Journal of Population Research

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 19–39 | Cite as

Net migration and migration effectiveness: A comparison between Australia and the United Kingdom, 1976–96

Part 2: Age-related migration patterns
  • John Stillwell
  • Martin Bell
  • Marcus Blake
  • Oliver Duke-Williams
  • Phil Rees


This paper explores the impact of net migration in Australia and the United Kingdom using measures of migration effectiveness computed from period-age migration data for four consecutive five-year periods. Results reported in Part 1 of this paper (Stillwellet al. 2000) suggest that while the overall effectiveness of net migration at the scale of city regions has declined over the twenty-year period in both countries, important geographical variations are evident. Part 2 considers how patterns of migration effectiveness vary by age and presents a single classification of all the city regions on the basis of age-specific effectiveness. More detailed analysis includes spatial patterns for particular age groups and net migration profiles of selected regions. Cohort effects are shown to be important for explaining changes between time periods in these regions.


Birth Cohort Internal Migration City Region Gold Coast Interregional Migration 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bell, M. and G.J. Hugo. 2000.Internal Migration in Australia 1991–96: Overview and the Overseas-born. Canberra: Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, M., P. Rees, M. Blake and O. Duke-Williams. 1999. An age-period-cohort database of inter-regional migration in Australia and Britain, 1976–96.Working Paper 02/99, School of Geography. Leeds: University of Leeds.Google Scholar
  3. Blake, M., M. Bell and P. Rees. 2000. Creating a temporally consistent spatial framework for the analysis of inter-regional migration in Australia.International Journal of Population Geography 6(2):155–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bonifazi, C. and F. Heins. 2000. Long-term trends of internal migration in Italy.International Journal of Population Geography 6(2):111–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Champion, A., S. Fotheringham, P. Rees, P. Boyle and J. Stillwell. 1998.The Determinants of Migration Flows in England: A Review of Existing Data and Evidence. Report prepared for the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.Google Scholar
  6. Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR). 1998. Regenerating London Docklands,Regeneration Research Summary No. 16. London.Google Scholar
  7. Easterlin, R.A. 1980.Birth and Fortune: The Impact of Numbers on Personal Welfare. New York: Basci Books.Google Scholar
  8. Greenwood, M.J. 1988. Changing patterns of migration and regional economic growth in the US: a demographic perspective.Growth and Change 19:68–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kontuly, T., R. Vogelsang, K.P. Schon and S. Maretzke. 1997. Political unification and regional consequences of German East-West migration.International Journal of Population Geography 3:31–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Milne, W.J. 1993. Macroeconomic influences on migration.Regional Studies 27:365–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. O’Connor, K. and R. Stimson. 1996. Convergence and divergence of demographic and economic trends. Pp. 108–125 in P.W. Newton and M. Bell (eds.),Population Shift: Mobility and Change in Australia. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar
  12. Pandit, K. 1997. Cohort and period effects in U.S. migration: how demographic and economic cycles influence the migration schedule.Annals of the Association of American Geographers 87(3):439–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Plane, D. 1984. A systematic demographic efficiency analysis of US interstate population exchange.Economic Geography 60:294–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Plane, D. 1993. Demographic influences on migration.Regional Studies 27(4):375–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Plane, D. and P.A. Rogerson. 1991. Tracking the baby boom, the baby bust, and the echo generations: how age composition regulates US migration.Professional Geographer 43(4):416–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Podolak, D. 1995. Interregional migration pattern in Slovakia: efficiency analysis and demographic consequences.Geoforum 26(1):65–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rees, P. and M. Kupiszewski. 1999.Internal Migration and Regional Population Dynamics in Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.Google Scholar
  18. Rees, P.H., J.C.H. Stillwell, A. Convey and M. Kupiszewski. 1996.Population Migration in the European Union. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  19. Rogers, A., R. Raquillet and L. Castro. 1978. Model migration schedules and their applications.Environment and Planning A 10:475–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rogerson, P. 1987. Changes in US national mobility levels.Professional Geographer 39:344–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Stillwell, J., M. Bell, M. Blake, O. Duke-Williams, and P. Rees. 2000. Net migration and migration effectiveness: a comparison between Australia and the United Kingdom, 1976–96. Part I: Total migration patterns.Journal of Population Research 17(1):17–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Stillwell, J.C.H. and P.H. Rees. 1985. Where do British universities get their students from?Working Paper 435, School of Geography. Leeds: University of Leeds.Google Scholar
  23. Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS). 1997. UCAS Annual Report 1996. Cheltenham.Google Scholar
  24. Vipond, J., K. Castle and R. Cardew. 1998. Revival in inner areas.Australian Planner 35 (4):215–222.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Stillwell
    • 3
  • Martin Bell
    • 1
  • Marcus Blake
    • 2
  • Oliver Duke-Williams
    • 3
  • Phil Rees
    • 3
  1. 1.University of QueenslandAustralia
  2. 2.University of AdelaideAustralia
  3. 3.School of GeographyUniversity of LeedsLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations