Geographical Mobility: 2005 to 2010 Population Characteristics
David K. Ihrke and Carol S. Faber Issued December 2012 P20-567
INTRODUCTION years ago. This type of question is BACKGROUND limited by the fact that it does not Geographical mobility data are used Since 1940, every 10 years the capture repeat migration (people to determine the extent of mobility census asked individuals where who leave a residence and return of the U.S. population and result- they lived 5 years ago, with the within the 5-year period) and only ing redistribution. Migration data exception of the 1950 Census, captures one move. Moves are are collected as part of the Annual which asked for residence 1 year commonly classified by type: within Social and Economic Supplement ago. Beginning in 1975, the CPS the same county, from a different (ASEC) to the Current Population asked a similar question on previ- county in the same state, from a Survey (CPS).1 How populations ous residence for the first 5 years different state, or from abroad. change has implications for fed- of the decade, a period not covered eral, state, and local governments, Report Highlights by the census. This allowed for an as well as for private industry. expansion of the time series and Researchers can identify character- · The 5-year mover rate for 2010 provided 5-year estimates for the istics of movers from these data was 35.4 percent, the lowest in period between decennial censuses. and track the mobility of the CPS history. With the discontinuation of the U.S. population over time. · Among those who moved, the census long form after the 2000 Census, no 5-year mobility data This report examines data based type of move shifted towards were collected in the 2010 Census. on the 5-year migration question movement within the same In that year, the CPS/ASEC col- from the March 2010 CPS. Histori- county (61.0 percent). lected 1-year and 5-year geographic cal migration data derived from the · People in their mid to late twen- mobility data, providing users with Decennial Census and CPS/ASEC ties had the highest mover rate an uninterrupted set of 5-year data questions on residence 5 years of 65.5 percent. covering a 40-year period. ago are provided and discussed for comparative purposes. The 5-year · Unemployed individuals (47.7 mobility question asked for infor- percent) were more mobile than mation about respondents aged 5 their employed (civilian) counter- years and over whether they lived parts (37.2 percent). in the same house or apartment 5 · Between 2005 and 2010, the South was the only region to 1 For the purpose of this report, CPS and ASEC are used interchangeably even though report a significant net gain of the ASEC is a supplement within the CPS 1.1 million due to migration. survey.
U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration U.S. CENSUS BUREAU census.gov MOVER RATES AND TRENDS For 2010, 21.6 percent of people Percent distribution in Figure 2 5 years old and over moved to focuses on those who moved According to data from the 2010 another residence within the same instead of the total population 5 Current Population Survey shown in county. People who moved to a years and over. Because percent Table 1, 100.2 million people aged different county—within the same distribution is limited to movers, 5 years and over lived in a different state and to a different state— fluctuations in one type of move residence 5 years ago.2 The number accounted for 6.7 percent and 5.6 result in changes to others. In of movers decreased from 107.0 percent, respectively. Only 1.5 2010, the same county mover esti- million reported in the 2000–2005 percent of the population moved to mate of 61.0 percent reached an all period, the last time 5-year CPS the United States from abroad. The time high for the ASEC. The remain- migration data were collected. The 2005 estimates reflect a type of ing types of moves all showed mover rate also decreased from move distribution that varies from significant decreases between 2005 39.5 percent for 2000–2005 to 2010.4 Movers within the same and 2010, especially movers from a 35.4 percent for 2005–2010. county increased from 20.4 percent different state (19.7 percent to 15.7 Figure 1 shows mover rates from in 2005 to 21.6 percent in 2010. percent) and movers from a differ- 1970 through 2010 for the The percentage that moved to a dif- ent county within the same state Decennial Census, 5-year CPS, and ferent county, within the same state (23.0 percent to 19.0 percent).5 1-year CPS.3 Focusing exclusively and to a different state, was 16.9 in Results from 1985 and 1995 on mover rates from the CPS 5-year 2005 compared with 12.3 in 2010. further support the notion that estimates, the 1975 estimate of People who moved from abroad decreases in the percent moved 45.6 percent is the highest. The represented a larger percentage in from a different county within the 1985 rate fell to 41.7 percent due 2005 (2.3 percent) than 2010 (1.5 same state and from a different to decreases in all types of moves. percent). state were primarily responsible The 1995 mover rate increased for the distribution shift to moves to 44.1 percent and has declined 4 Part of the difference in the type of within the same county. The differ- for both 5-year mobility periods move distribution may be due to a change ent county categories, same state thereafter. in ASEC processing. This may have resulted in an overestimate of interstate movers for and different state, comprised 38.5 the 2005 estimates. For additional details on 2 All comparative statements in this the processing change, see page 2, footnote percent of movers in 1995 and report have undergone statistical testing, 6 of the Current Population Report titled and, unless otherwise noted, all comparisons “Geographical Mobility: 2008 to 2009” at are statistically significant at the 10 percent
Table 1. Five-Year Mover Rates, by Type: 1970–2010 (Numbers in thousands) Percent moved Different county Mobility period Total, 5 years Number of Margin of Different and over movers Mover rate error1 (+/–) Same county Same state state From abroad 2005–2010...... 282,846 100,152 35.4 0.29 21.6 6.7 5.6 1.5 2000–2005...... 270,904 107,012 39.5 0.31 20.4 9.1 7.8 2.3 1995–2000...... 262,375 120,348 45.9 0.01 24.9 9.7 8.4 2.9 1990–1995...... 241,805 106,616 44.1 0.45 25.0 8.8 8.1 2.2 1985–1990...... 230,446 107,649 46.7 0.01 25.5 9.7 9.4 2.2 1980–1985...... 216,108 90,126 41.7 0.45 22.1 9.1 8.7 1.8 1975–1980...... 210,323 97,629 46.4 0.01 25.1 9.8 9.7 1.9 1970–19752...... 183,093 83,442 45.6 0.47 25.6 8.9 9.1 2.0 1965–19702...... 176,354 77,790 44.1 0.01 24.6 8.9 9.1 1.5
1 The margin of error, or MOE, when added to or subtracted from the mover rate, represents the 90 percent confidence interval around the estimate. 2 The 1970 Census and 1975 Current Population Survey (CPS) estimates do not include respondents who did not specify a mobility status. Note: Comparisons between data from the CPS and the Decennial Census must be made with caution because of sampling and nonsampling variability. Data from the Decennial Census are for the total resident population of the United States, whereas data from the March CPS are for the civilian noninstitutionalized population plus members of the Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post and are therefore not totally comparable. Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000; Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2010.
2 U.S. Census Bureau Figure 1. Mover Rate: 1970–2010
Percent 50 Census (5-year) 45
CPS 5-year 40
35
30
25
20
CPS 1-year 15
10
5
0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000; Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 1975, 1980–2010.
Figure 2. Five-Year Percent Distribution of Movers: 1980–2010 (In percent)
4.0 4.3 4.7 4.9 6.2 5.7 4.3
15.7 20.9 20.8 20.1 18.5 18.4 19.7
From abroad 19.0 20.0 Different county, 21.1 21.8 20.7 21.0 23.0 different state Different county, same state Same county 61.0 54.5 56.7 54.4 54.0 53.1 51.6
1980 Census 1985 CPS 1990 Census 1995 CPS 2000 Census 2005 CPS 2010 CPS
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1980, 1990, and 2000; Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2010.
U.S. Census Bureau 3 42.6 percent in 1985, more than or who reported being Black or owner-occupied housing units.9 the 34.8 percent in 2010. African American had the highest About two-thirds of renters moved mover rates with 43.1 percent and within a 5-year period compared CHARACTERISTICS 42.9 percent, respectively.7,8 The with less than one-quarter of own- Table 2 contains selected demo- distributions of moves for these ers. Part of this difference can be graphic characteristics from the two groups tell completely differ- attributed to movers within the “Geographical Mobility: 2005 ent stories. Moves from a different same county. Approximately 40.7 to 2010, 5-Year Detailed Table county were more common among percent of renters moved within Package.”6 Characteristics dis- Black or African Americans (12.5 the same county, while 13.2 per- cussed in this report include age, percent) than Hispanics or Latinos cent of owners moved within the race and Hispanic origin, marital (9.1 percent). However, Asians had same county. status, educational attainment, the highest percentage of movers People who completed labor force status, household from abroad, with 9.5 percent fol- lowed by Hispanic or Latino with some college coursework or income in 2009, tenure, and obtained a post-secondary 3.0 percent. These were higher poverty status. Proper utilization degree had higher levels of of characteristics helps to identify than the rates for Black or African mobility from a different state differences in migration patterns American with 1.7 percent and than those who did not pursue among various subgroups. White, not Hispanic or Latino with education beyond high school. 1.0 percent. Among the population 25 years People in their mid to late and over, those with a bachelor’s twenties were the most Occupants of rental housing degree had the highest mover rate: mobile. units were more mobile than occupants of owned housing 35.6 percent. Among professional Respondents between the ages of units. or graduate degree holders, 8.4 25 and 29 had the highest 5-year The 5-year mover rate suggests percent moved from another state, mover rate of any age group, at people living in renter-occupied 7.7 percent who attained a bach- 65.5 percent. About 48.0 percent housing units were much more elor’s degree moved from a differ- of 18 to 24 year olds also moved mobile than those living in ent state, and 5.5 percent of people during this time period. These with some college or an associate’s ages are a common time in the life degrees moved from a different course when people are transition- state. About 4 percent of high 7 ing between college, first jobs, and Federal surveys now give respondents the option of reporting more than one race. school graduates and 3.1 percent establishing their own households. Therefore, two basic ways of defining a race of those who did not graduate from The two oldest age categories, 65 group are possible. A group such as Asian may be defined as those who reported Asian high school completed a state-to- to 74 years old and 75 years and and no other race (the race-alone or single- state move. over, had the lowest mover rates race concept) or as those who reported Asian regardless of whether they also at 15.2 percent and 11.9 percent, reported another race (the race-alone-or-in- Separated individuals were the respectively. For these older ages, combination concept). This report shows data most mobile marital status. using the first approach (race alone). This the percentage that moved within report will refer to the White-alone population For the population 15 years and the same county was less than as White, the Black or African American-alone over, 51.6 percent of separated ten percent, well below the rate population as Black or African American, the Asian-alone population as Asian, and respondents moved between reported by younger age groups. the White-alone-non-Hispanic population 2005 and 2010. Marital events as White, not Hispanic or Latino. Use of the single-race population does not imply that it such as separation often require Mover rates and type of move is the preferred method of presenting or ana- a move and may explain why this differ by race. lyzing data. The Census Bureau uses a variety of approaches. In this report, the term “White, group has the highest rates. Never Respondents who reported being not Hispanic or Latino” refers to people who married respondents are another are not Hispanic and who reported White and Hispanic or Latino of any race no other race. The Census Bureau uses non- mobile group with a mover rate Hispanic Whites as the comparison group for of 44.2 percent. Never married 6 other race groups and Hispanics. Because The 2010 detailed tables have been individuals tend to be younger and redesigned to decrease repetition present in Hispanics may be any race, data in this report the 2005 tables. For comparison guidance for Hispanics overlap with data for racial between the 2005 and 2010 tables, see the groups. 9 From this point forward, people living “5-Year ASEC Table Package Comparison” at 8 The mover rate for Hispanic or Latinos is in renter-occupied housing units are referred
4 U.S. Census Bureau Table 2. Five-Year Mover Rates, by Selected Characteristics: 2005–2010 (Numbers in thousands) Percent Different county Selected characteristics Movers Same Different from Total Movers Mover rate county Same state state abroad Total, 5 years and over ...... 282,846 100,152 35 .4 21 .6 6 .7 5 .6 1 .5 Sex Male ...... 138,530 49,468 35.7 21.7 6.8 5.7 1.6 Female...... 144,316 50,684 35.1 21.5 6.7 5.5 1.4 Age 5 to 9 years ...... 20,785 9,292 44.7 28.9 8.0 6.1 1.7 10 to 17 years ...... 32,820 11,369 34.6 23.1 5.6 4.5 1.5 18 to 24 years ...... 29,313 14,068 48.0 27.9 10.5 7.4 2.2 25 to 29 years...... 21,453 14,043 65.5 37.5 13.2 11.6 3.2 30 to 44 years...... 60,079 27,311 45.5 27.6 8.3 7.3 2.3 45 to 64 years...... 79,782 18,781 23.5 14.6 4.5 3.7 0.8 65 to 74 years...... 20,956 3,177 15.2 8.5 3.2 3.2 0.3 75 years and over...... 17,657 2,110 11.9 7.1 2.6 2.0 0.3 Race and Hispanic Origin White alone...... 226,457 76,251 33.7 20.4 6.7 5.6 1.0 Black or African American alone...... 35,363 15,159 42.9 28.7 7.2 5.3 1.7 Asian alone...... 12,991 5,282 40.7 19.6 5.6 6.0 9.5 Hispanic or Latino1 ...... 43,343 18,689 43.1 31.0 5.2 3.9 3.0 Tenure In an owner-occupied housing unit...... 196,656 43,588 22.2 13.2 4.7 3.7 0.6 In a renter-occupied housing unit ...... 86,190 56,564 65.6 40.7 11.3 9.9 3.7 Educational Attainment (aged 25 and over) Not a high school graduate...... 25,711 8,566 33.3 23.6 4.4 3.1 2.2 High school graduate...... 62,456 18,733 30.0 19.6 5.6 3.9 0.9 Some college or associate’s degree...... 51,920 17,397 33.5 20.2 6.9 5.5 0.9 Bachelor’s degree...... 38,784 13,792 35.6 18.4 7.5 7.7 1.8 Professional or graduate degree...... 21,056 6,933 32.9 16.0 6.3 8.4 2.2 Marital Status (aged 15 and over) Married ...... 124,219 35,823 28.8 16.5 5.6 5.1 1.6 Widowed...... 14,356 2,599 18.1 11.3 3.4 2.9 0.5 Divorced ...... 23,758 9,523 40.1 26.1 7.7 5.8 0.5 Separated...... 5,541 2,858 51.6 33.9 9.5 6.8 1.4 Never married...... 74,294 32,837 44.2 27.0 8.5 6.7 1.9 Household Income (in 2009, aged 15 and over) Without income...... 30,914 11,418 36.9 22.7 5.8 5.0 3.5 Under $10,000...... 41,920 14,870 35.5 21.2 6.9 5.7 1.7 $10,000 to $29,999...... 74,270 26,300 35.4 22.0 6.8 5.3 1.3 $30,000 to $49,999...... 43,553 15,281 35.1 21.2 7.4 5.5 0.9 $50,000 to $74,999...... 27,421 8,648 31.5 17.8 6.8 6.0 1.0 $75,000 to $99,999...... 10,822 3,315 30.6 17.4 6.0 6.4 0.8 $100,000 and over...... 13,268 3,806 28.7 15.4 5.6 6.7 0.9 Employment Status (aged 16 and over) Employed (civilian)...... 137,753 51,241 37.2 22.6 7.3 5.8 1.4 Unemployed...... 15,764 7,519 47.7 29.3 9.4 7.3 1.7 Armed Forces2 ...... 937 681 72.7 21.2 8.2 36.4 6.8 Not in labor force...... 83,641 22,851 27.3 16.0 5.2 4.6 1.5 Poverty Status Below 100 percent of poverty ...... 38,673 20,300 52.5 33.8 9.0 6.7 3.0 100 percent to 149 percent of poverty...... 25,650 10,832 42.2 27.7 7.5 4.8 2.2 150 percent of poverty and above...... 218,523 69,020 31.6 18.7 6.2 5.5 1.1
1 Hispanics and Latinos may be of any race. 2 Includes members of the Armed Forces in the United States living off post or with their families on post, but excludes all other members of the Armed Forces. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 2010.
U.S. Census Bureau 5 therefore, more mobile. Widowed About one-third of area, due to migration, by limiting respondents were least likely to respondents below 100 the outside influence of immigra- have moved (18.1 percent) and percent of poverty moved to a tion (movement into the country tend to be older. different residence within the from abroad). To calculate the same county. net domestic migration estimate, Movement among several People below 100 percent of pov- subtract the number of outmigrants household income groups is erty had the highest mover rate from the number of inmigrants. A not statistically different. with 52.5 percent. People at or positive result means the region The 2010 ASEC asks about the above 150 percent of poverty had gained population, while a nega- respondent’s household income in a considerably lower mover rate tive result means the region lost 2009 instead of 2005. The differ- of 31.6 percent. This difference is population. If the net domestic ence in the total mover rate among attributable to lower percentages migration estimate has an asterisk several of the lower household for all types of moves, especially symbol (*) next to it, then the esti- income groups is not statistically within the same county (18.7) and mate is statistically different from different. For example, households to a different county within the zero. that earned under $10,000 or less, same state (6.2 percent). Data from Table 3 and Figures 3, $10,000 to $29,999, or $30,000 4, and 5 display in, out, and net to $49,999 all had mover rates IN, OUT, AND NET domestic migration estimates by ranging from 35.1 percent to 35.5 MIGRATION BY REGIONS region from 1970 to 2010. The percent. Other household income AND METRO STATUS first 5-year estimates from the groups reported lower mover One strength of ASEC data is CPS are from 1975. According to rates. Households with income of the ability to identify migrations these data, the South reported 4.1 $75,000 to $99,999 and $100,000 between regions of the United million inmigrants and the West and over had movers rates of States. The following section had 2.3 million. The Midwest had 30.6 percent and 28.7 percent, focuses on regional migration in the largest number of outmigrants respectively. order to determine the popula- with 2.9 million and the West had tion change resulting from 5-year Members of the Armed Forces the lowest with 1.6 million. The net migration. tend to move a lot, especially domestic migration estimates show from a different state and the Northeast losing more than 1 Region abroad. million people during this time.11 Of the population 16 years and Regional migration approaches The South and West both gained over, 37.2 percent of the employed population change from more of population, although the South was civilian workforce lived at a differ- a larger scale, macro level rather the only region with a net gain of 1 ent residence 5 years ago. People than the micro level same county/ million or more people. employed by the Armed Forces different county approach. Regional The estimates from the 1995 ASEC had the highest mover rate of any migration concentrates on the are an approximate midpoint employment status, with 72.7 overall redistribution of people between 1975 and 2010 data. percent.10 As shown in Table 2, this as they move throughout the Keeping with results present in is a very mobile population, with country. Three different types of the 1975 data, the South contin- 36.4 percent moving from a differ- regional changes are contained in ued to have the largest number of ent state and 6.8 percent moving Table 3: inmigrants, outmigrants, inmigrants with 4.7 million and from abroad within a 5-year period. and net domestic migration. For the Northeast had the least with Unemployed respondents were the this report, inmigrants are people 1.2 million. However, the varia- second most mobile group, with who moved into an area during tion in outmigration was consider- 47.7 percent. About 30 percent of a 5-year period. Outmigrants are ably smaller in 1995 compared the unemployed moved within the people who moved out of an area with 1975. In 1975, outmigration same county, the highest of any over the same period. The term ranged from 1.6 million to 2.9 mil- employment status. net domestic migration refers to the overall change in an area when lion. The 1995 estimates ranged both inmigrants and outmigrants are taken into consideration. This 10 Only members of the Armed Forces number provides the clearest 11 living off post or with their families on post in picture of population change in an Estimates for the Northeast and the United States are included. Midwest are not significantly different.
6 U.S. Census Bureau from 2.5 million to 2.7 million.12,13 net domestic migration estimates 1 million people. Outmigration The outmigration for all regions from 1995 indicate that the estimates for the regions were between 1990 and 1995 was not Northeast and Midwest lost popula- between 1.8 million for the significantly different from one tion during this 5-year period. With Northeast and 2.4 million for the another. Taking the components of 2.0 million, the South was the only South.14 For net domestic migra- inmigration and outmigration into region that experienced an increase tion, only the South had a signifi- consideration simultaneously, the in population due to migration. cant increase in the population due to migration. Data from the 2010 ASEC indicate 12 The 1995 outmigration estimates of 2.5 million and 2.7 million are not significantly a continuation of historical regional different. migration trends. The South led 14 Outmigration estimates for the 13 The 1975 estimate of 2.9 million is not inmigration with 3.5 million and Northeast and West and the South and significantly different from the 1995 estimate Midwest were not significantly different of 2.7 million. the Northeast placed last with from one another.
Table 3. Five-Year In, Out, and Net Domestic Migration, by Region: 1970–2010 (Numbers in thousands) Period Northeast Midwest South West 2005–2010 Inmigrants...... 992 1,818 3,497 2,013 Outmigrants...... 1,824 2,168 2,386 1,942 Net domestic migration...... *–832 *–350 *1,111 71
2000–2005: Inmigrants...... 1,290 1,909 4,124 2,294 Outmigrants...... 2,313 2,328 2,701 2,273 Net domestic migration...... *–1,024 *–420 *1,422 21
1995–2000: Inmigrants...... 1,537 2,410 5,042 2,666 Outmigrants...... 2,808 2,951 3,243 2,654 Net domestic migration...... –1,271 –541 1,800 12
1990–1995 Inmigrants...... 1,162 2,190 4,682 2,269 Outmigrants...... 2,477 2,643 2,653 2,530 Net domestic migration...... *–1,316 *–452 *2,029 –261
1985–1990: Inmigrants...... 1,604 2,324 4,769 2,827 Outmigrants...... 2,720 3,172 3,344 2,289 Net domestic migration...... –1,116 –848 1,426 538
1980–1985: Inmigrants...... 1,218 1,902 4,428 2,641 Outmigrants...... 2,239 3,426 2,631 1,992 Net domestic migration...... *–1,021 *–1,524 *1,797 *649
1975–1980: Inmigrants...... 1,275 2,125 4,738 3,114 Outmigrants...... 3,059 3,505 2,752 1,935 Net domestic migration...... –1,785 –1,380 1,986 1,179
1970–1975: Inmigrants...... 1,057 1,731 4,083 2,347 Outmigrants...... 2,399 2,927 2,254 1,638 Net domestic migration...... *–1,342 *–1,196 *1,829 *709
1965–1970: Inmigrants...... 1,273 2,024 3,142 2,309 Outmigrants...... 1,988 2,661 2,486 1,613 Net domestic migration...... –715 –637 657 695
* The net migration flows are significantly different from zero. Only net domestic migration estimates from the CPS were tested for significance. Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census, 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000; Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2010.
U.S. Census Bureau 7 Figure 3. Five-Year Domestic Inmigration, by Region: 1970–2010
Numbers in thousands 5,500
4,400
South
3,300
2,200 West
Midwest
1,100 Northest
0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000; Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2010.
Another approach to utilizing A topic of interest to many migra- The Western region lost a net of regional migration data to its fullest tion researchers is the movement 54,000.16 potential is to identify the charac- of the college educated. A well- teristics of people moving into and educated workforce is of interest to DISTANCE MOVED out of a region. Table 4 provides every city, state, and region. Table A unique measure calculated using these estimates by combining a 4 offers a general sense of where ASEC migration data is the distance limited set of selected characteris- the highly educated are moving. a person moved. Distance moved tics from Table 2 and the in, out, From a regional perspective, the is calculated by measuring the and net domestic categorization South and West were popular des- distance between the population of Table 3. The key components tinations among graduate degree center of the origin county and of this table are the net esti- holders 25 years and over with destination county.17 Because this mates, because they provide the net gains of 89,000 and 104,000, approach is used, moves within the 15 best understanding of the overall respectively. The Northeast had same county (intracounty) and from change resulting from regional a net loss of 124,000 professional abroad are not calculated since migration. For instance, we can or graduate degree holders. At the their distance moved values would tell that between 2005 and 2010 opposite end of the education spec- be zero.18 Only people who moved the Northeast had a net loss of trum, the South had the highest net 16 233,000 people aged 30 to 44. The gain of people who were not high The net loss for the West is not sig- nificantly different from the net loss of the South fared better, reporting a net school graduates with 106,000. Northeast. gain of 232,000 people within this 17 More details on this process can be found on page 10, footnote 14, of the Current age range. In fact, the South was Population Report titled “Geographical the only region to report a net gain Mobility: 2002 to 2003” at
8 U.S. Census Bureau Figure 4. Five-Year Domestic Outmigration, by Region: 1970–2010
Numbers in thousands 4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500 South Midwest 2,000 West Northeast 1,500
1,000
500
0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census, 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000; Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2010.
Figure 5. Five-Year Domestic Net Migration, by Region: 1970–2010
Numbers in thousands 2500
2000
1500 South 1000
500 West 0 Midwest -500 Northeast -1000
-1500
-2000 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000; Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2010.
U.S. Census Bureau 9 Table 4. Inmigration, Outmigration, and Net Domestic Migration for Regions, by Selected Characteristics: 2005–2010 (Numbers in thousands) Northeast Midwest South West Characteristics In Out Net In Out Net In Out Net In Out Net Total, 5 years and older . . . 992 1,824 *–831 1,818 2,168 *–350 3,497 2,386 *1,111 2,013 1,942 71 Sex Male...... 488 922 *–433 887 1,094 *–207 1,735 1,156 *578 1,047 985 62 Female...... 504 902 *–398 931 1,074 –143 1,762 1,230 *532 966 958 9 Age 5 to 9 years...... 72 126 *–54 183 165 18 269 206 63 148 175 –27 10 to 17 years...... 73 190 *–116 196 177 19 329 220 *110 149 162 –12 18 to 24 years...... 171 208 –37 222 306 *–85 433 313 *120 306 305 2 25 to 29 years...... 161 296 *–136 267 399 *–132 527 340 *187 361 280 80 30 to 44 years...... 263 496 *–233 520 540 –20 941 709 *232 595 574 21 45 to 64 years...... 194 335 *–141 329 447 *–118 702 449 *253 330 325 6 65 to 74 years...... 43 103 *–60 45 95 *–51 209 98 *111 82 83 –1 75 years and over...... 15 70 *–55 56 38 19 86 51 35 41 39 2 Race and Hispanic Origin White alone...... 835 1,340 –505 1,492 1,709 –217 2,699 1,969 730 1,660 1,667 –8 Black or African American alone. . 74 320 –247 189 239 –50 540 212 328 114 145 –31 Asian alone...... 54 114 –60 96 151 –55 169 146 24 163 72 91 Hispanic or Latino1 ...... 69 160 –91 181 129 52 426 280 146 210 316 –106 Educational Attainment (25 years and over) Not a high school graduate. . . . 35 76 *–40 87 99 –12 200 94 *106 60 114 *–54 High school graduate...... 147 262 *–115 345 299 47 585 414 *171 209 311 *–103 Some college or associate’s degree...... 166 292 –126 331 368 –36 629 435 *194 344 376 –32 Bachelor’s degree...... 185 404 *–219 258 489 *–232 667 409 *258 508 316 *192 Professional or graduate degree. . 143 267 *–124 196 265 *–69 383 294 *89 288 184 *104 Marital Status (15 years and over) Married ...... 340 698 *–358 648 934 *–286 1,579 945 *634 813 803 10 Widowed...... 26 56 *–30 42 59 –16 99 58 *40 54 48 6 Divorced ...... 96 126 *–30 176 143 32 293 244 *49 150 202 *–52 Separated...... 13 48 *–34 68 44 *24 86 63 23 30 44 –13 Never married...... 398 636 *–237 579 701 *–122 956 733 *223 710 574 *136 Income in 2009 (16 years and over) Without income...... 85 130 *–45 151 180 –29 324 204 *120 166 212 *–46 Under $10,000...... 169 251 *–82 285 307 –21 460 371 *89 294 280 14 $10,000 to $29,999...... 226 442 *–216 499 546 –47 914 649 *266 487 489 –2 $30,000 to $49,999...... 160 299 *–139 277 341 *–65 579 330 *249 293 338 –45 $50,000 to $74,999...... 115 200 *–85 128 246 *–118 351 217 *135 227 159 *68 $75,000 and over...... 109 223 *–114 142 240 *–97 351 241 *110 277 175 *101 Labor Force Status (16 years and over)2 Employed (civilian)...... 522 962 *–440 880 1,137 *–257 1,741 1,148 *592 1,077 971 *106 Unemployed...... 67 131 *–64 143 184 *–41 291 174 *118 130 142 –12 Not in labor force...... 269 443 *–174 439 503 *–65 874 611 *262 458 481 –23
* The net migration flows are significantly different from zero. 1 Hispanics or Latinos may be of any race. 2 Excludes members of the Armed Forces in the United States due to limited regional mobility. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2010 Annual Social and Economic Supplement.
10 U.S. Census Bureau to a different county or different in 2010 (61.0 percent) than 2005 In the detailed table package, state are included in the distance (51.6 percent). Movers from abroad distance moved is tabulated by moved measure. The typical cat- decreased from 5.7 percent in 2005 various characteristics to provide egories are less than 50 miles, 50 to 4.3 percent in 2010. an idea of how intercounty movers to 199 miles, 200 to 499 miles, and with selected characteristics differ The distance moved category of 500 miles or more. by their distance moved. Educa- less than 50 miles was the most tional attainment is of particular Distance moved was first calculated common distance moved. Among interest because distance moved in 2003 for 1-year ASEC migra- all movers, 13.0 percent made can be determined across edu- tion estimates. In 2005, the same an intercounty move less than 50 cational attainment categories. method was applied to calculate miles in 2010. Intercounty moves As displayed in Figure 7, there is 5-year distance moved estimates. 500 miles or more were the second considerable variation in distance The release of the 2010 5-year most common with 9.3 percent, moved across education groups. detailed table package marks the trailed by 50 to 199 miles and 200 About 70 percent of moves by first time two 5-year distance to 499 miles, respectively. In 2005, people who were not high school moved estimates are available for intercounty moves less than 50 graduates were within the same comparison. Figure 6 emphasizes miles also led the distance moved county. Among the distance moved movers by displaying a percentage categories, and moves 200 to 499 categories, less than 50 miles was breakdown of type of move with miles were last. The categories of the highest with 9.5 percent. The intercounty movers subdivided by 50 to 199 miles and 500 miles or longest distance moved category of their distance moved. According more were not significantly dif- 500 miles or more had 5.5 percent. to this figure, intracounty movers ferent from one another in 2005. For comparison purposes, those account for the majority of moves Both of these distances moved with a graduate or professional for 2005 and 2010; however, they decreased between 2005 and 2010. degree had 48.6 percent of their comprise more of the distribution
Figure 6. Type of Move and Distance Moved: 2005 and 2010 (in percent)
Intracounty Intercounty Movers From abroad movers (distance not (distance not Less than 50 to 199 200 to 499 500 miles determined) determined) 50 miles miles miles or more
2010 61.0 13.0 7.5 5.0 9.3 4.3
2005 51.6 13.6 10.6 7.7 10.7 5.7
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000; Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2010.
U.S. Census Bureau 11 Figure 7. Educational Attainment by Type of Move and Distance Moved: 2010 (In percent. Population 25 years and over)
Intracounty Intercounty Movers From abroad movers (distance not (distance not Less than 50 to 199 200 to 499 500 miles determined) determined) 50 miles miles miles or more
Not a high 70.7 9.5 4.6 3.1 5.5 6.6 school graduate
High school 65.3 13.5 6.3 4.6 7.3 3.0 graduate
Some college 60.4 14.6 7.5 4.8 10.0 2.7 or AA degree
Bachelor's 51.8 14.5 9.1 6.1 13.4 5.2 degree
Professional or 48.6 13.6 8.1 7.7 15.4 6.6 graduate degree
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1970, 1980, 1990 and 2000; Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2010.
moves within the same county. The greater for movers with a gradu- Bureau.19 With the discontinuation 500 miles or more category was ate or professional degree than of the census long form, 5-year the largest distance moved with movers who were not high school migration data would not have 15.4 percent. Less than 50 miles graduates. been available for 2010. To rem- was the second largest with 13.6 edy this, the CPS decided to add a percent. These results indicate that SUMMARY 5-year migration question to the among those who moved, there is a From 2010 on, the CPS will be the survey instrument. Future plans much greater likelihood that people sole provider of 5-year migration include continuing to add a 5-year who did not graduate high school statistics collected by the Census will move within the same county 19 The American Community Survey (ACS) than someone with a professional currently releases 5-year multiyear estimates for migration. These estimates are based or graduate degree. Conversely, upon data for residence 1 year ago collected intercounty mobility, of any dis- over a 60-month period. They are not equiva- lent to 5-year CPS estimates, which are based tance, was more common among upon data for residence 5 years ago collected professional or graduate degree over a three-month period between the months of February and April. For additional movers than movers without a high information on ACS multiyear estimates, school degree. This is especially consult the American Community Survey Multiyear Accuracy of the Data at true for intercounty moves of 500
12 U.S. Census Bureau migration question to years ending The population represented (the survey is not precisely known. All in “5” and “0” in order to provide population universe) in the of these considerations affect com- a streak of uninterrupted 5-year Decennial Census is the population parisons across different surveys or migration data dating back to living in the United States on data sources. 1970. April 1 of that year. This includes For further information on statisti- people living in group quar- Several noteworthy results from cal standards and the computation ters, noninstitutionalized and the 2010 ASEC were discussed in and use of standard errors, go to institutionalized. this report. The number of movers
U.S. Census Bureau 13 incorrect or inconsistent informa- estimates of households or families 2010, 5-year” subheading select tion, and recording information by income category will tend to be “Detailed Tables.” incorrectly. In addition, errors can understated for the higher income occur during the field review of the categories and overstated for the CONTACTS enumerator’s work, during clerical lower income categories. Such David K. Ihrke handling of the census question- biases are not reflect in the stan- [email protected] naires, or during the electronic dard errors. processing of the questionnaires. Carol S. Faber FOR MORE INFORMATION [email protected] Nonsampling error may affect the data in two ways: (1) errors that are Detailed geographical mobility/ For additional information, contact introduced randomly will increase migration tables from the 2010 the U.S. Census Bureau Customer the variability of the data and, ASEC are available on the Census Services Center at 1-800-923-8282 therefore should be reflected in Bureau’s Web site
14 U.S. Census Bureau APPENDIX 5-year question. If the same person not the case. Taking the opposite participated in the 2006 through approach of dividing the 5-year Comparison Guidance: Five- 2010 CPS using 1-year questions, estimate by five yields 7.08 per- Year Migration and One-Year they would be categorized as a cent (35.4/5=7.08). This estimate Migration mover 5 times, once for each year. falls well below any of the 1-year The 5-year mobility question asks To reiterate, the same person could estimates between 2005 and 2010 respondents 5 years old and over be theoretically counted as a mover again, because more people move where they lived 5 years ago. The five times using multiple 1-year multiple times in the 5-year period. 1-year question asks respondents questions but only once using a Because of these differences, 1-year 1 year old and over where they 5-year question covering the same data should be compared only with lived 1 year ago. Changing the period. Figure 1 provides a visual other annual data. time interval (i.e., reference period) representation of 1- and 5-year Looking at Figure 1, both sets of causes 1- and 5-year estimates to mover rates. A common miscon- CPS mover rates, 1-year and 5-year, become too different and therefore ception is that multiplying a 1-year show a decrease when compar- not comparable. One year ques- estimate by five equals a 5-year ing results from 2005 and 2010. tions are better suited to capture estimate. Using 2010 ASEC data This decrease in the mover rate people who move repeatedly, as an example, the 1-year mover appears to be more dramatic for while 5-year questions offer a rate is 12.5 percent. Multiplying the 5-year estimates due to limited better overall picture of long-term the 1-year estimate by five results data points on the graph. One-year changes among the population as a in 62.5 percent (12.5*5=62.5). The estimates are available on a more whole. For example, a respondent actual 5-year mover rate for 2010 frequent basis (annually), smooth- moves once a year between 2005 is 35.4 percent. Multiplying the ing out the line. and 2010. This person is selected 1-year estimate by five incorrectly to participate in the 2010 CPS and assumes that the same percent- answers that they lived in a differ- age of people move within any ent residence 5 years ago. They are given year and that the estimates counted as a mover once using a are independent, which is often
U.S. Census Bureau 15