1. Phil Rees QMSS2 Summer School Projection Methods for Ethnicity and Immigration Status 2-9 July 2009 School of Geography, University of Leeds, UK

2. Outline of topics Internal migration: definitions and sources The evidence for ethnic differences in internal migration Raymer and Giullieti Hussein, Stillwell and Norman Framework for estimation of internal migration Available data sets The exercise for the afternoon

3. What is internal migration? Internal migration is the change of residence within a country Both origin and destination residence is within the same country The changes of residence are usually aggregated into origin-destination tables Origins and destination zones are usually based on the administrative hierarchy of the country (e.g. ward  municipality  county  region; LAU1  LAU2  NUTS3  NUTS2  NUTS1) For the purposes of population projection, you normally ignore intra-zone migration

4. What are the important interactions? Evidence from the literature Work of Raymer and co-authors establishes that OD patterns differ between ethnic groups But only five ethnic groups Work of Hussein and Stillwell show that the ethnic groups differ in net migration patterns But only seven ethnic groups

5. Hussain & Stillwell: net migration results

6. Table 1: Portion of an internal migration matrix, 2001 Census White British Destinations Origins 00AA City of London 00AB Barking and Dagenham 00AC Barnet 00AD Bexley 00AA City of London98083 00AB Barking and Dagenham05147829 00AC Barnet821842612 00AD Bexley031207356 Census data are transitions over one year, 2000-1

7. Table 2: Part of a Patient Register Data System PRDS matrix,2006-7 Mid-year to mid-year 2006-7UKC1UKD2UKD1UKD2UKD3 UKC105129487310694 UKC2645608483111070 UKD13988600318875 UKD234132737904577 UKD37331038111468480 PRDS migration data are transitions adjusted to agree with NHSCR migration data which are moves

8. NHSCR data for UK NUTS1 regions, 2006-7 UKNENWYHEMWMEELOSESWWASCNI UK 33.684.386.691.887.1117.7234.5183.992.847.038.58.8 NE 39.505.99.23.22.33.03.94.52.21.03.50.8 NW 99.25.7018.29.012.46.911.911.27.28.36.32.2 YH 92.69.218.3016.27.88.59.810.25.42.63.90.8 EM 108.23.09.318.3016.118.512.417.67.02.72.80.6 WM 92.82.412.07.314.707.612.113.712.37.52.50.6 EE 144.82.56.77.314.17.2064.9269.12.93.50.7 LO 167.04.812.210.811.412.330.8055.916.35.06.21.3 SE 226.14.011.29.414.413.229.397.1033.37.16.01.2 SW 136.52.28.76.18.815.913.222.444.809.93.70.8 WA 56.51.010.12.93.29.33.65.38.910.301.60.4 SC 51.54.37.85.43.53.44.76.98.04.01.80 NI 12.80.62.10.80.60.80.91.81.40.70.52.60

9. Migration schedule by single years of age (2001 Census)

10. Problem: how to use this information to produce a consistent estimate? Definitions of dimensions O = origins (352 LAs in E, 22 in Wales, Scot + N Ire) D = destinations (ditto) E = ethnic groups (16 in 2001 Census) A = ages (0 … 100 for projection model) S = sexes (men, women) T = time intervals (my: 2000-1 to 2007-8) One solution: ODE + AS + T Use the origin-destination structures by age multiplied by age-sex probabilities for all migrants multiplied by time series factors Can we do better than this?

11. Exercise Aim: to help me to develop a feasible model for estimating internal migration by ethnicity that captures the main effects but is not too complex Read and report on the set of papers Raymer 2008 RMF Raymer 2008 EAPS Raymer and Giulietti 2009 Stillwell and Hussein 2008 Hussein and Stillwell 2008 Stillwell, Hussein and Norman 2008 Design a possible solution