American workers find less incentive to relocate

Mar 11, 2013 by Michael Hotchkiss

American workers—long unusually mobile—are increasingly staying put. There are a range of popular explanations for the slowdown in migration between states, including an aging population that is firmly entrenched and a rise in the number of two-income couples that find it difficult to pull off a dual job switch. But researchers from Princeton University and the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis have other ideas.

Greg Kaplan, an assistant professor of economics at Princeton, and Sam Schulhofer-Wohl, a senior at the of Minneapolis, argue that the shifts in are better explained by changes in the and the ways people learn about faraway places. Those factors account for at least one-third—and perhaps all—of the decline in , they say.

Kaplan and Schulhofer-Wohl discuss their findings, which are described in a recent working paper:

"Compared with their counterparts in most other countries, American workers have long been unusually mobile, freely migrating around the country to wherever they can find good jobs. Many researchers view that high level of mobility as an important strength for the U.S labor market: Migration allows the economy to respond flexibly to local , such as the recent oil boom in North Dakota, and suggests that workers will go wherever they are most productive.

"But the rate of migration among states has been falling steadily for decades and is now about half what it was in the early 1990s. Is the labor market losing its flexibility? And will the U.S. economy suffer as a result?

"In new research, we investigate the decline in long-distance labor mobility in the United States. We show that the data rule out many popular theories—an older population with deep roots, for example, or an increase in the number of two-earner couples who won't move unless both earners find jobs—that are linked to decreasing labor flexibility. In fact, the interstate migration rate would have fallen almost exactly as much over the past two decades if American workers' demographics had not changed at all. In place of those theories, we offer two new explanations for the decline in U.S. migration.

"Our first explanation is that fewer workers need to move to obtain the best jobs, because labor markets around the country have become more similar. We show that the mix of available jobs differs less from state to state than it did 20 years ago, and the income a worker can earn in a particular occupation depends less than before on what state she works in. That decrease in geographic specificity makes it easier for workers to stay where they most enjoy living, and continue working in their preferred occupation.

"Our second explanation for low interstate migration is that workers have better information than before about what it's like to live in different parts of the country. "Suppose you think you might want to escape Minnesota winters and move to California for the year-round sunshine. Unless you have already spent some time in California, or have talked with many people who live there, you can't be very sure you will like it—and there's a good chance you will either miss the snow and return to Minnesota or try a third state quite soon. (Data show that someone who moves between states in one year has about a 15 percent chance of moving again the next year.)

"But in recent decades, improved information technology and decreased market regulation have made it much easier to learn about faraway places, without actually moving there. Airline deregulation made it cheaper to take a vacation in a place you might want to live, while telephone deregulation and the Internet help people gather information about distant states. With more information, workers are less likely to make moves they ultimately regret, and the migration rate declines.

"In our research, we use a quantitative model to measure how powerful these explanations are. We find that reduced geographic specificity of occupations explains one-third of the drop in interstate migration over the past two decades. Our estimates of the effect of increased information are less precise, but it potentially explains all of the remaining drop.

"In other words, American haven't lost their flexibility. They just don't need to move so much anymore."

The views expressed herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis or the Federal Reserve System. A version of this article will appear in June in The Region, a publication of the Bank of Minneapolis.

Explore further: Economist probes the high cost of health care

More information:… swp_revised_2013.pdf

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

How Temporary Help Agencies Impact the Labor Market

Aug 29, 2008

( -- Temporary help agencies place nearly 3 million Americans in jobs each day -- but the temp industry's very success may embolden some managers to view all workers as impermanent, jobs scholar Vicki Smith argues ...

Economist shows the value of moving back with mom and dad

Jun 25, 2012

Though many may dread the idea, young adults who move back home with mom and dad after a job loss may benefit from it more than they realize. Research published in the Journal of Political Economy finds that returning to the ...

Recommended for you

Economist probes the high cost of health care

Mar 27, 2015

When Zack Cooper arrived at Yale as assistant professor of public health and economics, he gained access to a first-of-its-kind dataset. Working with the non-profit Health Care Cost Institute, Cooper and ...

Cash remains king in Chile but its days could be numbered

Mar 26, 2015

For more than a year now, Chileans have endured a crisis of cash access. Despite global moves toward new forms of payment such as contactless and mobile transfers, the crisis in Chile highlights the continuing ...

Will you ever pay off your student loan?

Mar 25, 2015

Would-be participants of higher education must be given full and transparent advice before they accumulate debts as students that follow them into the workplace, according to a report published in the International Journal of ...

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

1 / 5 (1) Mar 12, 2013
"In other words, American workers haven't lost their flexibility. They just don't need to move so much anymore."

When unemployment payments only ran 6 months, and your parents basement was't an option, you either found a job at any cost including relocation, or starved.

Now with payments going on for years, and food stamps not only available, but trendy in some circles, I guess they really just don't need to.

Please somebody, raise my taxes so I can help make those poor devils more comfortable!

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.