Migration Economics Summer School : Program content

by Giovanni Peri

The aim of these two classes will be to understand the consequences of immigrants on the labor market of the host country. Immigrants can act as substitute or complement to natives, which may affect labor supply and wages in different ways. In addition, by bringing new or complementary skills to the host labor market, immigrants may influence firm productivity. Overall, immigrants are likely to have large and sizable effects on the structure and the functioning of firms and the labor market more generally in the host country. We will investigate these questions both theoretically and empirically, paying particular attention to the methodological challenges raised by these questions.

Structure

• Basic model of labor market effect of immigrants: Labor markets and skills
• The task approach
• Dynamic responses in the labor markets
• Impact on productivity, entrepreneurship and firms: empirical analysis and results

Selected key references

• Beerli A. et al., 2021, “The Abolition of Immigration Restrictions and the Performance of Firms and Workers: Evidence from Switzerland”, American Economic Review, 111(3), pp 976-1012.
• Cattaneo C., Fiorio C. & Peri G., 2015, “What Happens to the Careers of European Workers When Immigrants Take Their Jobs ?”, Journal of Human Resources, 50(3), pp 655-693.
• Foged M. & Peri G., 2016, “Immigrants’ Effect on Native Workers: New Analysis on Longitudinal Data”, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 8(2), pp 1-34.
• Ottaviano G. & Peri G., 2012, “Rethinking The Effect Of Immigration On Wages”, Journal of the European Economic Association, 10(1), pp 152-197.
• Orefice G. & Peri G., 2020, Immigration and Worker-Firm Matching, NBER Working Paper N°26860.
• Peri G. & Sparber C., 2009, “Task Specialization, Immigration, and Wages”, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(3), pp 135-169.

by Giovanni Peri

The aim of these two classes is to dig deeper into the methods used in estimating the impact of immigration. First, we will analyze the instrumental variable method using a shift-share and we will follow the criticism and the recent evolution of this IV strategy. Then we will introduce methods used to analyze natural quasi-experiment and policies as tools to learn about the impact of immigration

Structure

• The shift-share IV method
• Criticism and evolution of shift-share
• Quasi-experiments

Selected key references

• Clemens M., Lewis E. & Postel H., 2017, Immigration Restrictions as Active Labor Market Policy: Evidence from the Mexican Bracero Exclusion, NBER Working Paper N°23125.
• Giovanni P., Shih K. & Sparber C., 2015, “STEM Workers, H-1B Visas, and Productivity in US Cities”, Journal of Labor Economics, 33(S1), pp 225-255.
• Giovanni P. & Yasenov V., 2019, “The Labor Market Effects of a Refugee Wave: Synthetic Control Method Meets the Mariel Boatlift”, Journal of Human Resources, 54(2), pp 267-309.
• Goldsmith-Pinkham P., Sorkin I. & Swift H., 2020, “Bartik Instruments: What, When, Why, and How”, American Economic Review, 110(8), pp 2586-2624.
• Jaeger D., Ruist J. & Stuhler J., 2017, Shift-Share Instruments and the Impact of Immigration, NBER Working Paper N°24285.

by Clément Imbert

Migration is a key feature of economic development, with workers leaving agriculture in rural areas to work in manufacturing and services in urban areas. As a result, the majority of the world’s migrants come from rural areas of developing countries. While most of them live in cities within the same country, many also live abroad. What are the consequences of rural-urban migration for the migrants themselves? For the cities of destination? For the villages of origin? We will discuss the economic literature on rural migrants from developing countries, whether internal or international, permanent or seasonal migrants, and present experimental and non-experimental evidence.

Selected key references

• Bryan G., Chowdhury S. & Mobarak A. M., 2014, “Underinvestment in a Profitable Technology: The Case of Seasonal Migration in Bangladesh”, Econometrica, 82, pp 1671-1748.
• Bryan G. & Morten M., 2019, “The Aggregate Productivity Effects of Internal Migration: Evidence from Indonesia”, Journal of Political Economy, 127(5), pp 2229-2268.
• Bustos P. et al., 2018, Structural Transformation, Industrial Specialization, and Endogenous Growth, CEPR Discussion Paper N°13379.
• Dinkelman T. & Mariotti M., 2016, “The Long-Run Effects of Labor Migration on Human Capital Formation in Communities of Origin”, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 8(4), pp 1-35.
• Imbert C. & Papp J., 2020, “Costs and benefits of rural-urban migration: Evidence from India”, Journal of Development Economics, 146(C).
• Imbert C. & Papp J., 2020, “Short-term Migration, Rural Public Works, and Urban Labor Markets: Evidence from India”, Journal of the European Economic Association, 18(2), pp 927-963.
• Imbert C. et al., 2023, “Migrants and Firms: Evidence from China”, American Economic Review, 112(6), pp 1885-1914.
• Imbert C. & Ulyssea G., 2023, Rural Migrants and Urban Informality: Evidence from Brazil, CEPR Discussion Paper N°18160.
• Khanna G.et al. 2022, Abundance from Abroad: Migrant Income and Long-Run Economic Development, NBER Discussion Paper N°29862.
• Lagakos D. et al., 2020, “Migration costs and observational returns to migration in the developing world”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 113(C), pp 138-154.
• Lagakos D., Mobarak M. & Waugh M., 2018, The Welfare Effects of Encouraging Rural-Urban Migration, Working Papers 2018-002, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
• Lagakos D., 2020, “Urban-Rural Gaps in the Developing World: Does Internal Migration Offer Opportunities?”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 34(3), pp 174-92.
• Mobarak A. M., Sharif I. & Shrestha M., Returns to International Migration: Evidence from a Bangladesh-Malaysia Visa Lottery, CEPR Discussion Paper N°15990.
• Tian Y., Xia J. & Yang R., 2020, Trade-induced urbanization and the making of modern agriculture, Discussion Papers 2020-16, University of Nottingham.
• Yang D., 2011, “Migrant Remittances”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 25(3), pp 129-152.

by Hillel Rapoport

This course will ask whether and how migration affects the political and cultural evolution of countries. It will present a general framework to think about these issues and then present in depth recent research papers using natural experiments. It will focus on the question of political and cultural selection into migration and on how political and cultural change arise through compositional and cultural transmission channels such as the dissemination of immigrants’ culture or through social remittances. It will rely on theoretical intuition and modelling as well as (and mostly) on empirical analyzes exploiting natural experiments.

Structure

1. Introduction: migration and political and cultural change – a general framework
2. Emigration and political change: exit v. political remittances
3. Migration and cultural change: dissemination v. cultural remittances

Selected key references

• Part 1: Introduction – a general framework
  • Alesina A. & Giulian, P., 2015, “Culture and institutions”, Journal of Economic Literature, 53(4), pp 898-944.
  • Rapoport H., Silve A. & Sardoschau S., 2021, Migration and cultural change, IZA Discussion Paper N°14772.

• Part 2: Emigration and Political Change
  • Barsbai T. et al., 2017, “The effect of labor migration on the diffusion of democracy: evidence from a former Soviet Republic”, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 9(3), pp 36-69.
  • Barsbai T. & Rapoport H., 2020, Exit and Voice: Germany, 1848-1933, mimeo.
  • Docquier F. et al., 2016, “Emigration and Democracy”, Journal of Development Economics, 120, pp 209-223.
  • Karadja M. & Prawitz E., 2019, “Exit, Voice and Political Change: Evidence from Swedish Mass Migration to the United States”, Journal of Political Economy, 127(4), pp 1864-1925.
  • Spilimbergo A., 2009, “Foreign students and democracy”, American Economic Review, 99(1), pp 528-43.

• Part 3: Migration and cultural change
  • Abramitzky R., Boustan L. P. & Eriksson K., 2014, “A nation of immigrants: Assimilation and economic outcomes in the age of mass migration”, Journal of Political Economy, 122(3), pp 467-506.
  • Bazzi S. et al., 2023, The confederate diaspora, NBER Working Paper N°31331.
  • Beck Knudsen A.-S., 2020, Those who stayed: Individualism, self-selection and cultural change during the age of mass migration, Working paper, Lund University.
  • Casari M. et al., 2022, “Civicness drain”, The Economic Journal, 133(649), pp 323-354.
  • Giuliano P. & Tabellini M., 2021, “The seeds of ideology: historical immigration and political preferences in the United States”, Working paper.
  • Jarotschkin A., Miho A. & Zhuravskaya E., 2024, “Diffusion of Gender Norms: Evidence from Stalin’s Ethnic Deportations”, Journal of the European Economic Association, 22(2), pp 475-527.
  • Melki M. et al., 2024, Cultural remittances and modern fertility, NBER Working Paper N°32990.

by Clément Imbert and Giovanni Peri

This part of the course aims at understanding migration responses to climate change. It will discuss various forms of migration responses (internal and international, temporary or permanent) in various contexts (mostly the United States and some developing countries). In terms of methods it will focus on structural (and semi-structural) models to answer questions such as: how does climate change affects the incentives (and costs) of migration? How does climate change affects displacement, relative (e.g., rural-urban) productivity, and the spatial distribution of people and jobs? Are the effects of “fast-onset” (e.g., Hurricanes) v “slow-onset” events alike, and to what extent are they context-dependent? How do climate-change and conflict interact and what migration response does such an interaction generate?

Selected key references

• Beine M. & Parsons C., 2015, “Climatic factors as determinants of international migration”, The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 117(2), pp 723-767.
• Bertoli S. et al., 2022, Weather shocks and migration intentions in Western Africa: Insights from a multilevel analysis”, Journal of Economic Geography, 22(2), pp 289-323.
• Burzynski M. et al., 2022, “Climate change, inequality and human migration”, Journal of the European Economic Association, 20(3), pp 1145-1197.
• Cattaneo C. et al., 2019, “Human migration in the era of climate change”, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 13(2), pp 189-206.
• Cattaneo C. & Peri G., 2016, “The migration response to increasing temperatures”, Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, 122(C), pp 127-146.
• Groeger A. & Zylberberg Y., 2016, “Internal Labor Migration as a Shock Coping Strategy: Evidence from a Typhoon”, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 8(2), pp 123-53.
• Hornbeck R., 2023, “Dust Bowl Migrants: Environmental Refugees and Economic Adaptation”, Journal of Economic History, 83(3), pp 645-675.
• Hornbeck R., 2012, “The Enduring Impact of the American Dust Bowl. Short and Long-run adjustment to an environmental catastrophe”, American Economic Review, 102(4), pp 1477-1507.
• Imbert C. & Ulyssea G., 2023, Rural migrants and urban informality, CEPR Discussion Paper N°18160.
• Leduc S. & Wilson D., 2024, Climate Change and the Geography of the US economy, SF FED Working paper.
• Mahajan P. & Yang, D, 2020, “Taken by storm: hurricanes and migrant networks”, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 12(2), pp 250-277.
• Peri G. et al., 2020, The Economic Impact of Migrants from Hurricane Maria, IZA Discussion Papers N°13049.