Estimating global migration flow tables using place of birth data.

A few months ago, Demographic Research published my paper on estimating global migration flow tables. In the paper I developed a method to estimate international migrant flows, for which there is limited comparable data, to matches changes in migrant stock data, which are more widely available. The result was bilateral tables of estimated international migrant transitions between 191 countries for four decades, which I believe are a first of kind. The estimates in an excel spreadsheet are available as a additional file on the journal website. The abstract and citation details are below.

The paper uses the ffs_demo() function in the migest package.

Publication Details:

Abel, G. J. (2013). Estimating global migration flow tables using place of birth data. Demographic Research, 28, 505–546. doi:10.4054/DemRes.2013.28.18

International migration flow data often lack adequate measurements of volume, direction and completeness. These pitfalls limit empirical comparative studies of migration and cross national population projections to use net migration measures or inadequate data. This paper aims to address these issues at a global level, presenting estimates of bilateral flow tables between 191 countries. A methodology to estimate flow tables of migration transitions for the globe is illustrated in two parts. First, a methodology to derive flows from sequential stock tables is developed. Second, the methodology is applied to recently released World Bank migration stock tables between 1960 and 2000 (Özden et al. 2011) to estimate a set of four decadal global migration flow tables. The results of the applied methodology are discussed with reference to comparable estimates of global net migration flows of the United Nations and models for international migration flows. The proposed methodology adds to the limited existing literature on linking migration flows to stocks. The estimated flow tables represent a first-of-a-kind set of comparable global origin destination flow data.

Does specification matter? Experiments with simple multiregional probabilistic population projections.

A paper that I am a co-author on, looking at uncertainty in population forecasting generated by different measures of migration, came out this week in Environment and Planning A. Basically, try and avoid using net migration measures. Not only do they tend to give some dodgy projections, we also found out that they give you more uncertainty. Using in and out measures of migration in a projection model give a big reduction in uncertainty over a net measure. They also are a fairly good approximation to the uncertainty from a full multiregional projection model. Plots in the paper were done by my good-self using the fanplot package.

Publication Details:

Raymer J., Abel, G.J. and Rogers, A. (2012). Does Speci cation Matter? Experiments with Simple Multiregional Probabilistic Population Projections. Environment and Planning A 44 (11), 2664–2686.

Population projection models that introduce uncertainty are a growing subset of projection models in general. In this paper we focus on the importance of decisions made with regard to the model specifications adopted. We compare the forecasts and prediction intervals associated with four simple regional population projection models: an overall growth rate model, a component model with net migration, a component model with in-migration and out-migration rates, and a multiregional model with destination-specific out-migration rates. Vector autoregressive models are used to forecast future rates of growth, birth, death, net migration, in-migration and out-migration, and destination-specific out-migration for the North, Midlands, and South regions in England. They are also used to forecast different international migration measures. The base data represent a time series of annual data provided by the Office for National Statistics from 1976 to 2008. The results illustrate how both the forecasted subpopulation totals and the corresponding prediction intervals differ for the multiregional model in comparison to other simpler models, as well as for different assumptions about international migration. The paper ends with a discussion of our results and possible directions for future research.