John Stillwell and Nik Lomax, University of Leeds
31
Internal migration in 2001 and 2011: A comparative analysis at the district scale in England and Wales John Stillwell and Nik Lomax, University of Leeds Presentation at the Census User Conference, Royal Statistical Society, London, 31 October 2014
Transcript of John Stillwell and Nik Lomax, University of Leeds
Internal migration in 2001 and 2011: A comparative analysis at the district scale in England and Wales
John Stillwell and Nik Lomax, University of Leeds
Presentation at the Census User Conference,Royal Statistical Society, London, 31 October 2014
Presentation
• Research question• Data sets: Census ODS • Spatial systems: districts (and NUTS regions)• National migration in 2000‐01 and 2010‐11• Migration churn and net migration • Origin‐destination flows using circular plots• Changes in London• Summary/Conclusions
Research question
• What changes are evident in the levels, intensities and geographical patterns of internal migration within (and immigration to) England and Wales between 2001 and 2011?
Data sets• Origin‐destination flow matrices from:
Table MG101 from 2001 Census Tables MM01CUK and MF02UK from 2011 Census
• Broad age groups: 1‐15, 16‐49, 50‐64, 65‐74, 75+(i.e. under 1s excluded)
• All downloaded from UK Data Service via WICID• Usual resident populations at census dates, 2001 and 2011
• All data for 2001 adjusted to 2011 Census districts
Spatial systems: Districts and NUTS Regions
346 districts inEngland and Wales
10 NUTS 1 regions and 111 NUTS 3 regions
National migration in 2000‐01 and 2010‐11
Migration flow aged 1 and over: 2000‐01 2010‐11 Change%
Change
Internal migration in E&W 5,371,330 6,096,085 724,755 +13.5
Internal migration within districts 3,187,050 3,590,329 +403,279 +12.7% of total 59.3% 58.9%
Internal migration between districts 2,184,280 2,505,756 +321,476 +14.7% of total 40.7% 41.1%
In‐migration from Rest of the UK 52,630 51,625 ‐1,005 ‐1.9
Immigration from outside the UK 365,544 612,488 +246,944 +67.6
Internal migration rates by age, all districts
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1‐15 16‐49 50‐64 65‐74 75+
Migratio
n ra
te (%
)
Broad age group
Total 2001
Total 2011
Within 2001
Within 2011
Between 2001
Between 2011
Rate of ‘all age’ internal migration was 10.44% in 2001 and 11.01% in 2011
Differences in migration rates by age group between 2000-01 and 2010-11
‐1.0
‐0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
1‐15 16‐49 50‐64 65‐74 75+
Differen
ce in
migratio
n rates
Broad age group
Total
Within
Between
Spatial patterns of churn: All ages
Churn rate 2000‐01
Churn = ((In‐migration + Out‐migration + Intra‐migration) / Population)*100
Churn rate 2010‐11
Change in churn, all ages, 2001‐2011
Change inchurn rate Change in
Churn volume
Changing rates of churn, 2001-2011
Tower Hamlets 7.21 Lancaster ‐1.24Islington 6.11 Surrey Heath ‐1.34Barking and Dagenham 5.54 East Riding of Yorkshire ‐1.36Southwark 5.35 Allerdale ‐1.36Hackney 5.21 Cherwell ‐1.38Lambeth 4.46 Harrogate ‐1.41Bournemouth 4.39 Maldon ‐1.43Hammersmith and Fulham 4.29 South Oxfordshire ‐1.44Kensington and Chelsea 4.20 Harborough ‐1.47Norwich 4.06 Craven ‐1.52Brighton and Hove 3.79 South Holland ‐1.54Newham 3.62 Bassetlaw ‐1.55Cardiff 3.59 Gosport ‐1.71Bath and North East Somerset 3.46 Richmondshire ‐1.74Lincoln 3.41 East Northamptonshire ‐1.89Liverpool 3.29 East Lindsey ‐2.05Newcastle upon Tyne 3.22 West Lindsey ‐2.16Camden 3.19 North Kesteven ‐2.19Manchester 3.18 Hart ‐2.19Exeter 3.05 Wyre ‐2.52
Increasing Decreasing
Immigration rates, 2001 and 2011
2000‐01 2010‐11
Changing immigration, all ages, 2001-2011
Change in immigration rate
Change in immigrationvolume
Churn-immigration relationship, 2010-11
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Immigratio
n rate
Churn rate
R = 0.837 (0.762 in 2001)R2 = 0.701 (0.579 in 2001)
Forest Heath
Lincoln
City, Westminster
Kensington & Chelsea
Spatial patterns of net migration, all ages, 2001 and 2011
2000‐01 2010‐11
Spatial patterns of net migration rates, all ages, 2001 and 2011
2000‐01 2010‐11
Number of districts by changing rates of net migration, 2001-2011
2000‐01 2010‐11Number of districts % of districts
Gain More gain 48 13.9Gain Less gain 69 19.9
Gain Loss 72 20.8Loss Gain 36 10.4
Loss Less loss 57 16.5Loss More loss 64 18.5
346 100.0
Migration efficiency, all ages, 2001 and 2011ME = 100(Net migration/Migration turnover)
2000‐01 2010‐11
Migration efficiency, ages 1‐15
2000‐01 2010‐11
Migration efficiency, ages 16‐49
2000‐01 2010‐11
Migration efficiency, ages 50‐64
2000‐01 2010‐11
Migration efficiency, ages 65‐74
2000‐01 2010‐11
Migration efficiency, ages 75+
2000‐01 2010‐11
Origin‐destination flows using circular plots, NUTS 1 regions (GOR), 2000‐01 and 2010‐11
http://nikolasander.com/uk‐migration/ with acknowledgement to Nicola Sander, Vienna Institute of Demography
Flows with values >1,000 are shown
2000‐01 2010‐11
Origin-destination flows using circular plots, NUTS 3 regions in London, 2000-01 and 2010-11
2000-01 2010-11
Origin‐destination flows using circular plots, Outer London West and North West, 2000‐01 and 2010‐11
2000-01 2010-11
Age group net migration balances for London boroughs, 2000‐01 and 2010‐11
Age 1-15
Age 16-49
Age 50-64
Age 65-74
Age 75+
2000-01 2010-11 2000-01 2010-11
Gain
Loss
Changes in net migration for London’s NUTS 3 regions, 2000‐01 and 2010‐11
-2.00
-1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
0.50
Inner London -West
Inner London -East
Outer London -East and North
East
Outer London -South
Outer London -West and North
West
Ne
t m
igra
tio
n r
ate
2000-01 2010-11
Net migration rates
Changes in net migration NUTS 3 regions in London (within and outside), 2000‐01 and 2010‐11
-2.00
-1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
Inner London -West
Inner London -East
Outer London -East and North
East
Outer London -South
Outer London -West and North
West
Ne
t m
igra
tio
n r
ate
Net migration rate within London
2000-01 2010-11
-2.00
-1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
Ne
t m
igra
tio
pn
ra
te
Net migration rate outside London
Summary/Conclusions• Internal migration levels and intensities have increased but
migration rates for those aged over 65 have declined• Major increase in immigration levels and rates• Churn increasing in urban areas and declining in rural areas• Counterurbanisation pattern waning for those aged 50‐74• Patterns of origin‐destination migration for NUTS1 and 3
regions and net migration balances by age group for London boroughs remained very similar
• Net migration rates suggest a reduction in deconcentrationfrom Inner to Outer London and in losses from Outer London to the Rest of E&W
• Inner London‐East balance with Rest of E&W (outside London) becomes positive
• More analysis when the remaining SMS tables are released
Contact details• John Stillwell
[email protected]• Nik Lomax
AcknowledgementsJohn Stillwell grateful for funding from ESRC as part of UK Data Service‐Census Support grantNik Lomax grateful to ESRC/ONS for funding PhD CASE studentship
