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: Facial selection technique for ads can increase buyers by 15 percent

More information:

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

Sharing = Stealing: Busting a copyright myth

Apr 11, 2014

Consumers copy and share digital files. This has been blamed for a potentially catastrophic decline in certain markets. But why do consumers copy? And is it as economically harmful as often thought?

How widespread is tax evasion?

Apr 10, 2014

Tax evasion is widely assumed to be an eternal problem for governments—but how widespread is it? For the first time, a new study, co-authored by an MIT professor, has put a cost on a particular kind of tax evasion, known ...

China looks to science and technology to fuel its economy

Apr 10, 2014

Maintaining stability in the face of rapid change and growth, and proactively partaking in cooperative global ties in science and technology fields will be key in helping China become an innovation-based economy, according ...

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!

More news stories

Online reviews: When do negative opinions boost sales?

When purchasing items online, reading customer reviews is a convenient way to get a real-world account of other people's opinions of the product. According to a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research, negative review ...

ESO image: A study in scarlet

This new image from ESO's La Silla Observatory in Chile reveals a cloud of hydrogen called Gum 41. In the middle of this little-known nebula, brilliant hot young stars are giving off energetic radiation that ...

First direct observations of excitons in motion achieved

A quasiparticle called an exciton—responsible for the transfer of energy within devices such as solar cells, LEDs, and semiconductor circuits—has been understood theoretically for decades. But exciton movement within ...

Patent talk: Google sharpens contact lens vision

( —A report from Patent Bolt brings us one step closer to what Google may have in mind in developing smart contact lenses. According to the discussion Google is interested in the concept of contact ...

Warm US West, cold East: A 4,000-year pattern

Last winter's curvy jet stream pattern brought mild temperatures to western North America and harsh cold to the East. A University of Utah-led study shows that pattern became more pronounced 4,000 years ago, ...