Living in a dream
The impact of party affiliation of US governors on immigrants’ labor market outcomes
Louis-Philippe Beland & Bulent Unel
Journal of Population Economics, April 2018, Pages 627–670
Abstract:
Do immigrants have better labor market outcomes under Democratic governors? By exploiting variations associated with close elections in a regression discontinuity (RD) design applied on gubernatorial elections in 50 states over the last two decades, we find that immigrants are more likely to be employed, work longer hours and more weeks, and have higher earnings under Democratic governors. Results are robust to a number of different specifications, controls, and samples.
Immigrants’ labor supply response to Food Stamp access
Chloe East
Labour Economics, April 2018, Pages 202-226
Abstract:
Welfare reform in 1996 created a new, large disparity in Food Stamp eligibility between documented non-citizen immigrants and natives. Subsequent policies restored eligibility for most of these immigrants at different times in different states, and I use these changes to estimate the effect of program access on the labor supply of immigrants – a policy-relevant population. The Food Stamp program is one of the largest safety net programs today, and my analysis provides one of the first quasi-experimental estimates of the effects of the modern Food Stamp program on adult labor supply. I find strong evidence of labor supply disincentives, and the magnitude and margin of this response varies across demographic groups. Access to the program reduces the employment rates of single women by about 6%, whereas married men continue to work but reduce their hours of work by 5%. These findings confirm the predictions of traditional labor supply theory regarding the response to a means-tested program.
Spillovers from immigrant diversity in cities
Thomas Kemeny & Abigail Cooke
Journal of Economic Geography, January 2018, Pages 213–245
Abstract:
Theory and evidence suggest that people born in different countries complement each other in the labor market. Immigrant diversity could augment productivity by enabling the combination of different skills, ideas and perspectives, resulting in greater productivity. Using matched employer–employee data for the USA, this paper evaluates this claim, and makes empirical and conceptual contributions to prior work. It addresses the potential bias from unobserved heterogeneity among individuals, work establishments and cities. The paper also identifies diversity impacts at both city and workplace scales, and considers how relationships vary across different segments of the labor market. Findings suggest that urban immigrant diversity produces positive and nontrivial spillovers for U.S. workers. This social return represents a distinct channel through which immigration may generate broad-based economic benefits.
Do Human Capital Decisions Respond to the Returns to Education? Evidence from DACA
Elira Kuka, Na'ama Shenhav & Kevin Shih
NBER Working Paper, February 2018
Abstract:
This paper studies the human capital responses to a large shock in the returns to education for undocumented youth. We obtain variation in the benefits of schooling from the enactment of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy in 2012, which provides work authorization and deferral from deportation for high school educated youth. We implement a difference-in-differences design by comparing DACA eligible to non-eligible individuals over time, and we find that DACA had a significant impact on the investment decisions of undocumented youth. High school graduation rates increased by 15 percent while teenage births declined by 45 percent. Further, we find that college attendance increased by 25 percent among women, suggesting that DACA raised aspirations for education above and beyond qualifying for legal status. We find that the same individuals who acquire more schooling also work more (at the same time), counter to the typical intuition that these behaviors are mutually exclusive, indicating that the program generated a large boost in productivity.
H-1B Visas and Wages in Accounting: Evidence from Deloitte's Payroll
Roger White et al.
Arizona State University Working Paper, January 2018
Abstract:
We use payroll data from a Big 4 accounting firm to examine the starting wage differentials for H-1B visa holders. Prior research in other industries has found both positive and negative differentials, but primarily relies on surveyed salary data. We observe that relative to U.S. citizen new hires – matched on office, position, and time of hire – newly hired accountants with H-1B visas receive starting salaries that are lower by approximately 10%. This suggests that, at least in the payroll data we examine, regulatory mandates thought to prevent H-1B visa holders from being paid less than U.S. citizens in similar roles are ineffective. In further tests, we find evidence that the hiring of H-1B visa holders has no or some small positive effect on the wages of peer U.S. citizen new hires (weakly indicative of complementarities or synergies), but no evidence of H-1B hiring driving down the wages for U.S. citizen peer new hires.
Latino Nativity Variations Link to Street Violence in Drug Markets
Jung Cho
Crime & Delinquency, forthcoming
Abstract:
The Latino paradox is defined as “Latinos do[ing] much better on various social indicators, including violence, than blacks and apparently even whites, given relatively high levels of disadvantage.” We do not know, however, if the Latino paradox is masquerading what is known as criminal social capital. This study defined geographic drug markets with drug sales crime data in Philadelphia. Multilevel negative binomial models showed census block group street violence levels varied significantly across drug markets. Although each additional 100 native-born Latinos was associated with expected street violent crime counts 8% lower, each additional 100 foreign-born Latinos was associated with expected street violent crime counts 28% lower, controlling for nearby street violence and structural predictors.
The labour market consequences of refugee supply shocks
George Borjas & Joan Monras
Economic Policy, July 2017, Pages 361–413
Abstract:
The continuing inflow of hundreds of thousands of refugees into many European countries has ignited much political controversy and raised questions that require a fuller understanding of the determinants and consequences of refugee supply shocks. This paper revisits four historical refugee shocks to document their labour market impact. Specifically, we examine: The influx of Marielitos into Miami in 1980; the influx of French repatriates and Algerian nationals into France at the end of the Algerian Independence War in 1962; the influx of Jewish émigrés into Israel after the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s; and the exodus of refugees from the former Yugoslavia during the long series of Balkan wars between 1991 and 2001. We use a common empirical approach, derived from factor demand theory, and publicly available data to measure the impact of these shocks. Despite the differences in the political forces that motivated the various flows, and in economic conditions across receiving countries, the evidence reveals a common thread that confirms key insights of the canonical model of a competitive labour market: Exogenous supply shocks adversely affect the labour market opportunities of competing natives in the receiving countries, and often have a favorable impact on complementary workers. In short, refugee flows can have large distributional consequences.
Race Relations, Black Elites, and Immigration Politics: Conflict, Commonalities, and Context
Irene Browne, Beth Reingold & Anne Kronberg
Social Forces, forthcoming
Abstract:
This paper investigates the question of whether and how race and race relations affect state legislators’ support for restrictive immigration policy. Focusing on the nine new immigration destinations in the US Southeast, we compare the roll call votes cast by African American and White Democratic state legislators on 196 restrictive immigration measures proposed between 2005 and 2012. Overall, the majority of Black Democratic legislators support restrictive immigration legislation, although at a consistently lower rate than White Democratic legislators. We test hypotheses that Black-White differences in support for restrictive immigration legislation depend upon the material resources at stake and the symbolic significance associated with specific legislation. Using bill topic to measure these conditions, we find that Black and White Democrats equally support immigrant “competition” bills on employment topics. Black Democratic legislators are less likely than their White counterparts to support immigration bills on Black-immigrant “commonalities” topics related to civil rights issues: voter ID regulations, education, police, and omnibus restrictions. Further, for civil rights bills only, district threat indicators such as a rapidly growing district Latino population are much more likely to increase support for restrictive immigration bills among White Democratic legislators than among Black Democratic legislators. Some district characteristics even evoke a commonalities response from African American Democratic legislators, reducing their support for restrictive legislation. Our research thus expands the competition/commonalities debate and highlights the complexities and contingencies of race relations and state policymaking in the twenty-first century.
A Change of Heart? Why Individual-Level Public Opinion Shifted Against Trump’s “Muslim Ban”
Loren Collingwood, Nazita Lajevardi & Kassra Oskooii
Political Behavior, forthcoming
Abstract:
Public opinion research suggests that rapid and significant individual-level fluctuations in opinions toward various policies is fairly unexpected absent methodological artifacts. While this may generally be the case, some political actions can and do face tremendous backlash, potentially impacting public evaluations. Leveraging broadcast and newspaper transcripts as well as a unique two-wave panel study we demonstrate that a non-random, rapid shift in opinions occurred shortly after President Donald Trump signed executive order 13769 into law, which barred individuals from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States for 90 days. The ban set off a fury of protests across U.S. cities and airports, garnering tremendous media attention and discussion. Drawing insights from literature on priming, we claim that an influx of new information portraying the “Muslim Ban” at odds with inclusive elements of American identity prompted some citizens to shift their attitudes. Our study highlights the potential broad political effects of mass movements and protests as it pertains to policies that impact racialized minority groups, and suggests that preferences can shift quickly in response to changing political circumstances.
Phenotypic Preference in Mexican Migrants: Evidence from a Random Household Survey
Rosario Aguilar, Alex Hughes & Micah Gell-Redman
Political Behavior, forthcoming
Abstract:
Does pre-existing preference based on skin tone, facial features, and other observable characteristics, i.e., phenotypic preference, affect immigrant voters’ support for political candidates competing in their countries of origin? Do these preferences change as migrants’ tenure in their host society increases? These questions are important for ethnic and racial politics in general, and particularly for the sizable foreign-born population in the United States, which includes 11 million Mexicans. Using a unique, random sample of foreign-born Mexicans in San Diego County, we employ a voting experiment to test the impact of skin tone and phenotype on vote choice among first generation immigrants. Our design allows us to distinguish responses to different phenotypic cues by exposing respondents to European, mestizo, and indigenous looking candidates competing in a hypothetical Mexican election. Migrants showed higher support for the Indigenous candidate, and evaluated the European and Mestizo candidates as more ideologically conservative. As migrants’ time in the United States increases, the preference for indigenous features gives way to a preference for whiteness, which we interpret as evidence of first generation migrants adopting the dominant racial ideology of the United States. While ethnic distinctions have long been viewed as a key component of voting behavior, our research demonstrates that, even within a single ethnicity, racial differences may have profound impacts on the evaluation of and support for electoral candidates. This study contributes to the research on race and political behavior in comparative perspective, as well as the political consequences of migration.
Segmented Re/integration: Divergent Post-Deportation Trajectories in El Salvador
Katie Dingeman-Cerda
Social Problems, February 2018, Pages 116–134
Abstract:
This study extends segmented assimilation to post-deportation studies. Drawing from life history interviews with 96 deported Salvadoran men, it argues that deportees follow different paths to re/integration upon return. Divergent trajectories are explained by an interaction between the context of return (government policies, social reception, economic structure, and the deportee community), migrant characteristics (demographics, criminal and migratory histories, economic resources, and social ties), and agentic behavior. In El Salvador, national affiliations and perceptions of deportee criminality emerge as the best predictors of post-deportation outcomes. Deportees who grew up in El Salvador and remained connected to it while abroad (Salvadoran Nationals) encountered a relatively more favorable societal reception but faced a precarious economic situation. Conversely, deportees who spent significant time in the U.S. and continued identified with it prior to removal (U.S. Nationals) were highly stigmatized and criminalized upon return. U.S. nationals struggled to find employment and were targeted by police and gangs. Regardless of sociocultural and economic outcomes, both Salvadoran nationals and U.S. nationals longed to return to the U.S., especially if they had children abroad. The study affirms existing research claiming that mass deportation may slow but does not stop the migration cycle in the Americas. It also offers an analytical framework for future comparative post-deportation research.
A randomized controlled design reveals barriers to citizenship for low-income immigrants
Jens Hainmueller et al.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 30 January 2018, Pages 939-944
Abstract:
Citizenship endows legal protections and is associated with economic and social gains for immigrants and their communities. In the United States, however, naturalization rates are relatively low. Yet we lack reliable knowledge as to what constrains immigrants from applying. Drawing on data from a public/private naturalization program in New York, this research provides a randomized controlled study of policy interventions that address these constraints. The study tested two programmatic interventions among low-income immigrants who are eligible for citizenship. The first randomly assigned a voucher that covers the naturalization application fee among immigrants who otherwise would have to pay the full cost of the fee. The second randomly assigned a set of behavioral nudges, similar to outreach efforts used by service providers, among immigrants whose incomes were low enough to qualify them for a federal waiver that eliminates the application fee. Offering the fee voucher increased naturalization application rates by about 41%, suggesting that application fees act as a barrier for low-income immigrants who want to become US citizens. The nudges to encourage the very poor to apply had no discernible effect, indicating the presence of nonfinancial barriers to naturalization.
Migrant Networks and Trade: The Vietnamese Boat People as a Natural Experiment
Christopher Parsons & Pierre-Louis Vézina
Economic Journal, forthcoming
Abstract:
We exploit a unique event in human history, the exodus of the Vietnamese Boat People to the US, to provide evidence for the causal pro-trade effect of migrants. This episode represents an ideal natural experiment as the large immigration shock, the first wave of which comprised refugees exogenously allocated across the US, occurred over a 20-year period during which time the US imposed a complete trade embargo on Vietnam. Following the lifting of trade restrictions in 1994, US exports to Vietnam grew most in US states with larger Vietnamese populations, themselves the result of larger refugee inflows 20 years earlier.
Migration, Knowledge Diffusion and the Comparative Advantage of Nations
Dany Bahar & Hillel Rapoport
Economic Journal, forthcoming
Abstract:
The diffusion of tacit knowledge involves direct human interactions. This implies that the international diffusion of knowledge should follow the pattern of international migration. We test this idea using cross-country productivity spillovers leading to new exports as proxy for knowledge diffusion. We find that a 10% increase in immigration from exporters of a given product is associated with a 2% increase in the likelihood that the host country starts exporting that good ‘from scratch’ in the next decade. The results appear stronger for highly-skilled migrants, qualitatively similar for emigrants and robust to instrumenting for migration in a gravity framework.
The Effects of Immigration on NHS Waiting Times
Osea Giuntella, Catia Nicodemo & Carlos Vargas Silva
Journal of Health Economics, forthcoming
Abstract:
This paper analyzes the effects of immigration on waiting times for the National Health Service (NHS) in England. Linking administrative records from Hospital Episode Statistics (2003-2012) with immigration data drawn from the UK Labour Force Survey, we find that immigration reduced waiting times for outpatient referrals and did not have significant effects on waiting times in accident and emergency departments (A&E) and elective care. The reduction in outpatient waiting times can be explained by the fact that immigration increases natives’ internal mobility and that immigrants tend to be healthier than natives who move to different areas. Finally, we find evidence that immigration increased waiting times for outpatient referrals in more deprived areas outside of London. The increase in average waiting times in more deprived areas is concentrated in the years immediately following the 2004 EU enlargement and disappears in the medium term (e.g., 3 to 4 years).
Reassessing the Breadth of the Protective Benefit of Immigrant Neighborhoods: A Multilevel Analysis of Violence Risk by Race, Ethnicity, and Labor Market Stratification
Min Xie & Eric Baumer
Criminology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Researchers in the United States have increasingly recognized that immigration reduces crime, but it remains unresolved whether this applies to people of different racial–ethnic and economic backgrounds. By using the 2008–2012 area-identified National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), we evaluate the effect of neighborhood immigrant concentration on individual violence risk across race/ethnicity and labor market stratification factors in areas with different histories of immigration. The results of our analysis reveal three key patterns. First, we find a consistent protective role of immigrant concentration that is not weakened by low education, low income, unemployment, or labor market competition. Therefore, even economically disadvantaged people enjoy the crime-reduction benefit of immigration. Second, we find support for threshold models that predict a nonlinear, stronger protective role of immigrant concentration on violence at higher levels of immigrant concentration. The protective function of immigration also is higher in areas of longer histories of immigration. Third, compared with Blacks and Whites, Latinos receive a greater violence-reduction benefit of immigrant concentration possibly because they live in closer proximity with immigrants and share common sociocultural features. Nevertheless, immigrant concentration yields a diminishing return in reducing Latino victimization as immigrants approach a near-majority of neighborhood residents. The implications of these results are discussed.
Marching Toward Assimilation? The 2006 Immigrant Rights Marches and the Attitudes of Mexican Immigrants About Assimilation
Lorena Castro
Social Problems, February 2018, Pages 75–95
Abstract:
Using a quasi-natural experiment in the Latino National Survey (2006), I examine the effect of the 2006 immigrant rights marches on attitudes about assimilation among Mexican immigrants residing in the United States. I test the hypothesis, dominant in the existing literature, that major sociopolitical events raise ethnic consciousness and lead to reactive or retentionist attitudes that privilege maintenance of ethnic culture over “blending in.” Contrary to established findings, I show that the marches did not increase retentionist attitudes nor strengthen ethnic nationalism. Instead, in the period during and after the marches, Mexican immigrants were more likely to hold incorporationist attitudes that place value on both assimilation and ethnic cultural maintenance, as well as assimilationist attitudes which privilege “blending in” to American society. These findings suggest that attitudes were influenced by the incorporationist and assimilationist messages promulgated by protest organizers and the Spanish-language media. The specific discourse used by media and activists can shape both individual attitudes and conceptions of how minority groups relate to wider society, evincing a more expansive approach to American identity.
Barriers to and Methods of Help Seeking for Domestic Violence Victimization: A Comparison of Hispanic and Non-Hispanic White Women Residing in the United States
Ana Bridges et al.
Violence Against Women, forthcoming
Abstract:
This study examined strategies Hispanic and non-Hispanic White victims of domestic violence use to manage violence and leave their relationships. Participants (N = 76, 41% Hispanic) completed self-report questionnaires and a semistructured interview with a language-congruent research assistant. Hispanics reported child care needs and fears of social embarrassment as barriers to leaving, while non-Hispanic Whites reported fewer social supports as a barrier. Hispanics were more likely to use legal resources for help, while non-Hispanic Whites used more informal resources. Recognizing unique barriers to leaving abusive relationships and accessing help can guide service providers and others to target vulnerable populations more effectively.
Cross-Border Marriage Costs and Marriage Behavior: Theory and Evidence
Yoram Weiss, Junjian Yi & Junsen Zhang
International Economic Review, forthcoming
Abstract:
This paper analyzes cross-border marriages between mainland China and Hong Kong (HK). We examine the effects of a reduction in cross-border marriage costs following an increase in marriage-migration quotas and the handover of HK to China. We find that cross-border marriages mainly involve men from the low tail of the HK attribute distribution. We also find that HK women's position in the marriage market and within households deteriorated following the reduction in cross-border marriage costs, and that their disadvantaged position exerts an incentive effect on their labor market behavior. These outcomes are consistent with our matching model.