and emigration) can be analyzed at a variety of scales. International migration patterns are those between countries, such as between Mexico and the United States. But we also discuss national migration patterns, such as from the Northeastern United States to the Southwest. We can also examine local migration patterns, such as from rural areas to cities, known as rural-to-urban migration, and other moves within states or even within counties or cities.
Figure 3.1.US Immigrants, 1910 and 2016. Human migration is an ongoing phenomenon. Immigrants to Ellis Island c.a. 1910 and a naturalization ceremony in Portland, Oregon, in 2016. Photo by Bain, George Grantham. Immigrants, Ellis Island. ca. 1910. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, DC. 20540 USA. Photo by Diego G. Diaz, Royalty-free stock photo ID: 483311986. Shutterstock.
Spatial distributions
Migrant stock and flow
Before we discuss why people migrate, it is useful to look at the spatial distribution of migrants. This distribution can be viewed in terms of stock and flows. Migrant stock is the number of people who reside in a place where they were not born. When viewed as a percentage, it can show the proportion of the population that is not native to a place. While measures of migrant stock reflect the number of newcomers to a place, they do not tell when the people migrated there. Thus, migrant stock includes recent arrivals as well as migrants who may have arrived decades ago as children.
Migrant flows refer to migration within a certain timeframe. A count of the number of people moving into and out of a place within the past year represents a migration flow. Flows can be viewed in different time frames, so one geographer may be interested in how migration flows during the past fifty years have impacted growth of US Sun Belt cities, while another geographer may be interested in how flows during the last month affect support for nativist political parties in Europe.
At a global scale, 71 percent of immigrants live in high-income countries, while the vast majority of emigrants (65 percent) come from middle-income countries. As seen in figure 3.2, there are higher concentrations of immigrants as a percentage of population in high-income places such as North America, much of Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. In the United States, 14.5 percent of the population was born abroad, substantially fewer than in Canada with 21.8 percent and Australia with 28.2 percent (figure 3.3). A cluster of countries with high immigrant stocks can also be seen in the Middle East, where over 70 percent of residents of the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Kuwait are foreign born.
Less-developed countries tend to have many fewer immigrants. The so-called global south, consisting largely of Latin America, Africa, and much of Asia, stands out in figure 3.2 as having low proportions of immigrants. Among the countries with the lowest percentage of immigrants are China, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Cuba, all of which have a foreign-born population of only 0.1 percent.
Figure 3.2.Migrant stock as a percentage of population. 2015. High-income countries tend to have a larger migrant stock than lower-income countries. Explore this map at http://arcg.is/2dDt4bf. Data source: United Nations.
Figure 3.3.Chinatown in Melbourne, Australia. The foreign-born population of Australia is double the proportion of that of the United States. Photo by ChameleonsEye. Stock photo ID: 188715929. Shutterstock.
In 2015 raw numbers, the largest diasporas, or people who have left their homelands, were from India, Mexico, Russia, and China. All four of these countries had at least ten million emigrants living in other countries, many of which have formed ethnic enclaves (more in chapter 4) in cities around the world.
Figure 3.4 illustrates international migrant flows by showing net migration per 1,000 people between 2010 and 2015. Larger negative numbers mean that more people left a country than arrived during this five-year period. Larger positive numbers mean that more people arrived than left. The Middle East shows the greatest movement of people during this time. The war-torn states of Syria and Libya show the largest proportional outflow of migrants, while the greatest proportional inflow of migrants was to Oman, Lebanon, Qatar, and Kuwait.
Figure 3.4.Net migration 2010−2015 per 1,000 people. The Middle East has seen massive migration flows during this time. Explore this map at http://arcg.is/2dDt4bf. Data source: United Nations.
While immigration is an ongoing topic of political discussion in the United States, net migration between 2010 and 2015 was 3.2 per 1,000, substantially less than in some other rich democracies. For instance, US net immigration was less than half that of Canada (6.7) and nearly one-third that of Australia (8.9) and Norway (9.3).
Migration stock and flow in the United States
Even though the United States has a smaller migrant stock and lower migration flows than some other countries, immigrants have still played an important role in shaping American society. Early American history consisted primarily of immigration from Europe (figure 3.5). The nineteenth century was dominated by immigration from the United Kingdom, Ireland, and Germany, while the early twentieth century saw many Italians, Russians, and Austria-Hungarians. After World War II, immigration from the Americas picked up, specifically from Mexico, which by the 1960s outpaced European immigration. Asian immigration also picked up around the 1960s.
Annual trends since 1980 show how immigration from Latin America dominated the late twentieth century and early twenty-first century (figure 3.6). A huge spike in immigration from Latin America occurred in the late 1980s, in large part due to military conflict in Central America. While Latin American immigration outpaced Asian immigration for most of the time-period, by around 2011, new Asian immigrants began to outnumber new immigrants from Latin America, especially from countries such as China, India, and the Philippines.
International immigrants made up 14 percent of the US population in 2015, and immigrants and their children have been the main driver of population growth since the 1960s (figure 3.7). Without immigrants and their descendants, it is estimated that the US population in 2015 would have been 252 million as compared to the actual number of 324 million. By 2065, immigrants and their children will make up 36 percent of the US population. This change will have significant impacts on the human geography of the United States in terms of culture, politics, and economics.
Figure 3.5.US Immigration by region and decade, 1820–2009. Immigration was dominated first by Europeans and later by Latin Americans and Asians. Data source: US Department of Homeland Security.
Figure 3.6.Immigration levels by year, 1980–2012. Around 2011, Asian immigrants began to outnumber Latino immigrants. Data source: United Nations.
At the state level within the United States, migration stock and flows can be observed in terms of international migration and of intrastate migration.
As the United States becomes increasingly influenced by immigrants and their descendants, the country will look more like the states of California, New York, Texas, and Florida. These are the states with the largest international migrant population counts, all with over 3.5 million international
