Immigrant suicide in Australia,Canada, England and Wales,and the United States

Factors influencing the suicide rates of numerous immigrants in groups in Australia, Canada, England and Wales, and the United States during the period 1959–73 were examined. Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated for the origin, immigrant and destination native-born populations using the Canadian native-born age-sex-specific suicide rates as the standard. For males, the foreign-born in England and Wales had the lowest suicide rates and the foreign-born in the United States the highest. For females the variation was smaller, with immigrants in the United States having the lowest rates, and those in Australia the highest. Agespecific suicide rates indicated that relative to the native-born, foreign-born elderly had substantially elevated risks of suicide.     

Measuring immigrant wage growth using matched CPS files

Cross-sectional estimates of immigrant wage growth have painted an optimistic picture of the ability of immigrants to adapt to the U.S. labor market: Studies using cross-sectional data have generally found the wage growth of immigrants to exceed that of the native born. This optimistic picture of immigrant economic assimilation was challenged by the important finding that compared to earlier immigrant cohorts, recent immigrants started at much lower wages. As such, the high wage growth of immigrants relative to the native born measured in cross-sectional data may simply be the spurious result of declining immigrant earnings ability. In this paper, we match Current Population Survey samples so that the wages of individual immigrant and native-born men can be followed for one year. We find that the wage growth of immigrants does exceed that of the native born. The general finding of faster immigrant wage growth also holds when imposing the foreign-born geographic distribution upon natives, but not when imposing the native-born geographic distribution on the foreign born—a result consistent with some theories of immigrant assimilation. In each comparison, however, the actual wage growth of immigrants relative to natives is similar to the predictions of cross-sectional regressions. This similarity suggests that either there is no cohort quality bias in the cross-sectional estimates of immigrant wage growth, or that there has been a coincidental increase in immigrant wage growth as the entry wages of immigrants have fallen.     

Imputation Match Bias in Immigrant Wage Convergence

Although immigrants to the United States earn less at entry than their native-born counterparts, an extensive literature has found that immigrants have faster earnings growth that results in rapid convergence to native-born earnings. However, recent evidence based on U.S. Census data indicates a slowdown in the rate of earnings assimilation. We find that the pace of immigrant wage convergence based on recent data may be understated in the literature as a result of the method used by the census to impute missing information on earnings, which does not use immigration status as a match characteristic. Because both the share of immigrants in the workforce and earnings imputation rates have risen over time, imputation match bias for recent immigrants is more consequential than in earlier periods and may lead to an underestimate of the rate of immigrant wage convergence.     

The Place of Place: Location and Immigrant Economic Well-being in Canada

In recent years, successive cohorts of immigrants to Canada have experienced a striking level of deterioration in their economic well-being. At the same time, more immigrants than ever before are choosing to live in Montréal, Toronto, or Vancouver, Canada’s three-first-tier or ‘gateway cities’. This paper uses instrumental variable regression techniques to determine the extent to which gateway city clustering is related to immigrant economic well-being. It identifies whether employment status, earnings, and employment suitability would significantly improve if more immigrants chose to live outside of Canada’s three gateway cities. The results suggest that, for the most part, although immigrants do worse than the native-born in gateway cities, they do experience marginally higher earnings than their non-gateway counterparts. Income and unemployment rates are higher for immigrants in gateway cities than they are for the native-born, but the gateway/non-gateway disparity is minimal. Levels of employment mismatch are substantially higher in gateway cities, compared to both the gateway city native-born population, and non-gateway immigrants. An analysis of the data shows that only marginal improvements to economic well-being would result from an increase in non-gateway immigration, and that there are other factors, like race or skin colour, that seem to be more closely linked to labour market success.

The substitutability of labor between immigrants and natives in the Canadian labor market: circa 1995

This paper examines the substitutability or complementarity between Canadian-born and immigrant workers. These are examined by estimating a set of wage equations using a generalized Leontief production function. The paper finds that, in general, there is no displacement of Canadian-born workers by immigrants. Recent immigrants affect the native-born positively, while older immigrants are neither substitute nor complement for natives. However, the effects differ across industries. Overall, the evidence that immigrants harm the opportunities of native-born workers is scant.

Immigrant and native responses to welfare reform

We investigate the effect of welfare reform in the US on the employment and hours of work of low-educated foreign-born and native-born women. For foreign-born women, we investigate whether the effect of welfare reform differed by year of immigration. We also examine whether the immigrant provisions of welfare reform had a chilling effect on those who remained eligible for benefits. Results suggest that welfare reform induced low-educated women to increase their labor market attachment; reform had larger effects on the least educated native-born women and among foreign-born, larger effects on more recent arrivals. The chilling hypothesis is not supported.All correspondence to Robert Kaestner. The authors thank Lynn Karoly, Christoph Schmidt, seminar participants at the University of Illinois and New School University, and several anonymous referees for comments on a previous draft of this paper. Robert Kaestner is grateful to the Luce Foundation for partial support for this research. Responsible editor: Christoph M. Schmidt.     

The educational enrollment of immigrant youth: a test of the segmented-assimilation hypothesis

An analysis of 1990 census data on the educational enrollment of 15- to 17-year-old immigrants to the United States provides partial support for predictions from both the segmented-assimilation hypothesis and the immigrant optimism hypothesis. Most immigrant adolescents, especially from Asia, are as likely as their native-born peers to be enrolled in high school, or more so. The "at-risk" immigrant youths with above-average levels of nonenrollment that are not reduced with longer exposure to American society are primarily of Hispanic Caribbean origins (from Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, and Cuba). Recent Mexican immigrants who arrived as teenagers have nonenrollment rates over 40%, but Mexican youths who arrived at younger ages are only somewhat less likely to be enrolled in school than are native-born Americans.     

Immigrants and the Spread of Tuberculosis in the United States: A Hidden Cost of Immigration

This panel-data study concerns the incidence of newly diagnosed tuberculosis (TB) in specific U.S. metropolitan areas among immigrants and, in turn, the possible transmission of the disease to the native-born population of these same metropolitan areas. The study includes 50 U.S. Metropolitan Statistical Areas as annual observations, 1993–2007. We find that a 10% increase in the number of high-incidence immigrants results in a 2.87% increase in TB among the foreign-born population, and that a 10% increase in the number of foreign-born TB cases increases the number of new TB cases among the native-born by 1.11%. The study concludes with a benefit/cost analysis of the societal cost of TB and suggests that testing all immigrants for TB would be a cost-effective method to limit the amount of TB that enters U.S. from abroad, thus limiting the transmission to both the foreign- and native-born populations.     

The impact of immigration on the internal migration of natives and immigrants

In this paper we examine the internal migratory response, by native-born non-Hispanic white men and foreign-born men in the United States, to recent immigration. Our analysis does not support the claim that natives have made a migratory response to recent immigration. Native-born men and foreign-born men were less likely to leave states that received large numbers of immigrants in the 1980s than they were to leave other states, and native-born men had less propensity toward out-migration than did foreign-born men. Out-migration was most likely to be deterred if recent immigrants originated in Europe or Asia. Although native-born non-Hispanic white men showed a tendency toward out-migration if recent immigrants originated in Latin America or the Caribbean, this result was insignificant after we controlled for state economic and regional context.     

Disability Among Native-born and Foreign-born Blacks in the United States

Using the 5% Public Use Micro Data Sample (PUMS) from the 2000 U.S. census, we examine differences in disability among eight black subgroups distinguished by place of birth and Hispanic ethnicity. We found that all foreign-born subgroups reported lower levels of physical activity limitations and personal care limitations than native-born blacks. Immigrants from Africa reported lowest levels of disability, followed by non-Hispanic immigrants from the Caribbean. Sociodemographic characteristics and timing of immigration explained the differences between these two groups. The foreign-born health advantage was most evident among the least-educated except among immigrants from Europe/Canada, who also reported the highest levels of disability among the foreign-born. Hispanic identification was associated with poorer health among both native-born and foreign-born blacks.     

Immigrant School Segregation in Sweden

Recent research has shown that there is a substantial skill difference in Sweden between natives and second-generation immigrants. The objective of this study is to find out whether there exists a relationship between immigrant school segregation and the individual’s human capital. The variation in immigrant concentration rate between cohorts within a school generally does not affect the individual’s human capital outcome. However when estimating specific peer influences between different immigrant groups (first-generation immigrants, second-generation immigrants with two foreign-born parent and second-generation immigrants with one foreign-born parent) the study shows three major findings. First, for men (both natives and second-generation immigrants) there is a general negative effect of having a large share of first-generation immigrant schoolmates. Second, for both men and women a large share of schoolmates with a completely foreign background (non-native parents) has a negative influence on the Swedish grades of second-generation immigrants with two foreign-born parents. Third, for men there seem to exist specific and positive peer influences within the groups of second-generation immigrants with either one or two foreign-born parents.     

Labor market effects of immigration in the United States and Europe: substitution vs. complementarity

This paper examines the impact of immigrants on the income of various groups of resident workers in the United States and Europe. Our approach features the use of a production technology incorporating education, experience, and unskilled labor as inputs. This contrasts with the assumption used in earlier studies that native-born and immigrant labor are distinct inputs into production. We find that in both United States and European production, education, unskilled labor and experience are complementary inputs. Based on these results, simulations of the impact of immigration on residents are carried out. The absolute magnitude of these effects is found to be very small.This paper was presented at the Centre for Economic Policy Research Workshop, The Economics of International Migration: Econometric Evidence, February 26 and 27, 1993, Konstanz, Germany. We benefitted from the discussion at the conference and, particularly, the comments of Anton Muscatelli. We thank three referees and the managing editor of this journal for their suggestions. We also thank Selig Sechzer for his significant contributions to the empirical analysis in this paper. Ira Gang's work was partially supported by the Rutgers University Research Council.     

A comparison of the environmental attitudes, concern, and behaviors of native-born and foreign-born U.S. Residents

This research offers an examination of environmental attitudes, concern, and behaviors among individuals presently living within the context producing contemporary American environmental awareness, but who originated from contexts socially, environmentally, and economically distinct. More specifically, data from the 1993 environmental module of the General Social Survey are used to examine variations in environmental awareness across native-and foreign-born individuals. Results suggest that immigrants living in the U.S. do, indeed, express similarattitudes toward environmental issues as compared to native-born residents. However, shorter-term immigrants (those residing abroad at age 16) in particular express significantly higher levels ofconcern with regard to environmental problems as compared to native-born residents. In addition, shorter-term immigrants are more likely to engage in “environmentally friendly” behaviors as compared to native-born residents, although they appear less likely to have signed an environmentally oriented petition.     

An alternative approach to immigration policy: Rationing by skill

Current U.S. immigration policy places a heavy emphasis on kinship ties with a U.S. citizen or resident alien in rationing immigration visas. An alternative policy is to focus on the skills of visa applicants. Immigrants with higher levels of schooling and with skills that are more readily transferable to the U.S. labor market are more productive, as measured by their earnings. A larger proportion of skilled workers in a cohort of immigrants tends to narrow the differences in earnings among skill groups in the native-born population. This reduces income inequality and reduces the use of income transfers by the low-skilled native-born population. More highly-skilled immigrants also make less use of income-contingent transfers. A point-system would be necessary to combine the multidimensional aspects of skill. The adoption of skill-based rationing with a point system in Canada led to an increase in the skill level of the immigrants.     

Insights from longitudinal data on the earnings growth of U.S. foreign-born men

Does the growth in earnings of foreign-born men exceed that of U.S. natives? We use longitudinal data on earnings from a Social Security Administration (SSA) database matched to the 1994 March Current Population Survey to shed new light on this important issue. We also examine the trend over time in the foreign-born men's earnings growth and illuminate the various ways that SSA data can be used to explore the earnings patterns of immigrants.     

The residential segregation of mixed-nativity married couples

This article examines the ways in which mixed-nativity marriage is related to spatial assimilation in metropolitan areas of the United States. Specifically, we examine the residential patterns of households with a mixed-nativity—and, in some cases, interracial—marriage to determine whether they are less segregated from the native-born than entirely foreign-born households. Using restricted-use data from the 2000 census, we find that compared with couples in which both spouses are foreign-born, mixed-nativity couples tend to be less segregated from various native-born racial and ethnic groups. Further, among both foreign-born Asians and Hispanics, those with a native-born non-Hispanic white spouse are considerably less segregated from native-born white households than from other foreign-born Asian and Hispanic households. We also find that even though nativity status matters for black couples in a manner consistent with assimilation theory, foreign-born and mixed-nativity black households still each display very high levels of segregation from all other native-born racial/ethnic groups, reaffirming the power of race in determining residential patterns. Overall, our findings provide moderate support for spatial assimilation theory and suggest that cross-nativity marriages often facilitate the residential integration of the foreign-born.     

Unhealthy assimilation: Why do immigrants converge to American health status levels?

It is well documented that immigrants are in better health upon arrival in the United States than their American counterparts but that this health advantage erodes over time. We study the potential determinants of this "healthy immigrant effect, " with a particular focus on the tendency of immigrants to converge to unhealthy American BMI levels. Using data from the National Health Interview Survey, we find that average female and male immigrants enter the United States with BMIs that are approximately two and five percentage points lower than native-born women and men, respectively. Consistent with the declining health status of immigrants the longer they remain in the United States, we also find that female immigrants almost completely converge to American BMIs within 10 years of arrival, and men close a third of the gap within 15 years.     

Migration, health, and environment in the desert southwest

The “immigrant health paradox” has captured the attention of researchers struggling to understand why immigrants to the United States appear to have health advantages that would not be predicted by their socioeconomic position. This research extends prior analyses through examination of the potential role of environmental factors in explaining the immigrant health paradox. We use data from the Phoenix Area Social Survey, a survey conducted in 2006 of approximately 800 individuals. Multilevel ordered logistic models examine three health outcomes: self-rated health, heat stress, and asthmatic symptoms. An innovation is our multiple considerations of contextual factors, including neighborhood amenities, disorder, traffic counts, and the heat index. We have three key findings: (1) frequent local migration has negative impacts on health, (2) the local neighborhood environment partially mediates differences between US-born non-Hispanic Whites and foreign-born Hispanics, and (3) subjective measures of the local environment tend to have greater effects than objective measures. In sum, our analyses suggested a need for studies of place and health to consider migration and residential history as a factor shaping health outcomes. Further, regarding the immigrant paradox, the results suggest the need to move beyond a dichotomous measure of immigration contrasting international migrants with native-born residents.     

Immigrants’ economic performance across Europe – does immigration policy matter?

Drawing on panel data from the European Community Household Panel (ECHP), the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS) and the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP), we compare the economic performance of immigrants to Great Britain, West Germany, Denmark, Luxembourg, Ireland, Italy, Spain and Austria to that of the respective indigenous population. The unit of analysis is the individual in the household context. This allows us to define immigrants state of integration into the host society at the family level taking into account issues such as immigrant/native intermarriage. Economic performance is measured in terms of the country-specific pre-government income position and change in the relative income position due to redistribution processes within the respective tax and social security systems. Our work is based on the premise that countries may be categorized – similarly to existing categorizations based on the type of welfare regime – according to the nature of their immigration policy. From an economic point of view, a successful and integrative immigration policy should result – at least when controlling for background characteristics such as education – in a non-significant differential between the economic performance of immigrants and that of the indigenous population. At first glance, our results indicate that this ideal is not attained in all of the countries analysed, particularly not in Germany and Denmark, where the economic performance of immigrants is much lower than that of the indigenous population. However, results from GLS random-effects models show that immigrants to these countries improve their economic situation rapidly with increasing duration of stay in the host country. This implies that these countries also do fairly well in fostering in the economic integration of immigrants. Our empirical results further reveal that the substantial cross-country differences in the immigrant/native-born performance differential persist even when controlling in detail for socioeconomic characteristics of the household and for indicators of the state of the immigrants integration, such as years since migration and immigrant/native intermarriage. This suggests that not only the conditions of entry to a country impact on immigrants economic performance, but also country-specific institutional aspects such as restrictions on access to the labour market and parts of the social security system that are related to citizenship or immigrant status. There still is a great deal of heterogeneity across EU member states in this respect. This should be taken into account when working towards the harmonization of national EU immigration policies.This paper benefited substantially from discussions at the EEA 2003 Conference in Stockholm, Sweden, and the EPUNet 2003 Conference in Colchester, UK. We also acknowledge very helpful comments resulting from the reviewing process     

Immigration,crime, and incarceration in early twentieth-century america

The major government commissions on immigration and crime in the early twentieth century relied on evidence that suffered from aggregation bias and the absence of accurate population data, which led them to present partial and sometimes misleading views of the immigrant-native criminality comparison. With improved data and methods, we find that in 1904, prison commitment rates for more serious crimes were quite similar by nativity for all ages except ages 18 and 19, for which the commitment rate for immigrants was higher than for the native-born. By 1930, immigrants were less likely than natives to be committed to prisons at all ages 20 and older, but this advantage disappears when one looks at commitments for violent offenses. The time series pattern reflects a growing gap between natives and immigrants at older ages, one that was driven by sharp increases in the commitment rates of the native-born, while commitment rates for the foreign-born were remarkably stable.