Transcript Trends in African-American Marriage Patterns

What is migration?

Do you have to cross international borders?

Do you have to cross any border at all?

Does it matter how long you stay at your destination?

If you move to a new house, are you definitely a migrant?

Can you be a migrant without changing jobs?

MIGRATION is not the same as MOBILITY
A loose definition of migration, with four key patterns identified
Definitive
Social break
Career
Chain
Local
Local
Circular
Not migration
Minimal
High
Low
Distance moved
But does any of this matter?

MAYBE NOT!
Precise definitions are often irrelevant because

We’re always limited by the data itself

We usually know about people who cross an administrative boundary

We usually know very little about social integration

We usually know very little about duration of stay
Example of identifying migrants to the U.S.

Distance moved


Duration of time spent in the U.S.



country of birth
Exact number of years in 1900-1920 and 1970-2000 census
Can make inferences based on children’s birthplaces in other years
Social integration

Can make inferences based on




Ethnic intermarriage
Naming patterns (some years)
Language spoke at home (some years)
Residential isolation at the destination
Example of identifying migrants within the U.S.

Distance moved


Duration of time spent at the destination



State of birth and current state of residence
No knowledge prior to 1940
Can identify those who moved >5 & <5 years ago in 1940-2000
Social integration

Can make inferences based on


intermarriage with similar migrants
residential isolation in the city
Even keeping things simple can get messy
The most common definition of a migrant is
“someone who has moved since being born”
Presents a problem for comparing populations:
A population with lots of children will have few migrants
Children just haven’t had that long to move
Figure 1. Percent of Native Population Residing Outside State of
Birth by Race, United States, 1850-1990
40
35
30
Percent Migrant
White
25
20
Black
15
10
5
0
1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Census Year
Figure 2. Percent of Native Born Migrant at Ages 50-59
by Race: United States, 1850-2000
60
50
White
Percent Migrant
40
Black
30
20
10
0
1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Census Year
So the big definition doesn’t matter?

ACTUALLY MAYBE IT DOES
Precise definitions developed to address earlier beliefs that

Migration was only barely existent prior to industrialization

Rural to urban migrants were “grist in the mill” of industrialization

Migration was permanent and devastating for them

Migration goes hand-in-hand with nation-building

Migrants were “poor huddled masses”

Undifferentiated and unprepared foreigners
A definition of migration, with four key patterns identified
Definitive
Social break
Career
Chain
Local
Local
Circular
Not migration
Minimal
High
Low
Distance moved
New emphases in study of migration

Migration has always been a part of U.S. and European life

Migrants tend to be positively selected

Migrants’ often plan to return home


even among migrants to the U.S.
affects their attitudes towards the destination point

Assimilation is not a given

Migration as a process to be understood in its own right
Brief history of immigration to the U.S.
Common images of migration
...Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to
be free,
The wretched refuse of your
teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless,
tempest-tossed to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden
door!
The New Colossus (1886)
Emma Lazarus
Common images of migration
Jacob Riis, “5 Cents Lodging”, 1890
Common images of migration
Lewis Hine, “New York City Tenement”, 1910
Common images of migration
“Graduation ceremony” from Ford plant’s orientation program, 1920s
Issues that complicate these portraits

Many early 1900s migrants returned home






Large numbers of Europeans went instead to...




South Italians, Croats, Slovenians, Slovaks, Hungarians: 50-60%
North Italians, Poles: 30-50%
Finns, Serbs, Bulgarians: 20-30%
Germans, Scandinavians, English: 10-20%
Irish, “Hebrews”: <10%
Brazil and Argentina: about 1 for every 4 who came to the U.S.
Canada: about 1 for every 5 who came to the U.S.
Towns and cities all across Europe: many more than came to U.S.
The U.S. was one destination in a complex migration system
Issues that complicate these portraits

Most were doing pretty well before leaving

Migration is usually a selective process




Traveling long distances costs money
Families send their most promising members
Education and experience with migration seems to make people more
inclined to move
Many avoided assimilation quite successfully


People planned to make a little money and return home
People lived here in perfectly happy ethnic isolation
Relevant immigration laws
 Chinese
Exclusion Act, 1882 (made permanent 1902)
 “Gentleman’s Agreement”
with Japan, 1908
 National Origins Act of 1924
 Established a tight quota system
 Based on origins of the US population in 1890
 Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965
 Larger quotas for Asian and African countries
 Family reunification privileged
 Particular professions priviledged
Main periods in US Immigration
"Old immigration":
1820s-1880s
Origins: German, Scandinavian, and Scotch-Irish
Destinations: Midwest rural and urban, Upper MW
Type of work: farm, some urban
Traveling alone: mostly families
Religion: Protestant
"New Immigration":
1880s-1920s
Origins: Italian, Greek, Polish, Russian
Destinations: Urban northeast and mid-Atlantic
Type of work: urban factory work
Traveling alone: yes, mostly
Religion: more Catholic, Jewish
“Really new Immigration": Origins: Latin America, Asia, Africa
1960s-2000s
Destinations: Florida, Texas, California, cities
Type of work: professions and clerical
Traveling alone: mixed
Religion: Catholic, Protestant, Muslim
Brief history of migration within the U.S.
Figure 1. Percent of Native Population Residing Outside State of
Birth by Race, United States, 1850-1990
40
35
30
Percent Migrant
White
25
20
Black
15
10
5
0
1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Census Year
Figure 7. Interstate Migration Destinations for Native-Born Whites
Aged 50-59: United States 1850-2000
50
45
40
35
Percent Migrant
Rural Nonfarm
30
Suburbs
25
Cities
20
15
Towns
Farm
10
5
0
1850
1860
1870
1880
1890
1900
1910
1920
1930
Census Year
Source: Integrated Public Use Microdata Series
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
Figure 8. Interstate Migration Destinations for Native-Born Blacks
Aged 50-59: United States 1870-2000
60
50
Suburbs
Percent Migrant
40
30
Rural Nonfarm
20
Cities
Towns
10
Farm
0
1870
1880
1890
1900
1910
1920
1930
1940
Census Year
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
Something I’m working on.....
Southern out-migrants as a proportion of all southern-born persons, by race
25%
20%
15%
Black
White
10%
5%
0%
1870
1880
1890*
1900
1910
1920
1930*
1940
1950
* Data not available for 1890 and 1930.
Source: Integrated Public Use Microdata Series files (IPUMS), 1870-1970.
1960
1970
Southern-born whites as a proportion of the
population in each State Economic Area, 1870
Proportion southern-born white
Less than 2.5%
2.5% - 5%
5% - 10%
More than 10%
Source: IPUMS file, 1870
Southern-born whites as a proportion of the
population in each State Economic Area, 1900
Proportion southern-born white
Less than 2.5%
2.5% - 5%
5% - 10%
More than 10%
Source: IPUMS file, 1900
Southern-born whites as a proportion of the
population in each State Economic Area, 1920
Proportion southern-born white
Less than 2.5%
2.5% - 5%
5% - 10%
More than 10%
Source: IPUMS file, 1920
Southern-born whites as a proportion of the
population in each State Economic Area, 1950
Proportion southern-born white
Less than 2.5%
2.5% - 5%
5% - 10%
More than 10%
Source: IPUMS file, 1950
Southern-born whites as a proportion of the
population in each County Group, 1980
Proportion southern-born white
Less than 2.5%
2.5% - 5%
5% - 10%
More than 10%
Source: IPUMS 1980 5% State file, Sample A
How did these folks do in the North?
Map 1
Two definitions of Appalachia:
Appalachian Regional Commission and Southern Appalachian Studies group
Appalachian Regional Commission
Southern Appalachian Studies
Map 2
SAS definition of Appalachia:
Using 1940 State Economic Areas and 1980 County Groups
1980 County Groups
1940 State Economic Areas
Map 3
ARC definition of Appalachia:
Using 1940 State Economic Areas and 1980 County Groups
1980 County Groups
1940 State Economic Areas
Map 4
Key areas of northward out-migration and economic distress in Appalachia
Persistently distressed
Appalachian counties, 1960-1990
Main sources of Appalachian
migration to the North, 1940-1980
Average wage incomes of recent Southern and Foreign-born men aged 25-60
in the East North Central region, 1980
N
All recent southern-born white migrants
$15,405
1183
Recent Appalachian white migrants
Selected subregions:
Appalachian West Virginia
Appalachian Kentucky
$13,685
177
$13,195
$11,505
86
38
All recent foreign-born migrants (all races)
Selected subregions:
Canada
Western Europe
Phillipines
India
Korea
Eastern Europe
Africa
Mexico
$10,405
1536
$20,005
$18,005
$12,005
$11,670
$11,505
$10,405
$8,005
$8,005
51
180
59
164
82
199
69
223
Source: IPUMS, 1980 5% State file, Sample A.
Percent of recent migrant households in poverty, East North Central region, 1980
N
All recent southern-born white migrants
14%
1838
Recent Appalachian white migrants
Selected subregions:
Appalachian West Virginia
Appalachian Kentucky
22%
327
23%
28%
165
83
All recent foreign-born migrants (all races)
Selected subregions:
Phillipines
Canada
Western Europe
India
Korea
South America
Eastern Europe
Mexico
Vietnam
Puerto Rico
China
Africa
29%
2100
10%
11%
12%
14%
21%
23%
27%
30%
33%
37%
40%
40%
86
71
177
162
100
73
249
256
64
127
91
112
Source: IPUMS, 1980 5% State file, Sample A.
Figure 11. Percent of Native Born Whites Migrant at Ages 50-59 by
Literacy and Educational Attainment: United States, 1850-2000
60
50
Literate
5th grade or more
Percent Migrant
40
30
Illiterate
4th grade or less
20
10
0
1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Census Year
Source: Integrated Public Use Microdata Series