

4

25-2

9

30-3

4

35-3

9

40-4

4

45-4

9

50-5

4

55-5

9

60-6

4

65-6

9

70-7

4

75-7

9

80-8

4

85-8

9

90+

Age

Mig

ran

ts

UK district Unknown Outside UK

Migrants within and into UK, 2000-1 Source: 2001 Census Special Migration Statistics

Page 10: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Migration connectivity

Migration connectivity is a simple measure of how well places are connected to other places

• It is affected by geography, but useful for comparing alternative characteristics given a fixed geography

Page 11: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Origin connectivity

oic_wmhh3

0.01 - 0.08

0.09 - 0.13

0.14 - 0.21

0.22 - 0.31

0.32 - 0.48

oic_whmm1

0.01 - 0.13

0.14 - 0.20

0.21 - 0.28

0.29 - 0.38

0.39 - 0.70

oic_whmm2

0.01 - 0.10

0.11 - 0.16

0.17 - 0.23

0.24 - 0.33

0.34 - 0.57

Page 12: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Destination connectivity

dic_whmm3

0.01 - 0.09

0.10 - 0.13

0.14 - 0.19

0.20 - 0.27

0.28 - 0.44

dic_whmm1

0.00 - 0.13

0.14 - 0.21

0.22 - 0.31

0.32 - 0.48

0.49 - 0.90

dic_whmm2

0.01 - 0.10

0.11 - 0.16

0.17 - 0.23

0.24 - 0.33

0.34 - 0.51

Page 13: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

About the BHPS

The British Household Panel Survey

• A multi-purpose panel survey

• Interviews all adults in a set of representative households

• First wave in 1991: 5,500 households, 10,000 individuals

Page 14: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

BHPS: Migrants

The BHPS is a useful source of information about migrants

• Individuals are tracked over many years

• The household context is clear

• Respondents are asked about intentions to migrate, and about reasons for recent migration events

Limitations

• The sample size is small

• The geography is limited

• Migration tends to be a cause of attrition in longitudinal data sets

Page 15: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

BHPS data studied

Individuals from wave J (2000-1) were studied

• This roughly matches the transition period over which migration is recorded in the 2001 Census

• The data were linked to the next wave, in order to identify those who had moved during the period

Page 16: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Characteristics of migrants in the BHPS

Net balances by region, for movers within UK

Region Outflow Inflow Net gain

Inner London 244 246 2

Outer London 514 514 0

R. of South East 1736 1728 -8

South West 846 852 6

East Anglia 395 402 7

East Midlands 794 811 17

West Midlands Conurbation 348 352 4

R. of West Midlands 489 483 -6

Greater Manchester 380 376 -4

Merseyside 177 180 3

R. of North West 429 434 5

South Yorkshire 235 229 -6

West Yorkshire 315 314 -1

R. of Yorks & Humberside 324 323 -1

Tyne & Wear 222 226 4

R. of North 362 365 3

Wales 2548 2567 19

Scotland 3010 3026 16

Northern Ireland 146 146 0

Total 13633 13633 0

Page 17: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Characteristics of migrants in the BHPS

All respondents are asked when they moved to their present address

• Data are highly dominated by recent moves

• Other moves tend to be within last 10 years or so

• The same pattern is apparent in other waves

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1930 1950 1970 1990

Year moved to present address

Co

un

t

1

10

100

1000

10000

1970 1980 1990 2000

Year moved to present address

Co

un

t

Page 18: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Characteristics of migrants in the BHPS

Age profile of migrants

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 20 40 60 80 100

Age

Fre

qu

ency

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

0-4

5-9

10-1

4

15-1

9

20-2

4

25-2

9

30-3

4

35-3

9

40-4

4

45-4

9

50-5

4

55-5

9

60-6

4

65-6

9

70-7

4

75-7

9

80-8

4

85-8

9

90+

Age

Mig

ran

ts

Male Female

Page 19: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Wishes to move

Separate questions ask whether respondents would

• prefer to move

• expect to move within the next year

Prefers to move? Frequency Percent

Don't know 191 1%

Stay here 9915 66%

Prefer to move 4975 33%

Total 15081 100%

Expect to move in next yearFrequencyPercent

Don't know 641 4%

Yes 2073 14%

No 12367 82%

Total 15081 100%

Page 20: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Preference and expectation

How to preference and expectation relate to each other?

Prefer to move?

Expect to move  

Don't know Yes No Total

Don't know 19% 18% 63% 191

Stay here 2% 6% 91% 9915

Prefer to move 8% 29% 64% 4975

Page 21: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Prefer to move

Does preference vary by age or sex?     Age group

Prefer to move 16-24 25--44 45-64 65+

Male

Don't know 1% 2% 1% 1%

Stay here 57% 54% 66% 78%

Prefer to move 37% 40% 27% 18%

Total 1071 2752 2119 1235

Female

Don't know 2% 1% 1% 1%

Stay here 54% 58% 69% 79%

Prefer to move 42% 39% 27% 17%

Total   1213 3108 2417 1688

Page 22: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Does preference vary by household type?

Prefer to move? Age group  

16-24 25-44 45-64 65+

Single Non-Elderly

Don't know 2% 2% 2% 0%

Stay here 55% 50% 62% 67%

Prefer to move 43% 48% 35% 33%Base 148 448 486 3

Single Elderly

Don't know 2% 1%

Stay here 75% 84%

Prefer to move 23% 15%

Base     104 1133

Page 23: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Prefer to move? Age group   16-24 25-44 45-64 65+

Couple No ChildrenDon't know 2% 1% 1% 1%Stay here 53% 59% 73% 79%Prefer to move 45% 40% 26% 20%Base 251 1073 1725 1357

Couple: dep childrenDon't know 1% 1% 1% 0%Stay here 60% 60% 70% 90%Prefer to move 39% 39% 29% 10%Base 738 3054 751 20

Couple: non-dep childrenDon't know 2% 1% 1% 0%Stay here 57% 56% 71% 82%Prefer to move 41% 42% 28% 18%Base 450 344 910 135

Page 24: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Prefer to move? Age group  

16-24 25-44 45-64 65+

Lone par: dep children

Don't know 2% 2% 2% 0%

Stay here 53% 52% 57% 64%

Prefer to move 45% 46% 41% 36%

Base 220 460 104 11

Lone par: non-dep children

Don't know 1% 2% 1% 1%

Stay here 66% 50% 69% 85%

Prefer to move 33% 48% 30% 14%

Base 127 122 183 104

Page 25: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Prefer to move? Age group  

16-24 25-44 45-64 65+

2+ Unrelated adults

Don't know 2% 3% 5% 0%

Stay here 58% 54% 52% 80%

Prefer to move 40% 44% 43% 20%

Base 208 112 21 15

Other Households

Don't know 0% 0% 0% 2%

Stay here 47% 50% 68% 72%

Prefer to move 53% 50% 32% 26%

Base 58 64 87 53

Page 26: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Is expectation realised?

How well does an expectation of a move predict an actual move?

• Link waves

• Compare expect to move vs. actual move status

• Can look at:

• Preference to move

• Expecting to move

PreferenceIndividual

mover status   Total

Non-moverMover

within GB

Don't know 86% 14% 164

Stay here 95% 5% 9068

Prefer to move 82% 18% 4395Total 91% 9% 13627

Expectation

Individual mover status   Total

Non-moverMover within

GB

Don't know 86% 14% 561

Yes 53% 47% 1679

No 97% 3% 11387Total 91% 9% 13627

Page 27: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

What about a year later?

What about a year later?

• Are expected moves deferred?

Expectation

Individual mover status  Total

  Non-mover Mover within GB  

Don't know 84% 16% 385

Yes 73% 27% 696

No 95% 5% 9101

Total 93% 7% 10182

PreferenceIndividual mover status

  Total

  Non-moverMover within

GB  

Don't know 84% 16% 116

Stay here 95% 5% 7150Prefer to move 88% 12% 2916

Total 93% 7% 10182

Page 28: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Reasons stated for moving

1. Those who expected to move and did move

2. Those who did not expect to move, but did move

Page 29: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Reasons for moving

Stated reasons for an actual move incude employment reasons (various) and non-employment related

 Moved for employment

reasonsExpected to

move Yes No Total

Yes 20% 80% 257

No 10% 90% 100

 Moved for

employment reasons  

Preference Yes No Total

Don't know 24% 76% 21

Stay here 10% 90% 383

Prefer to move 11% 89% 761

Page 30: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Non-employment reasons

Look at reasons for moving amongst those who expected to move and did move

Reason Frequency PercentOther 34 14%Mve to college 33 14%Mve in wth partn 30 13%Evicted, reposs 19 8%Split from partn 15 6%Larger accom 12 5%Smaller accom 11 5%Better accom 10 4%Job reasn, self 9 4%Closr fam, friend 8 3%Own accom 8 3%Mve from family 7 3%Wants change 6 3%To specfc place 6 3%Job reasn, othr 5 2%Mve in wth family 4 2%Area unsafe 4 2%Area unfriendly 4 2%Buy accom 3 1%Left college 2 1%Dislkd area 2 1%Mve in wth friend 1 0%Retirement 1 0%Health reasons 1 0%To rural envirn 1 0%Total 236 236

Page 31: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Reasons for moving

What about those who moved, but had not expected to do so?

Reason Frequency Percent

Other 11 12%

Split from partn 10 11%

Larger accom 10 11%

Evicted, reposs 9 9%

Smaller accom 9 9%

Better accom 9 9%

Mve in wth partn 7 7%

Mve to college 6 6%

Own accom 6 6%

Mve in wth family 3 3%

Mve from family 3 3%

Health reasons 3 3%

Other aspects 2 2%

To specfc place 2 2%

Closr fam, friend 1 1%

Job reasn, self 1 1%

Dislkd prev acc 1 1%

Area unfriendly 1 1%

Dislkd area 1 1%

Total 95 95

Page 32: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Reasons for moving

Are reasons for moving different for those who do / do not move?

• If respondents indicated that they would like to move, they were asked for reasons why

• Did those who followed through on this wish quote different reasons?

  Individual mover status  Reason to move Non-mover Mover within GB

Larger accom 16% 16%Other 5% 9%Dislikes area 10% 8%Own accommodation 3% 6%Feels isolated 5% 5%Other aspects 5% 5%To specific area 8% 5%Area unsafe 5% 5%Family reasons 4% 5%To buy somewhere 1% 5%Smaller/cheaper acc 3% 4%Unfriendly area 6% 4%Wants a change 5% 4%Another type 3% 3%Better accom 2% 3%Reduce travelling 1% 2%Occupation reasons 1% 2%To rural environ 6% 2%Noise 2% 2%No stairs 3% 2%Dislikes accom 1% 1%For childs education 1% 1%Traffic 2% 1%From urban environ 1% 1%Health reasons 0% 0%Retirement 0% 0%More privacy 1% 0%No reason 0% 0%Total 3590 794

Page 33: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Reasons for moving

Do stated reasons for moving vary by household type?

• Look at most commonly cited reasons by individuals in different household types

Household type Reasons PercentSingle Non-elderly Mve to college 17%

Other 11%

Split from partn 11%

Base 160

Single-elderly Health reasons 22%

Closr fam, friend 16%

Evicted, reposs 11%  Base 37

Page 34: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Reasons for moving

Household type Reasons PercentCouple No Children Mve in wth partn 20%

Buy accom 11%

Smaller accom 8%

Base 340

Couple: dep children Larger accom 28%

Other 12%

Mve in wth partn 9%

Base 364

Couple: non-dep children Smaller accom 15%

Other 12%

Split from partn 10%  Base 41

Household type Reasons Percent

Lone par: dep children Split from partn 25%

Other 13%

Evicted, reposs 13%

Base 55

Lone par: non-dep children Split from partn 20%

Evicted, reposs 20%

Mve in wth family 20%

  Base 20

Page 35: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Household type Reasons Percent

2+ Unrelated adults Evicted, reposs 23%

Mve to college 21%

Better accom 11%

Base 73

Other Households Other 22%

Evicted, reposs 17%

Mve in wth partn 17%

  Base 23

Page 36: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Effect of migration

To what extent has migration been associated with a change in circumstances?

Page 37: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

RG Social class

Do migrants experience a change in Registrar General’s Social Class?

RG Social Class Wave J Wave K Change

Professional occ 46 50 9%

Managerial & technical occ 233 252 8%

Skilled non-manual 177 170 -4%

Skilled manual 146 137 -6%

Partly skilled occ 110 105 -5%

Unskilled occ 26 25 -4%

Armed forces 1 0 -100%

Page 38: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Tenure

Change in tenure

• Using all persons

• Use person 1 only

Tenure Wave J Wave K Change

Owned Outright 140 145 4%

Owned with Mortgage 502 529 5%

Local Authority rented 171 142 -17%

Housing Assoc. rented 49 62 27%

Rented from Employer 18 18 0%

Rented private unfurnished 132 127 -4%

Rented private furnished 186 174 -6%

Tenure Wave J Wave K Change

Owned Outright 97 91 -6%

Owned with Mortgage 325 319 -2%

Local Authority rented 123 98 -20%

Housing Assoc. rented 35 40 14%

Rented from Employer 13 13 0%

Rented private unfurnished 89 93 4%

Rented private furnished 121 148 22%

Page 39: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Change in household type

• Select movers in wave K

• Compare household type in wave K with household type wave J

• Fluctuations to household type due to age of children

• Moves out of families into households of unrelated adults

Household type Wave J Wave K Change

Single Non-Elderly 971 986 2%

Single Elderly 1115 1150 3%

Couple No Children 2077 2163 4%

Couple: dep children 1926 1931 0%

Couple: non-dep children 617 547 -11%

Lone par: dep children 554 479 -14%

Lone par: non-dep children 262 255 -3%

2+ Unrelated adults 133 153 15%

Other Households 100 91 -9%

Page 40: Relationships between migration, commuting and household structure

Conclusions

• BHPS permits detailed analysis of relationships between migrants and their household context

• Demonstrates changes in household structure associated with migration events

• Motivations for moving are many and varied