Transcript PowerPoint presentation

1
The internal migrations
process to the urban zones of
Colombia (2001-2005)
Carolina Silva (Militar University)
Juan Carlos Guataquí (Rosario University)
2
Two historical approaches to study
Internal Migrations in Colombia
• Proactive approach: The internal migrations is a
factor of the economic development
• Reactive approach: All internal migratory flows
are in some sense forced migrations, they all
have been related with violence events
The main objective of this research is to bring
both approaches -theoretical and empirical view
points-.
3
Colombia: Internal Migration Dynamics
1950 - 2005
How has Colombian population been growing?
• 1.8% at the beginning of the XX century
• 3% at the beginning of the 1960s; a decade that
finished with 3.2%
• 1.8% at the 1990s and around 1% according to
the 2005 Census
The transition from a rural to an urban
country
• The relevance of urban
progressively increased
population
was
• Around
1963-1964
the
rural
historical
predominance became reverted (Flórez, 2000;
Posada et Al., 1993)
• Population distribution between urban areas was
relatively homogeneous
4
5
From a rural to an urban country
Mobility
• By 1951, 15% of population could be classified
as migrant
• By 1963, 36% of population was considered
migrant
• According to the 1993 Census, 40% of the total
population has migrated at least once in their
lives.
6
Who have been the migrants?
• The migratory flows at the beginning of the
1960s and 1970s had a higher proportion of
women.
• The profile of Migrant was highly related with
sending area.
• Education has been the main factor for positive
selection between the size of the urban recipient
area and the education level of the migrant.
7
The internal migrations according to the
Continuous Household Survey (ECH)
Two criteria for migratory flows classification:
• Chronological: Recent Migrants vs. Long Term
ones
• Cause of Migration: Economical (voluntary) or
Involuntary Displaced Population.
8
A country with high geographical
population mobility
For a country whose greater urbanization
process was than 30 years ago, to find that 7%
of the population of the main 10 urban areas
was recent migrants reflect in some way the
permanent mobility of the Colombian
population.
9
Migratory Flows Characterization
Age
• Recent migrants showed lower age levels than
long-term ones.
• Economic migration seems to be a labor
strategy for the 18 - 34 years age group.
• Involuntary migration (forced displacement), did
not seem to have a specific age-differentiated
pattern.
10
Age pattern according Chronological
Migration
30.00%
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
Recent
10.00%
Long Term
Polynomic (Long Term)
5.00%
Polynomic (Recent)
0.00%
Less
than 12
From
12 to
17
From
18 to
24
From
25 to
34
From
35 to
44
From
More
45 to than 60
60
11
Any evidence of self-selection?
Education Level
While 53.2% of the economic migrants had
high school education level, this share was
only 34.6% for the involuntary displaced
population, and even more remarkable,
whereas 21.1% of the economic migrant
population had tertiary attainment, only 7% of
the displaced population had reached that
education level.
12
Is there evidence of self-selection?
Income
The income situation of the forced
displacement population was precarious.
Their wage has represented in average 60%
of the wage perceived by economic
migrants and a similar percentage of
native's wage.
13
Theoretical Framework: Self-selection
• This approach allowed to analyze the
economic effect of involuntary migration
decisions.
• It provided a causal relationship between the
decision-taking
process
and
economic
outcomes; disregarding if the decision has not
been generated in consideration to economic
factors.
14
Theoretical Framework: Self-selection
Positive Selection: This case is when qualified people
migrate and reach a higher work performance than the
natives of the recipient place.
Negative Selection: It implies that the receiving place
attracts migrants of lower skills of the sending place, who
are less efficient on their job than the natives of the
recipient place.
Forced Displacement Selection: It attracts involuntary
displaced population (the migrate decision is exogenous
and not related with their skills) and these one have higher
work performance than the natives of the recipient place.
15
Modifications to Borjas’ (1987) approach
We modified his approach to Forced International
Migration = refugee / asylum applicants, to be applied
to involuntary internal migration = i.e. forced
displacement
•
Forced Migrants’ Positive Selection: An involuntary
migration cohort has better economic outcomes of
their work performance than comparable natives
and/or voluntary migrants.
•
Forced Migrants’ Negative Selection: An involuntary
migration cohort has worse economic outcomes of
their work performance than comparable natives
and/or voluntary migrants.
16
Probability of being occupied:
Chronological
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Constat
-4.7578
(0.0000)
-4.7227
(0.0000)
-4.8050
(0.0000)
-3.5931
(0.0000)
-2.3672
(0.0000)
AGE
0.1769
(0.0000)
0.1741
(0.0000)
0.1769
(0.0000)
0.1228
(0.0000)
0.1256
(0.0000)
AGE2
-0.0016
(0.0000)
-0.0016
(0.0000)
-0.0016
(0.0000)
-0.0011
(0.0000)
-0.0011
(0.0000)
EDUAGE
0.0001
(0.9700)
0.0059
(0.0050)
0.0059
(0.0060)
0.0043
(0.0410)
0.0038
(0.0840)
RECMIGR
0.1935
(0.0000)
0.2184
(0.0000)
0.2201
(0.0000)
0.0821
(0.1090)
0.0751
(0.1710)
GENDER
0.4915
(0.0000)
0.4781
(0.0000)
0.5102
(0.0000)
0.4713
(0.0000)
0.3655
(0.0000)
COUPLE
0.3054
(0.0000)
0.3109
(0.0000)
0.2863
(0.0000)
0.3195
(0.0000)
0.3095
(0.0020)
NOCUP
1.0344
(0.0000)
1.0007
(0.0000)
1.0431
(0.0000)
0.3280
(0.0000)
0.2381
(0.0000)
17
Probability of being occupied:
Migration Cause
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Constat
-3.0925
(0.0000)
-3.0179
(0.0000)
-2.7844
(0.0000)
-2.9915
(0.0000)
-3.7769
(0.0000)
AGE
0.1489
(0.0000)
0.0958
(0.0000)
0.0774
(0.0080)
0.1049
(0.0010)
0.1711
(0.0000)
AGE2
-0.0018
(0.0000)
-0.0011
(0.0000)
-0.0008
(0.0350)
-0.0012
(0.0040)
-0.0020
(0.0000)
EDUAGE
-0.0145
(0.1350)
-0.0124
(0.0000)
-0.0002
(0.9860)
-0.0025
(0.7890)
-0.0198
(0.0760)
GENDER
0.5234
(0.0020)
0.6084
(0.0000)
0.5479
(0.0010)
0.1989
(0.1960)
0.4357
(0.0140)
COUPLE
-0.3722
(0.0220)
-0.1217
(0.0300)
0.0551
(0.7360)
0.0173
(0.9090)
-0.5581
(0.0030)
NOCUP
2.5193
(0.0000)
3.4302
(0.0000)
3.2759
(0.0000)
2.8316
(0.0000)
3.2596
(0.0000)
FDISPL
-2.3133
(0.0000)
-1.9400
(0.0000)
-1.9798
(0.0000)
-1.8176
(0.0000)
-1.2338
(0.0000)
18
Labour Income: Chronological
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
EDUAGE
0.085701
(0.0000)
0.060044
(0.0000)
0.087726
(0.0000)
0.084535
(0.0000)
0.083520
(0.0000)
EXPERIENCE
0.034324
(0.0000)
-0.023940
(0.0000)
0.031629
(0.0000)
0.031990
(0.0000)
0.029082
(0.0000)
EXPERIENCE2
-0.000312
(0.0000)
-0.000606
(0.0000)
-0.000188
(0.0000)
-0.000240
(0.0000)
-0.000158
(0.0000)
LHOURS
0.607823
(0.0000)
1.761563
(0.0000)
0.750097
(0.0000)
0.679969
(0.0000)
0.694719
(0.0000)
RECMIG
0.170371
(0.0000)
0.112294
(0.2570)
0.109554
(0.0000)
0.145221
(0.0000)
0.114743
(0.0000)
_cons
8.580908
(0.0000)
1.646389
(0.0000)
8.059344
(0.0000)
8.349310
(0.0000)
8.367825
(0.0000)
19
Labour Income: Migration Cause
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
EDUAGE
0.072307
(0.0000)
0.043533
(0.0200)
0.081917
(0.0000)
0.073479
(0.0000)
0.062983
(0.0000)
EXPERIENCE
0.026777
(0.0000)
-0.047265
(0.0110)
0.038665
(0.0000)
0.035125
(0.0000)
0.026328
(0.0000)
EXPERIENCE2
-0.000216
(0.0320)
-0.000269
(0.5520)
-0.000395
(0.0020)
-0.000441
(0.0000)
-0.000258
(0.0030)
LHOURS
0.322045
(0.0000)
1.178669
(0.0000)
0.567996
(0.0000)
0.520213
(0.3700)
0.601091
(0.0000)
FDISPL
-0.149482
(0.0340)
-1.474875
(0.0000)
-0.202769
(0.0050)
-0.136197
(0.0000)
-0.225647
(0.0000)
_cons
10.216490
(0.0000)
5.318187
(0.0000)
9.013098
(0.0000)
9.312580
(0.0000)
9.187710
(0.0000)
20
Concluding Remarks
• Nobody, since Schultz (1971), compared
simultaneously, for the Colombian case, the
economic outcomes for both voluntary and
involuntary migration flows.
• We provided empirical evidence regarding
positive selection of the recent economic
migrants’ cohort, i.e. ceteris paribus, they had
higher probability of getting a job and a positive
wage differential.
21
Concluding Remarks
The empirical outcomes for either the
voluntary/involuntary decision to migrate
were coherent with the theory: i.e. ceteris
paribus, an IDP had lower probability of
getting a job and in the case he/she found it,
they faced a negative wage differential
which was not explained by socio-economic
factors or by their reservation wage.
22
Thank you for your kind
attention
Please send your comments to
Carolina Silva
[email protected]