Transcript Tony Champion ER Updated Powerpoint

The ‘escalator region’ hypothesis
two decades on: a review and critique
Tony Champion
Presented at Centre for Population Change
University of Southampton, 2 May 2013
Introduction
Aim: To see how well Tony Fielding’s (1992) ‘escalator
region’ hypothesis has stood the test of time
- Fielding AJ (1992) Migration and social mobility: South East England
as an 'escalator' region. Regional Studies 26, 1-15.
Outline: (1) the original model; (2) subsequent work by
Fielding & others; (3) more detail on 3 studies:
- Champion T (2012) Testing the return migration element of the
‘escalator region’ model: an analysis of migration into and out of
south-east England, 1966-2001. Cambridge Journal of Regions,
Economy and Society 5, 255-69.
- Champion T (2012) ‘The value of your investment can go down as
well as up’: an examination of negative outcomes of stepping onto
the regional escalator. PPT at RGS-IBG 2012, Edinburgh.
- Champion T, Coombes M & Gordon I (2013) How far do England’s
second-order cities emulate London as human-capital ‘escalators’?
Spatial Economics Research Centre Discussion Paper 132.
The original model
The ‘escalator region’ (ER) hypothesis comprises 3 stages
according to Fielding (1992):
• Stage 1: ER attracts many young people with promotion
potential to itself at the start of their working lives –
‘stepping on the escalator’;
• Stage 2: ER provides the context where these in-migrants
achieve accelerated upward social mobility (USM) –
‘being taken up by the escalator’ or ‘riding the escalator’;
• Stage 3: ER loses through out-migration a significant
proportion of these in-migrants when ‘downshifting’ at or
near retirement – ‘stepping off the escalator’.
Fielding tested 1 & 3 using data on net migration by age, and
tested 2 using linked individual census records 1971-81 to
measure (i) odds of USM for non-migrants in SE cf non-SE,
(ii) ditto for SE in-migrants, (iii) ditto for SE out-migrants.
Transitions 1971-81 for non-migrants:
the South East as an ‘escalator region’ (nation=1.00)
Source: Fielding (1992), Figures 2-5
Standard
Region
In educ 71
Manager 81
In educ 71
Prof’l 81
Wk Class 71
Manager 81
Wk Class 71
Prof’l 81
North
0.60
0.88
0.73
0.87
North West
0.83
0.93
0.90
0.95
Yorks/Humb
0.67
0.86
0.88
0.78
East Mids
0.87
0.79
0.82
0.83
West Mids
0.80
0.91
0.87
0.80
Wales
0.56
0.99
0.72
1.05
East Anglia
0.76
0.75
0.90
0.76
South West
0.89
0.86
0.90
1.45
1.19
1.29
1.10
1.21
South East
Entry rate to ‘service class’ (Managerial & Prof’l) by 1981
for those not in it in 1971 (% of starters)
Source: Fielding (1992), Table 3
Status in 1971
England & Wales
South East only
Total
Interregional
migrants
only
Total
Inmigrants
only
In labour market
11.4
23.1
13.5
28.2
Low-level white collar
18.8
31.7
19.7
35.8
In education
18.3
45.7
19.0
50.5
Results of Fielding’s (1992) test
Inter-regional migrants rise into the service class more strongly
than non-migrants, and migrants entering the South East
rise faster than these
Fielding (1992, Table 5) also looks at people leaving the South
East 1971-81 and finds highest odds (compared to all interregional migrants) for moving into retirement and selfemployment
This supports the return migration element of ER hypothesis;
viz. ER loses through out-migration a significant proportion
of those gaining from this upward social mobility;
in Fielding’s words:
- ‘These out-migrants would be in the middle to later stages of their
working lives, or at or near to retirement.’
- ‘They would migrate partly to “cash in” the assets gained during their
social promotion in the ER.’
Main results of subsequent studies
• Role of SE as escalator region was not confined to 1971-81
but continued in 1981-91 beyond ‘last fling of Fordism’
(Fielding, 2007)
• Both men and women benefit from stepping on the
escalator, but women relatively more so (Fielding & Halford,
1993), though mainly if unpartnered (Bruegel, 1999, 2000)
• Much of the benefit of stepping on the escalator takes place
at the time of the move (detected from interview study,
Findlay et al, 2009)
• Stepping-off process is consistent with counterurbanisation
with people moving for quality of life etc, with only limited
economic benefits for non-SE (Williams & Champion, 1998)
• But other (qualitative) studies find out-migrants from SE to
be a mixed bunch including younger people (Devine et al,
2003 on Manchester; Findlay et al, 2008, on Edinburgh)
Study 1: How soon did the people
who moved to SE England 1966-1971
leave the SE again (up till 2001)?
Regional location, 1966-2001, of LS members aged 6-40 in 1971
who moved to the South East (SE) from the Rest of England and
Wales (REW) between 1966 and 1971
Period
1966-1971
1971-1981
1981-1991
1991-2001
In REW From
at start REW to
of
SE
period
3136
3136
0
n/a
1098
104
1281
61
From
SE to
REW
n/a
1098
287
195
In REW
at end
of
period
0
1098
1281
1415
In SE at end of
period
N
%
3136
2038
1855
1721
Source: Calculated from ONS Longitudinal Study. Crown copyright
100.0
65.0
59.2
54.9
How different were the ‘returners’ from
those who stayed in SE after moving
there in 1966-71?
Managers
Professionals
Petite bourgeoisie
White collar
Personal service
Returners in 2001
Skilled manual
Non-returners in 2001
Other employed
Unemployed
In education
Retired
Other inactive
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
per cent
Source: Calculated from ONS Longitudinal Study. Crown copyright
Study 2: ‘Value of your investment
can go down as well as up’
At start of decade
outside London City
Region (CR)
At end of decade inside London CR
WC
Core
WC
Noncore
BC
Skilled
Total
Others
Not
at start
in work working
White Collar Core
457
257
20
22
74
830
White Collar Noncore
473
1631
44
208
561
2917
Blue Collar Skilled
59
145
155
137
89
585
Others in work
86
363
123
407
283
1262
Not working
1361
3991
294
987
2257
8890
Total at end
2436
6387
636
1761
3264
14484
Transition matrix for those moving to London from Rest of England & Wales
Results for three decades 1971-81, 1981-91 & 1991-2001 combined:
- upward mobility (green) = 7,882 = 54.4%
- no change (blue) = 4,907 = 33.9%
- downward mobility (pink) = 1,695 = 11.7%
Source: Calculated from ONS Longitudinal Study. Crown copyright
Trend in social mobility types
Migrants to London City Region in specified decade
classified by direction of transition
70.0
60.0
1971-1981
1981-1991
1991-2001
per cent
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Down
Same
Up
Source: Calculated from ONS Longitudinal Study. Crown copyright
Study 2: Summary of findings
The odds of upward mobility for those ‘stepping on the escalator’
have been progressively increasing
The main downward transitions (in order) are:
• WCnoncore>Not working (stable over time)
• Others in work>Not working (declining)
• WCcore>WCnoncore, WCnoncore>Others in work (rising)
For movers to London CR 1991-2001 and in work at both dates,
those losing out are more likely to be:
• Male
• Older
• Born outside UK
• With limiting long-term illness
• Starting decade as self-employed, with a few qualifications, in
high-status occupation, and in a one-earner household
Study 3: Using LS to compare
strength of escalator for 9 city
regions with London
Rank
City Region
Pop 1991
1
London
2
Birmingham
2,990.7
3
Manchester
2,855.5
4
Leeds
2,446.0
5
Liverpool
1,671.9
6
Sheffield
1,662.0
7
Newcastle
1,627.0
8
Nottingham
1,128.5
9
Bristol
1,054.1
10
Leicester
10 CRs
11,573.6
887.9
27,897.2
Remainder
22,850.8
England & Wales
50,748.0
Probability of WC Non-core starters becoming WC Core by
end of decade (out of all those still in work, stayers only)
Source: Calculated from ONS Longitudinal Study. Crown copyright.
16.0
London
9 other CRs
Rest of E&W
14.0
Probability (%)
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
1971-1981
1981-1991
1991-2001
Probability of WC Non-core 1991 becoming
WC Core 2001, London vs 9CRs combined:
stayers by gender & age in 1991
Source: Calculated from ONS Longitudinal Study. Crown copyright.
25.0
% = 9CRs compared with London CR
-18.4%
15.0
-21.3%
-21.6%
-22.3%
-26.2%
-10.0%
10.0
-19.8%
5.0
all
male
female
15-24
25-34
35-49
9 other CR
London CR
9 other CR
London CR
9 other CR
London CR
9 other CR
London CR
9 other CR
London CR
9 other CR
London CR
9 other CR
0.0
London CR
Probability (%)
20.0
50-64
Probability of WC Non-core 1991 becoming
WC Core 2001: all stayers of 10 City Regions (ranked)
Source: Calculated from ONS Longitudinal Study. Crown copyright.
x
Probability
(%)
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
London
Manchester
Leicester
Sheffield
Leeds
Birmingham
London = 15.8
Nottingham
Weighted average for 9
non-London CRs = 12.2
Bristol
All zone stayers in
England & Wales = 13.1
Newcastle
Liverpool
Liverpool is 68% of London
18.0
Probability of WC Non-core 1991 becoming
WC Core 2001 for 10 CRs: stayers, in-movers, premium
Source: Calculated from ONS Longitudinal Study. Crown copyright.
.
30.0
stayers
in-movers
in-mover premium
25.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
City Regions ranked by Stayer probability
po
ol
er
Li
v
ca
ew
N
B
ris
st
le
to
l
m
ot
tin
gh
a
N
in
gh
am
ds
B
irm
ef
Sh
Le
e
fie
er
Le
ic
e
st
r
te
M
an
ch
es
ld
0.0
Lo
nd
on
Probability (%)
20.0
Study 3: Summary of findings
• The London escalator has not only survived the ‘last fling of
Fordism’ of 1970s but appears to have strengthened
• In 1991-2001 London’s premium over 9 other CRs (for
stayers) is not due to compositional effects of age/gender
• Manchester is the most similar to London on the criterion
used (12% behind), Liverpool least (32%) [all 23%]
• In-movers hold a premium over stayers of around 10%
points for both London and 9 CRs combined
• Composition (age/gender) does not explain this ‘migrant
premium’, also standardising for occupational level at start
• Could it be due to some unobserved personal attribute such
as ‘ambition’ (migration is known to be a selective process)?
• Or is ‘selection’ operating through the recruitment process:
i.e. mainly the contracted migration of people prepared to
move for a (better) job and chosen by employers?
Concluding critique
Has the ‘ER hypothesis’ stood the test of time?
• Certainly London/SE’s role as escalator region appears to
have intensified (also evident in data on migration by age)
• But its role is not as clearcut as the basic model suggests:
- many young-adult arrivals in ER stay only a short time
(nb:- the CJRES study excludes moves to/from university)
- a proportion of those stepping on the escalator seem to
miss their footing! (nb:- Fielding acknowledged this)
- it is not just migrants to London that have higher odds of
upward social mobility; (nearly) as high in some other cities
• Implications of this last finding: Employer selection? Does all
or most of the migrant premium occur at time of move?
• Next steps: Micro-level regression on continuous ‘job status’
indicator across 38 city regions. Plus updating to 2011.
Acknowledgements & disclaimer
Census output is Crown copyright and is reproduced with the
permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen’s
Printer for Scotland
The permission of the Office for National Statistics to use the
Longitudinal Study is also gratefully acknowledged, as also
is the help provided by staff (notably Christopher Marshall)
of the Centre for Longitudinal Study Information & User
Support (CeLSIUS). CeLSIUS is supported by the ESRC
Census of Population Programme (Award Ref: RES 348-250004)
The material in this presentation has previously been cleared
by ONS, but the author alone is responsible for the
interpretation of the data