Mapping the Capital’s Migration

Conclusion

In this post, I’ve shown that DC’s nationwide migration ties vary widely across different states and regions. It prominently gains from the upper plains and mountains, and loses to various states around the nation. Within DC, extrametro migrants tend to settle in the urban core, while intrametro migrants move out to the suburbs and exurbs. This reflects both a life cycle process involving education and family, but also reveals some preferred amenities. There is little evidence of any general preference for density in metro area migration. International migrants generally tend to move to the urban centers or inner suburbs. This may reflect existing information networks, preference for urban living, or lack of familiarity with the area. The result is that foreign-born populations are highly concentrated in inner suburbs, such that some of these suburban counties are over a third foreign-born. But, within the foreign-born population, there is significant variation in origins and preferences. The foreign-born population in DC proper is more European, while the foreign-born population in the suburbs is more Asian and Latin American. Exactly what drives these differences is not clear, but they are large.

Throughout this series, I have offered an account of migration in the DC metro area, explaining the broad trends, specific migration patterns for different groups of people and demographics, and offering maps and visualizations. The result is fairly clear. While the DC metro area is experience real growth fueled by migration, that migration is highly selective and transient. DC loses families and older residents especially, struggling to hold on to these long-term residents who are especially likely to built neighborhood and community social capital. Instead, the DC metro area attracts young professionals and students, especially to the urban core. When they’re a bit older, they move to the suburbs, and establish some roots there. However, many move away from the metro area entirely, and even if they do raise a family, their children are very likely to have their sights set on going somewhere else.

These trends imply that the DC metro area may provide amenities that serve mobile, low-family-commitment individuals very well. For those without large families and who are comfortable moving frequently and not putting down deep roots, the DC metro area will work well. In other words, high-performing, long-hour professionals are likely to thrive. But on the other hand, the metro area does not appear to provide the right benefits to attract and retain families and older people. The reality is that families and older people aren’t sticking around. Maybe the amenities aren’t good, or maybe the prices are too high, but these groups are in fact valuable for promoting the formation of social capital in a locality. Family ties, and especially multi-generational family ties, encourage people to make social (and financial) investments in their communities and their neighbors that they might not otherwise make. Parents with kids care about the local schools and parks more than 20-somethings. By alienating these essential social builders, the DC metro area makes for itself a situation of ongoing social disconnection, high and persistent inequality, contentious gentrification debates, and perpetual transiency.

See my next post, on migration and the life cycle.

See part 1 of this series, offering a brief overview of migration in DC.

See part 2 of this series, getting into the demographic details of migration in DC.

Start my series on migration from the beginning.

If you like this post and want to see more research like it, I’d love for you to share it on Twitter or Facebook. Or, just as valuable for me, you can click the recommend button at the bottom of the page. Thanks!

Follow me on Twitter to keep up with what I’m writing and reading. Follow my Medium Collection at In a State of Migration if you want updates when I write new posts. And if you’re writing about migration too, feel free to submit a post to the collection!

I’m a graduate of the George Washington University’s Elliott School with an MA in International Trade and Investment Policy, and an economist at USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service. I like to learn about migration, the cotton industry, airplanes, trade policy, space, Africa, and faith.

My posts are not endorsed by and do not in any way represent the opinions of the United States government or any branch, department, agency, or division of it. My writing represents exclusively my own opinions. I did not receive any financial support or remuneration from any party for this research. More’s the pity.

Cover photo source.