The Annals of Regional Science

, Volume 62, Issue 1, pp 169–186 | Cite as

Regional preferences for the living environment and mobility of researchers and general workers: the case of Korea

  • Hyun-kyung Lee
  • Hong-bae KimEmail author
Original Paper


Since 2005, the Korean government has relocated national research institutes from the Seoul Metropolitan Area (SMA) to other parts of the nation. The main purpose of this relocation is to ameliorate disparities in population and economic power across regions. However, it turns out that only 27% of researchers in the SMA have actually relocated. This implies that researcher’s preference for a living environment should be reflected in the planning process. Hence, this paper attempts to specify the migration behaviors of researchers by comparing their preferences with those of general workers. Here, regional living environment is represented by a function of two attributes: regional labor market conditions and living environments. The paper shows that regional living environments have a more decisive impact on the migration of researchers, relative to general workers. Also, researchers are found to be slightly more sensitive to regional living environments especially crime than regional labor market conditions. Finally, the paper suggests a policy direction for balanced development among regions in Korea based on the results obtained.

JEL Classification

J61 R23 R58 



  1. Arntz M (2010) What attracts human capital? Understanding the skill composition of interregional job matches in Germany. Reg Stud 44(4):423–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Betz MR, Partridge MD, Fallah B (2016) Smart cities and attracting knowledge workers: which cities attract highly-educated workers in the 21st century? Pap Reg Sci 95(4):819–841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown WM, Scott DM (2012) Human capital location choice: accounting for amenities and thick labor markets. J Reg Sci 52(5):787–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buch T, Hamann S, Niebuhr A, Rossen A (2014) What makes cities attractive? The determinants of urban labour migration in Germany. Urban Stud 51(9):1960–1978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buch T, Hamann S, Niebuhr A, Rossen A (2017) How to woo the smart ones? Evaluating the determinants that particularly attract highly qualified people to cities. J Urban Aff 39(6):1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buettner T, Janeba E (2016) City competition for the creative class. J Cult Econ 40(4):413–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carlino J, Saiz A (2008) Beautiful city: leisure amenities and urban growth. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia working paper. SSRN-1280157Google Scholar
  8. Constant A, Massey DS (2003) Self-selection, earnings, and out-migration: a longitudinal study of immigrants to Germany. J Popul Econ 16(4):631–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cullen JB, Levitt SD (1999) Crime, urban flight, and the consequences for cities. Rev Econ Stat 81:159–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dahl MS, Sorenson O (2009) The embedded entrepreneur. Eur Manag Rev 6(3):172–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dahl MS, Sorenson O (2010) The migration of technical workers. J Urban Econ 67(1):33–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dalmazzo A, de Blasio G (2011) Amenities and skill-biased agglomeration effects: some results on Italian cities. Pap Reg Sci 90(3):503–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Delisle F, Shearmur R (2010) Where does all the talent flow? Migration of young graduates and nongraduates, Canada 1996–2001. Canad Geogr/Le Géographe canadien 54(3):305–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dorfman J, Partridge MD, Galloway H (2011) Are high-tech employment and natural amenities linked: answers from a smoothed Bayesian spatial model. Spat Econ Anal 6(4):397–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Faggian A, McCann P, Sheppard S (2006) An analysis of ethnic differences in UK graduate migration behaviour. Ann Reg Sci 40(2):461–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Florida R (2002) Bohemia and economic geography. J Econ Geogr 2(1):55–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Glaeser EL, Saiz A (2003) The rise of the skilled city (No. w10191). National Bureau of Economic ResearchGoogle Scholar
  18. Glaeser EL, Scheinkman J, Shleifer A (1995) Economic growth in a cross-section of cities. J Monet Econ 36(1):117–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Glaeser EL, Kolko J, Saiz A (2001) Consumer city. J Econ Geogr 1(1):27–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hassink R (2001) Towards regionally embedded innovation support systems in South Korea? Case studies from Kyongbuk Taegu and Kyonggi. Urban Stud 38:1373–1395Google Scholar
  21. Herbst M (2013) Mobility of human capital and its effect on regional economic development. Review of theory and empirical literature. MPRA paper no 54305. University of Warsaw, WarsawGoogle Scholar
  22. Kim LY, Yang KS (2013) Empirical analysis of regional characteristic factors determining net inflow and outflow of the population. J Korean Reg Dev Assoc 25(3):1–19Google Scholar
  23. Kodrzycki YK (2001) Migrants of recent college graduates: evidence from the national longitudinal survey of youth. N Engl Econ Rev 2001:13–34Google Scholar
  24. Korea Employment Information Service (2017) 2015 graduates occupational mobility survey (GOMS). KEIS. Accessed 10 Apr 2017
  25. Korea National Assembly Budget Office (2016) Evaluation of the public sector relocation program. National assembly budget office analysis & evaluation. Report no 16-05Google Scholar
  26. KOSIS (2018) Korean statistical information service (KOSIS). KOSIS. Accessed 5 Sept 2018
  27. Lee YS (2009) Balanced development in globalizing regional development? Unpacking the new regional policy of South Korea. Reg Stud 43(3):353–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lee MK, Lee JH (2010) The effect of regional characteristics on the migration in small and medium-sized cities. Korean Local Gov Rev 12(3):139–168Google Scholar
  29. Lee HY, Roh SC (2011) Impacts of the regional education environment on the formation of two-residential location family through migration. J Korea Plan Assoc 46(4):19–30Google Scholar
  30. Lim DI (2011) Analysis on the migration determinant factors of 3 major cities in Gangwon-Do-case-study of Chuncheon, Wonju and Gangneung. J Korea Contents Assoc 11(1):411–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lim J, Lee C, Kim E (2015) Contributions of human capital investment policy to regional economic growth: an interregional CGE model approach. Ann Reg Sci 55(2–3):269–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Liu Y, Shen J (2014) Jobs or amenities? Location choices of interprovincial skilled migrants in China, 2000–2005. Popul Space Place 20(7):592–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Liu Y, Shen J (2017) Modelling skilled and less-skilled interregional migrations in China, 2000–2005. Popul Space Place 23(4):e2027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Liu Y, Shen J, Xu W, Wang G (2017) From school to university to work: migration of highly educated youths in China. Ann Reg Sci 59(3):651–676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lucas RE Jr (1988) On the mechanics of economic development. J Monet Econ 22(1):3–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Marinelli E (2011) Graduate migration in Italy-Lifestyle or necessity? ERSA conference papersGoogle Scholar
  37. Miguélez E, Moreno R (2014) What attracts knowledge workers? The role of space and social networks. J Reg Sci 54(1):33–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mood C (2010) Logistic regression: why we cannot do what we think we can do, and what we can do about it. Eur Sociol Rev 26(1):67–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Moretti E (2004) Workers’ education, spillovers, and productivity: evidence from plant-level production functions. Am Econ Rev 94(3):656–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Moretti E (2013) Real wage inequality. Am Econ J Appl Econ 5(1):65–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Nifo A, Vecchione G (2014) Do institutions play a role in skilled migration? The case of Italy. Reg Stud 48(10):1628–1649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Qian H (2010) Talent, creativity and regional economic performance: the case of China. Ann Reg Sci 45(1):133–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Roback J (1988) Wages, rents, and amenities: differences among workers and regions. Econ Inq 26(1):23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rodríguez-Pose A, Ketterer TD (2012) Do local amenities affect the appeal of regions in Europe for migrants? J Reg Sci 52(4):535–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Romer PM (1990) Endogenous technological change. J Polit Econ 98(5, Part 2):S71–S102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Scott AJ (2010) Jobs or amenities? Destination choices of migrant engineers in the USA. Pap Reg Sci 89(1):43–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shapiro JM (2006) Smart cities: quality of life, productivity, and the growth effects of human capital. Rev Econ Stat 88(2):324–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shen J, Liu Y (2016) Skilled and less-skilled interregional migration in China: a comparative analysis of spatial patterns and the decision to migrate in 2000–2005. Habitat Int 57:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Stark O (1991) The migration of labor. Blackwell, Cambridge, MassGoogle Scholar
  50. Statistics OECD (2015) OECD statistics. OECD. Accessed 5 Sept 2018
  51. Wang C, Wu J (2010) Natural amenities, increasing returns and urban development. J Econ Geogr 11(4):687–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Whisler RL, Waldorf BS, Mulligan GF, Plane DA (2008) Quality of life and the migration of the college-educated: a life-course approach. Growth Change 39(1):58–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zucker L, Darby M, (2007) Star scientists, innovation and regional and national immigration. National bureau of economic research working paper no 13547Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Urban PlanningHanyang UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations