Impact of Internal Migration on Population Redistribution in Europe

Urbanisation, Counterurbanisation or Spatial Equilibrium

Dados Bibliográficos

ID7728149
AutoresFrancisco Rowe (0000-0003-4137-0246, University of Liverpool, autor correspondente), Martin Bell (0000-0001-9251-6773, The University of Queensland), A Bernard (0000-0001-7388-4562, The University of Queensland), Elin Charles-Edwards (0000-0003-2580-207X, The University of Queensland), Philipp Ueffing (0000-0002-3847-0951)
Ano2019
Volume44
Páginas201-234
Data de publicação2019-11-06
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoComparative Population Studies (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1869-8980 • E-ISSN: 1869-8999
EditoraGerman Federal Institute for Population Research (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.12765/cpos-2019-18
OpenAlexW2984648491
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas29
Referências citadas19

The classical foundations of migration research date from the 1880s with Ravenstein’s “Laws of migration”, which represent the first comparative analyses of internal migration. While his observations remain largely valid, the ensuing century has seen considerable progress in data collection practices and methods of analysis, which in turn has permitted theoretical advances in understanding the role of migration in population redistribution. Coupling the extensive range of migration data now available with these recent theoretical and methodological advances, we endeavour to advance beyond Ravenstein’s understanding by examining the direction of population redistribution and comparing the impact of internal migration on patterns of human settlement in 27 European countries. Results show that the overall redistributive impact of internal migration is low in most European countries but the mechanisms differ across the continent. In Southern and Eastern Europe migration effectiveness is above average but is offset by low migration intensities, whereas in Northern and Western Europe high intensities are absorbed in reciprocal flows resulting in low migration effectiveness. About half the European countries are experiencing a process of concentration toward urbanised regions, particularly in Northern, Central and Eastern Europe, whereas countries in the West and South are undergoing a process of population deconcentration. These results suggest that population deconcentration is now more common than it was in the 1990s when counterurbanisation was limited to Western Europe. The results show that 130 years on, Ravenstein’s law of migration streams and counter-streams remains a central facet of migration dynamics, while underlining the importance of simple yet robust indices for the spatial analysis of migration.* This article belongs to a special issue on “Internal Migration as a Driver of Regional Population Change in Europe: Updating Ravenstein

Development economics · Economic geography · Economic growth · Economics · Geography · Human migration · Internal migration · Political science · Population · Redistribution (election · Sociology · Urbanization · Demography · Law · Migration and Labor Dynamics · Regional Economics and Spatial Analysis · Urban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies