Embed
Email

Martin

Document Sample
Martin
Shared by: HC111111042258
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
0
posted:
11/10/2011
language:
English
pages:
22
Migration in Alaska





EPSCoR All Hands meeting

May 14, 2009

Anchorage



Stephanie Martin

Institute of Social and Economic Research

University of Alaska Anchorage

Anchorage, AK USA

Acknowledgements



• National Science Foundation

– Social Transitions in the North

– Survey of Living Conditions in the Arctic

– Boreas

– Migration in the Arctic

– EPSCoR

• North Slope borough

• National Park Service, Alaska Department of Fish and

Game

• US Census Bureau

Connections



• Macro effects of micro-decisions

– Community effects of out-migration

• Micro effects of macro forces

– Climate change

– Global economy

Integration

• So far integrated over projects and communities

– Who moves and why

– Are migrants better off

– Return migrants

• Goal to extend projects by integrating over

disciplines and extending geographic and

cultural scope

– Out-migration

– Return

Iñupiat migration in Alaska



1985-90

930 1995-00

935





1615

1010

1149

777

Surveys



• Not designed to be migration surveys

• Most ask where did you live 5 years ago or 1

year ago

• Where were you born

Migrant groups in the surveys



• Return migrants - moved back to the community

where they grew up.

• In-migrants – moved to a community other than

where they grew up.

• Stayers – never left.

Who moves



• More women move out

• More men move back

• Young adults

• Some places, women with children

Why people move



• More women than men considered leaving

– Pull. Women cite own or children’s education,

family as reasons.

• More men want to stay.

– Negative push factors. Hunting and fishing

one of the main reported reasons.

What else?



• Return migration is important because of its

implications for community level well being.

• Important for individual well-being because it is

related to family ties and social support. Both

essential for well-being.

Return Migration

• In Northern Alaskan communities, about 1/3

are return



• Return migration varies by community

– Some communities are relatively new and

weren’t around when respondents were

young.

– Some communities people leave and don’t

return.

Return Migration





• Return migration varies by gender.

– Mirroring the census data showing that more

women leave and more men return

– Of men living in Arctic communities, 41% are

return migrants.

– Compared with 34% of women

Why people leave



• Education

– 52% of male return migrants reported leaving

for education

– 42% of women return migrants

• Jobs

– Equal percentages of men and women return

migrants (about 21% reported leaving for

jobs)

Why people return



• Overwhelmingly, people return to be with family

– A larger share of men (68%) than women

(58%)

• A slightly larger share of women (13%) than men

reported returning for jobs

• About 7% of both men and women reported

returning for subsistence.

Characteristics of return migrants



• Educated

• Employed

• Subsistence participation

– Less in whaling, walrus

– Same in other activities

• Social support

• Family ties

Moving forward



• Macro effects of micro-decisions

- Out-migration and its effects on communities

• Effects of macro forces on micro-decisions

– Effects of climate change on communities

• Leaky system.

Practical Importance



• Denali Commission and other federal agencies

• State funding for schools, local government

• State sport hunting/subsistence trade-offs

• Urban areas – providing services

• Understanding migration in other places

Different community profiles



• More very small communities (37 places)

• Declining populations

• Schools closing

• High subsistence harvest but fewer species

– Moose, salmon, caribou

Regional/local effects Households/Communities





Global Opportunities

social elsewhere

change Fuel prices

Subsistence Well-

being



Biological Changes Social & Migration

change in wildlife family ties



Jobs Community

Income Viability



River levels

Physical

Fire

change

Infrastructure

damage

Summary



• Until now: Integrated research in one field over

time

• Going forward: Integrate research across

disciplines

• Moved from micro effects on macro decisions to

macro effects on micro

• Migration is a good example of leakage from

system.

Research questions

• What are the points of contact between global

forces and communities/households?

• What are thresholds for change?

• Link these changes to resilience?

• Resilience of what? Boundaries of system.

Leakage.

• Community location?

• What happens if communities vanish? Decay.


Related docs
Other docs by HC111111042258
AH363SyllabusFall09
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
ALHA_Summer_09
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
update27 28
Views: 4  |  Downloads: 0
Resource
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
rooster_sept_04_color_97
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
bitterorbetter
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Fr 20Ind 20War 20teach 2310D8E8
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
KitapCD listesi
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
savonarola2bk3
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!