Trends | Theory | Facts | Food | Environment | Aging | Elderly | Immigration | Urbanization | Family | Women


Networking and the Migration Decision

Jessica Weiss


Current migration literature focuses on three main theories of migration. These studies highlight the importance of both individual characteristics and familial connections to the migration decision. How important is the presence of networks to migration? This paper draws on specific studies regarding the border crossing culture between the United States and Mexico in order to answer this question.


This paper is divided into seven sections. The first section will introduce the three main theories of migration. The second section will discuss how individual characteristics and demographics influence the migration decision. The third section will explore the importance of networks, particularly regarding the choice of destination. The fourth section will highlight gender specific considerations in migration research. The fifth section draws on the current literature regarding migration across the U.S.-Mexico border to examine the aforementioned issues. The sixth section discusses the implications of these research findings for policy decisions. The final section summarizes the paper.

Theories of Migration


There are three main micro-level theories of migration: the neoclassical, the 'new economics' and the network models of migration. The neoclassical model of migration posits that the decision to migrate is based on a careful cost-benefit analysis of the economic actor which affects both the decision to migrate and the proposed destination (Davis and Winters, 2001). This model suggests that each individual weighs the relocation costs, government regulations and current assets against expected future income and opportunities (Davis, et. al., 2002). This is the most individualistic of the three theories.


The 'new economics' model of migration expands the decision from an individual choice to a household level choice whereby the potential migrant comes to a joint decision along with family members (Davis, et. al., 2002). This model implies that within a household costs and benefits are shared. It also suggests that migration can be a means to overcome market imperfections, especially in the credit and insurance markets (Davis and Winters, 2001).


The network or social capital model of migration puts the most emphasis on the role of relationships on migration. According to this model, individuals use social connections to others who have migrated in order to make a more informed decision (Davis, et. al., 2002). The network serves as a form of social capital that the decision-maker can use to gain increased levels of information about employment prospects and risks. With larger numbers of migrants from a community the network grows and ultimately leads to more migrants.


These three theories have all been accepted in modern literature. Each model provides specific insight into the migration decision and provides a unique mode of analysis. This paper primarily focuses on the network model as a way of analyzing the migration decision.

Individual Characteristics


Although the primary focus of this paper is on the merits of networks to the migration decision, it is important to understand the influence of individual characteristics on migration. Individual factors such as gender, age and education can have a direct impact on employment prospects and the risk associated with migrating. Individual assets also play into the migration decision as does the variation in individual preferences. All these factors must be investigated and controlled in the neoclassical model (Davis and Winters, 2001).

Networks and Network Variations


The importance of networks and social capital to the migration decision is being revalued. However, although networks are important to migration, research has generally ignored the variance in network composition and the resultant effects of this variation.


There are two types of networks as defined by the literature: family networks and community networks. This distinction addresses the potential difference in the level of influence between immediate family members and community members or acquaintances (Winters, et. al., 2001). While both types of networks have been shown to be positively influential in the migration decision, it was hypothesized that the presence of familial network ties would be more advantageous. Immediate family was thought to be more likely to provide direct assistance and advice to a migrant. The more direct the relationship is between the migrating individual and the network, the more important the impact of the network (Davis and Winters, 2001). However, examination of the data also reveals that the two distinct types of networks are substitutes (Winters, et. al., 2001). At the same time, the desegregation of network relation local or domestic migrant networks, as opposed to international migrant networks, become more important (Davis and Winters, 2001). Therefore, it is important to investigate the strength of relationships within the network in order to evaluate the influence of the network.


Regardless of the composition of the network, this form of social capital is vital to the decision to migrate. The presence of a network can often override the migration decision made at the household level. This observation helps support the theory of cumulative causation (Winters, et. al., 2001). This theory states that international migration is a self-catalyzing process. This means that once a few members of a community have migrated across borders, it becomes easier for future migrants to do the same, regardless of direct support offered by the household. This theory is therefore directly influenced by the availability and size of networks.


In addition to providing support and resources, networks are also a large determinant in the location decision made by the migrant. Due to their equivalency with social capital and their function as a support mechanism, the establishment of a network in a particular location greatly influences others to migrate to that location. In other words, migrants have a high likelihood of migrating to areas where the majority of the members of their network are located (Winters, et. al., 2001). This is a logical conclusion as one of the main purposes of networks is to provide information about the migration prospects and employment prospects. Migrating to a location with a lot of migrants eliminates some of the risk, as the migrant is made aware of the conditions of the location. Migrating to a network-concentrated location also increases the availability of direct support, once migration has occurred.


For the above reasons, it is important to consider the network model in discussing migration. However, not all networks can be treated the same. The composition and strength of the network, as well as the size and location, are all important in influencing migration.

The Gender Question


Thus far, gender has been ignored in the discussion of migration. However, gender is one of the influential individual variables that can potentially influence migration. Gender does matter when considering international migration (Davis and Winters, 2001). There are several reasons for this conclusion.


First, females are more risk averse or household decisions are made that reflect a risk averse attitude towards females. This means that under conditions of greater uncertainty women are less likely to migrate. Increased information about procedure, job prospects and other coping mechanisms can in turn greatly increase migration amongst the female population (Davis and Winters, 2001).


Second, female specific characteristics and societal norms may prohibit or hinder female migration. Differences between men and women in employment opportunities as well as social acceptance related to women performing certain types of work can make the decision to migrate less worthwhile (Davis and Winters, 2001).


In both of these cases, the presence of networks is a mitigating factor. For female migration the presence of strong male networks appears to be most influential on the decision of a female to migrate. Perhaps gaining the support and help of males in the community makes the decision more socially acceptable and less risky. On the other hand the presence of female networks is important in determining the destination of female migrants. This presence of female migrants in the final destination may serve as a signal of employment opportunities for women and in that way decrease risk. These results signal that the gender effect on migration cannot be ignored (Davis and Winters, 2001).

Case Study: Crossing the U.S.-Mexico Border


Research in international migration helps to highlight the importance of social structure and networks in the migration decision. The case of border crossings, both legal and illegal, between the United States and Mexico, serves as an illustrative example.


Policy on land reform in Mexico creates an ideal environment for studying community effects on migration. The Mexican government from the 1930s to 1992 distributed parcels of land and water to individual communities called ejidos. Each community would then be responsible for production on this land. This distribution of land creates small rural communities with relatively equal characteristics. The presence of communities along with differences between real wages based on purchasing power parity and a Mexican peso crisis in the 1990s, make this situation invaluable to migration research (Davis, et. al., 2002).


Specific research on these communities shows a dramatic increase in the number of migrants between the years 1994 and 1997. The migration decision in the ejido sector can be described as a decision to migrate to the Unites States, to another agrarian community within Mexico, to a non-agrarian community in Mexico, or to not migrate. The presence of networks seems to be the greatest factor in determining the migration decision amongst Mexican ejido migrants (Davis, et. al., 2002).

Policy Implications


The results of the mentioned studies have policy implications. First, understanding the individual characteristics that affect migration can lead to proper reform of economic and agricultural policy in both. For example, understanding the effect of land distribution and the relation between irrigated land and migration can lead to policy to curb migration. Second, by understanding the networks are invaluable to the migration decision, it is possible to enact policies directly affecting these networks to either promote or curb migration (Davis, et. al., 2002).

Conclusion


Of the three main models of migration, this paper focused on the network or social capital model of migration. The presence of networks provides direct support and information to potential migrants that can be of assistance in the migration decision. However, not all networks are the same. The size of the network along with the strength of the relationship between the migrant and the network can have important effects on the decision to migrate. The presence of a network also has a large impact on the destination choice of the migrant.


Understanding the factors that affect migration such as gender, education, income and networks, can lead to policies that are in line with a countries stance on migration. The relation between the United States and Mexico serves as an example of the variety of influences on migration and the importance of policy decisions on migration.



Bibliography


Davis, Benjamin; Winters, Paul (2001), "Gender, Networks and Mexico-US Migration", Journal of Development Studies v38, n2 (December 2001): 1-26.

Davis, Benjamin; Stecklov, Guy; Winters, Paul (2002), "Domestic and International Migration from Rural Mexico: Disaggregating the Effects of Network Structure and Composition", Population Studies v56, n3 (November 2002): 291-309.

Winters, Paul; de Janvry, Alain; Sadoulet, Elisabeth (2001), "Family and Community Networks in Mexico-U.S. Migration", Journal of Human Resources v36, n1Winter 2001): 159-184.