Violence and
International Emigration in Mexico
Liliana Meza González, Ph.D.
Michael Feil (Colonel retired)
Content of the paper
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction
Insecurity and migration trends
Literature review
Theoretical framework
Empirical analysis
Concluding remarks
Introduction
• The main reason behind Mexico-US migration is either
employment, the search of a job or family reunification.
• People fleeing Mexico for security reasons can be a new
phenomenon that is taking place while total flows are decreasing,
which seems paradoxical.
• Environments of insecurity (EOI) have been behind large flows of
people moving to safer places.
• Migration from Mexico to the US explained by security reasons can
be changing the profile of migrants in some destinations.
• This paper shows a small correlation between violence and
emigration to the US using data from Mexican northern border
municipalities.
• The analysis at a household level shows a negative correlation
between violence and international emigration.
Migration trends
Source: CONAPO estimates based on CONAPO, INM, SRE, STPS, and COLEF, Encuesta sobre Migración en la Frontera
Norte de México (EMIF NORTE), 2002 - 2010.
Internal and international migration explained
by public insecurity
Insecurity trends
Source: NationMaster crime rates. www.nationmaster.com
Homicides per 100,000 inhabitants
Source: Mexican Federal Government, INEGI.
Drug related murders by state, 2011
Literature review
 According to Pérez (2003), widespread insecurity and the public demand
for quick solutions often justify military style responses to violence in
ways that undermine the rule of law and promote further criminal
behavior.
 The consequences of crime have come to influence the economic
development of countries in Latin America (Ayres, 1998).
 Violence not only engulfs poor population but also affects the wealthy and
powerful, many of whom contract private security or barricade
themselves in gated communities (Caldeira, 2000).
 Violence could be considered the central and defining problem in
contemporary Latin America, and for many people in the region leaving
their country and migrating to the US has become one means of escape.
Literature review
• Morrison (1993) established a threshold effect of violence such that low levels
of violence had no effect on internal migration in Guatemala, but violence
reaching a certain threshold level lead people to migrate.
• Bohra-Mishra and Massey (2011) find that violence has a non-linear effect on
migration because low to moderate levels of violence reduce the odds of
movement, while at high levels of violence, the odds of movement increase.
• Elías Alvarado and Massey (2010) study the relationship between violence and
international migration in 4 Latinamerican countries. They state that rising
violence has reduced the likelihood of emigration from Mexico, Costa Rica and
Guatemala. They say that only in Nicaragua, lethal violence seems positively
correlated with out-migration.
• Shellman and Stewart (2007) predict forced international migration from Haiti
by predicting civil violence, poor economic conditions and foreign
interventions.
• Stanley (1987) uses time-series analysis to conclude that political violence was
an important motivation of Salvadorans who migrated to the US since the
beggining of 1979. He drops controls for economic factors, which may
exaggerate the effect of insecurity on international emigration.
Theeoretical framework
• Migration decisions from developing countries are typically made by families, not
individuals, and families migrate not only to maximize earnings but also to
minimize risks (Stark, 1985).
• Economic conditions in developing countries are volatile, and families face serious
risks to their well-being from many sources –natural disasters, political upheavals
or economic recessions among others (Massey, 1994).
• The literature on forced migration generally distinguishes between three kinds of
determinants of movements: root causes, proximate conditions and intervening
factors (Bohra-Mishra and Massey, 2011).
– Root causes.- Poverty, along with unemployment and low wages, yields economic
hardships that prompt people to look elsewhere for material sustenance or advancement.
– Proximate conditions.- The proximate cause of migration of central interest here is the
intensity of violence in municipality i
– Intervening factors.- The most important intervening factor influencing the migration decision
are the social ties that migrants constitute with other migrants from their families or a close
circle of friends.
Empirical analysis. National data
Table 3
National
Sociodemographic characteristics of municipalities, by migration intensity
Migration Intensity*/
Very
high
Homicide rate (per 10,000 inhabitants)
high
medium
low
very low
null
1.98
3.36
4.00
5.20
2.27
0.33
Gini coefficient (income) 2005
0.423
0.416
0.414
0.419
0.411
0.359
Marginality Index
0.163
0.095
0.003
-0.187
0.089
0.799
Source: Own calculations based on INEGI data.
Empirical analysis. National data
Table 5
Migration variables and homicide rates at a national level
Percentage of dwellings receiving
remittances
Percentage of dwellings with emigrants to
the US
Percentage of dwellings with circular
migrants
Percentage of dwellings with return
migrants
High
Homicide rate*/
Medium
Low
average
8.12
9.37
6.11
standard dev
6.77
7.63
7.19
average
2.75
4.26
3.89
standard dev
2.28
4.48
4.22
average
1.05
1.42
1.19
standard dev
1.01
1.22
1.24
average
3.86
4.51
3.33
standard dev
2.69
2.91
3.07
*/ Homicide rates below 5 are considered low; between 5 and 10, medium and above 10, high.
Source: Own calculations based on INEGI and CONAPO data.
Estimations
Empirical analysis- National data
Table 6
Estimation 1: Municipal level model with National data
Dependent variable: Percentage of dwellings receiving remmittances
Independent variables
Model 1
Model 2
Model 3
Intercept
6.300**
(39.951)
1.531**
(11.089)
2.883**
(6.684)
Rate of deaths related to organized crime 1/
0.067**
(3.274)
0.034**
(2.456)
0.033**
(2.421)
Rate of deaths related to OC squared
0.000**
(-2.355)
0.000
(-0.928)
0.000
(-1.154)
Social network in the US 2/
---
0.804**
(54.239)
0.735**
(48.675)
Percentage of population earning up to 2 min wage
---
---
0.082**
(13.405)
--0.005
5.627
0.004
2455
--0.549
988.691
0.000
2442
-0.134**
(-13.347)
0.587
692.552
0.000
2442
Percentage of dwellings overcrowded
R squared
F statistic
Sig. F
N
1/ Defined as deaths in the 2006-2011 period due to aggressions or executions and in clashes.
2/ Percentage of dwellings with emigrants in the US between 1995 and 2000.
t statistics in perenthesis.
Source: Own calculations.
Empirical analysis – National data
Table 7
Estimation 2: Municipal level model with National Data
Dependent variable: Percentage of dwellings with emigrants to the US
Independent variables
Model 1
Model 2
Model 3
Intercept
3.958**
(44.269)
1.841**
(19.382)
-1.569**
(-6.637)
Rate of deaths related to Organized Crime 1/
-0.046**
(-3.983)
-0.061**
(-6.443)
-0.026**
(-2.870)
0.000**
(-2.375)
0.000**
(-4.578)
0.000**
(2.227)
Social network in the US 2/
---
0.357**
(35.011)
0.367**
(37.600)
Percentage of population earning up to 2 min wage
---
---
0.050**
(13.877)
Percentage of indigenous population
---
---
0.046**
(5.234)
Rate of deaths related to OC squared
R squared
0.008
0.340
F statistic
9.538
418.306
Sig. F
0.000
0.000
N
2455
2442
1/ Defined as deaths in the 2006-2011 period due to aggressions or executions and in clashes.
2/ Percentage of dwellings with emigrants in the US between 1995 and 2000.
t statistics in perenthesis.
0.418
349.603
0.000
2442
Empirical analysis- National data
Table 8
Estimation 3: Municipal level model with National data
Dependent variable: Percentage of dwellings with circular migrants
Independent variables
Model 1
Model 2
Model 3
Intercept
1.216**
(45.769)
0.954**
(35.155)
0.908**
(11.144)
Rate of deaths related to Organized Crime 1/
-0.005
(-1.434)
-0.013**
(-3.945)
-0.012**
(-3.619)
0.000
(0.051)
0.000*
(1.906)
0.000*
(1.678)
Social network in the US 2/
---
0.227**
(21.765)
0.225**
(21.434)
Percentage of population earning up to 2 min wage
---
---
0.002
(1.303)
Percentage of dwellings without piped water
---
---
-0.004**
(-2.807)
R squared
0.003
0.165
F statistic
3.294
160.541
Sig. F
0.037
0.000
N
2455
2442
1/ Defined as deaths in the 2006-2011 period due to aggressions or executions and in clashes.
2/ Percentage of dwellings with circular migrants in the US between 1995 and 2000.
t statistics in perenthesis.
Source: Own calculations.
0.168
98.166
0.000
2442
Rate of deaths related to OC squared
Empirical analysis- Border municipalities data
Table 12
Estimation 1: Border Municipalities Data
Dependent variable: Percentage of dwellings receiving remittances
Independent variables
Model 1
Model 2
Model 3
Intercept
4.324**
(15.390)
1.646**
(6.164)
5.327**
(7.096)
Rate of deaths related to Organized Crime 1/
0.021**
(2.837)
0.016**
(2.949)
0.011**
(2.205)
Social network in the US 2/
---
0.734**
(15.602)
0.569**
(11.463)
Percentage of population earning up to 2 min wage
---
---
0.042**
(3.889)
Percentage of dwellings overcrowded
---
---
-0.146**
(-6.983)
R squared
0.029
0.486
0.567
F statistic
8.049
129.303
88.614
Sig. F
0.005
0.000
0.000
N
275
275
275
1/ Defined as deaths in the 2006-2011 period due to aggressions or executions and in clashes per every 10,000
inh.
2/ Percentage of dwellings with emigrants in the US between 1995 and 2000.
t statistics in perenthesis.
Source: Own calculations.
Empirical analysis- Border municipalities data
Table 13
Estimation 2: Border Municipalities Data
Dependent variable: Percentage of dwellings with emigrants to the US
Independent variables
Model 1
Model 2
Model 3
Intercept
1.445**
(16.922)
0.660**
(6.516)
0.294*
(1.674)
0.001
(0.485)
0.004**
(2.212)
0.004**
(2.059)
---
1.077**
(10.940)
1.003**
(9.982)
---
---
0.010**
(2.689)
---
---
-0.141**
(-1.966)
Rate of deaths related to Organized Crime 1/
Social network in the US 2/
Percentage of population earning up to 2 min
wage
Percentage of indigenous population
R squared
0.001
0.305
0.327
F statistic
0.235
60.011
32.958
Sig. F
0.628
0.000
0.000
N
275
275
275
1/ Defined as deaths in the 2006-2011 period due to aggressions or executions and in clashes per every
10,000 inh.
2/ Percentage of dwellings with circular migrants between 2005 and 2010.
t statistics in perenthesis.
Source: Own calculations.
Empirical analysis- Border municipalities data
Empirical Analysis – Household level data
Table 15. Logit regression.
Probability of having a migrant in the US (household level estimation)
National data
Border municipalities data
Rate of deaths related to organized crime
-0.002**
(-4.48)
-0.001
(-1.24)
Percentage of population of the municipality in dwellings with a migrant in the US
0.146**
(234.40)
0.018**
(30.59)
-0.022**
(-44.56)
0.382**
(42.38)
0.034**
(6.31)
-0.069**
(-2.47)
0.001**
(6.18)
-0.005**
(-3.61)
0.003**
(7.88)
0.266**
(26.43)
0.432**
(45.71)
0.223**
(22.98)
-0.078**
(-11.46)
0.328**
(46.53)
0.511**
(72.27)
-0.621**
(-92.06)
-0.169**
(-64.69)
-0.005**
(-20.64)
0.083**
(20.48)
-0.407**
(-53.62)
-3.692**
(-133.36)
-0.002
(-1.47)
0.279**
(5.23)
0.409**
(5.58)
0.241**
(4.11)
-0.164**
(-6.46)
0.325**
(11.61)
0.415**
(16.25)
-0.399**
(-14.48)
-0.021**
(-2.26)
0.000
(0.01)
0.039**
(2.27)
-0.356**
(-13.74)
-5.106**
(-44.57)
-460043.52
109708.31
0.000
2803977
0.1065
-35461.92
3352.40
0.000
341773
0.0451
Percentage of illiterate population in municipality
Percentage if indigenous population in municipality
Percentage of population of the municipality in dwellings without piped water
Percentage of population of the municipality in overcrowded dwellings
Light meter in dwelling
Gas stove in dwelling
Kitchen in dwelling
Nuclear household
Own car in dwelling
Telephone in dwelling
Male head of household
Head of household schooling level
Age of head of household
Presence of children younger than 5
Presence of adults 65 and older
Constant
Log likelihood
LR chi 2 (17)
Prob > chi2
Number of observations
Pseudo R2
Source: Own calculations.
Concluding remarks
• Theory and common sense predict a positive relationship between
violence and international migration, but it is not always the case.
• Low violence intensity can even decrease migration probabilities.
• Violence and International migration seem to have a non-linear
relationship in the Mexican case, but this is not confirmed in the
regression analysis.
• Data at a municipality level show a positive correlation between violence
and remmittances, but a negative correlation between violence and the
presence of migrants in dwellings (either permanent or circular).
• When the analysis is performed using only data from northern border
municipalities, violence appears positively correlated both with
remmittances and permanent migration, but the effect is too small.
• The household level analysis suggests a negative correlation between
violence and international migration.
Concluding remarks
• The high violence intensity in the northern Mexican states seems to be
promoting international emigration, according to the municipality level
data analysis.
• For the rest of the country, evidence suggests that violence is not a force
behind migration to the US, and the household level analysis even
indicates that migration has dropped due to moderate levels of public
insecurity.
• Security measures should be implemented to protect the population in
the most violent states of the country, which happen to be in the northern
part of the territory.
• People affected by violence and that can migrate to the US come from
higher education or income level groups, so the receiving communities
can be benefited by the presence of positively selected migrants.
• The US authorities have to decide if they receive positively selected
migrants coming from northern states, or if they support Mexico in its
efforts to protect people affected by public insecurity, so they don´t leave
the country.