Migration between core and peripheral regions: a description and tentative explanation of the patterns in 22 countries

• Published in: Geoforum 1982, Vol.13 (4), p.339-410
• Main Authors: Vining, Daniel R., Pallone, Robert
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Demography; Developed Countries; Emigration and Immigration; Geography; Population; Population Dynamics; Statistics as Topic
• ISSN: 0016-7185; 1872-9398
• DOI: 10.1016/0016-7185(82)90031-8

In the developed world at least, the century-long migration towards the high density core regions is over. To establish this thesis, internal migration statistics for 22 countries are examined, covering the period 1950–1979. Of these 22 countries, five categories are distinguished: (1) the countries of north-western Europe (Belgium, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, and West Germany), in which there is moderate net out-migration from the core regions; (2) the countries of North America (Canada and the United States), in which net out-migration from the core regions has become quite substantial; (3) countries on the periphery of western Europe (Finland, Iceland, Italy, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom), and including Japan and New Zealand, in which the modal pattern is one of increases in net migration towards the core regions between the 1950s and 1960s, followed by a sharp decline in the 1970s, though not to the point where a sustained net flow of population away from these regions has been observed; (4) the countries of eastern Europe (Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, and Poland), in which net migration towards the core regions, though quite moderate, has yet to show a systematic decline; and (5) two advanced developing countries in eastern Asia (South Korea and Taiwan), in which net migration towards the core regions is very large and showing no signs of imminent decline. The countries of the first three categories belong to the developed world, in which economies of further agglomeration in the core regions no longer exist, according to the hypothesis put forward in the second half of this paper. The distinguishing feature of the countries in the first two of these three categories is that their less urbanized, peripheral regions offer sites for urban and industrial development which are competitive with those of the core regions. In contrast, the peripheral regions of the countries of the third category do not offer competitive sites for industry and urban development, due to fundamental deficiencies in physical geography. Thus, despite the disappearance of the agglomeration advantages of the core regions, a sustained net flow of population away from these regions has yet to be observed. Finally, the countries of the fourth and fifth categories, according to our hypothesis, are those in which the economies of further agglomeration in the core regions are still present, due to a lower level of economic development. What distinguishes