Full Citation
Title: Pandemic Migration in Michigan's Upper Peninsula
Citation Type: Miscellaneous
Publication Year: 2021
ISBN:
ISSN:
DOI:
NSFID:
PMCID:
PMID:
Abstract: In March 2020, the Covid-19 global pandemic dramatically altered the day-to-day routines of most Americans. As the pandemic wore on and Americans internalized the realities of extended, national public health and economic crises, changes in circumstances or priorities (including job loss/departure, remote work, virtual versus in-person schooling, space and outdoor activities at a premium, etc.) inspired or forced many Americans to reconsider their place of residence. Media stories told anecdotal accounts of migration away from city centers towards more rural and natural amenity destinations in response to pandemic realities. This report describes historical migration patterns in and out of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula (UP) and systematically documents change to that historical pattern during the global pandemic in 2020 and through August 2021. The report then situates those findings in the context of broader literature about migration, focusing on rural America and natural amenity destinations. The report’s final section builds on the demographic findings and literature review to provide recommendations for migration-related community and economic development endeavors in the UP. While some people did move in response to the pandemic, pandemic migration appears to be modest in nature and nuanced. In September 2020, Bloomberg City Lab reported that based on data from moving companies and real estate websites, Americans were moving less in 2020, with some notable exceptions for major cities such as New York City and San Francisco (Patino, 2020). The New York Times (Kolko et al., 2021) and CBRE (Willett & Mowell, 2021) independently published analyses of United States Postal Service (USPS) data, each arriving at the same conclusion: pandemic migration patterns largely matched pre-pandemic patterns, with residents of large, coastal urban metros continuing to move to Sun Belt cities (e.g., Austin), smaller metros (e.g., Boise), or areas considered “destinations” (e.g., Cape Cod) in much the same pattern as 2019. Review of Consumer Credit Panel data similarly shows that while urban neighborhoods saw increased out-migration in 2020, lack of in-migration made a bigger impact on urban centers, suggesting that on the whole Americans were more likely to stay in place in response to Covid-19 than to move (Whitaker, 2021). In a survey study of 300,000 residential and interstate moves over the last three years, Haslag & Weagley (2021) found that while inter-state moves in 2020 were lower than previous years, 15% of movers directly cited the influence of the pandemic in their decision to move; less moved for reasons of employment and more for family or lifestyle (though differences exist among socio economic groupings); and the ability to work remotely factored highly in decisionmaking. Consistent with others’ findings, movers perceived or knew their destinations to have less Covid-19 cases, less pandemic-related restrictions, lower density, and lower rents (Haslag & Weagley, 2021). Given this, a mass inflow of migrants to Michigan’s Upper Peninsula (UP) as a result of the pandemic is unlikely. Still, even a reduction of out-migration or a slight increase of in-migration would signal a noteworthy change to a pattern of primarily out-migration from the region over the last several decades. Migration research (see Appendix A) demonstrates that for those who are not tethered to their geographic location by employment, migration is strongly motivated by quality-of-life factors, such as access to amenities. Michigan’s UP is an attractive location, especially relative to pandemic life in an urban environment: low density (19 people per square mile), moderate cost of living, year-round recreation opportunities, and easy access to outdoor amenities such as beaches, forests, lakes, and rivers. For this report, we analyzed migration trend data in the 20 years prior to the pandemic (1999-2019), the pandemic year itself (2020), and the months since (through August 2021). Our findings show that: • Over the last fifty years, the UP has generally experienced population loss due to net out-migration, but also and increasingly, due to natural decrease (more deaths than births). • Outflow from the UP slowed considerably during the pandemic. • Inflow to the UP also slowed, but not as much as outflow, meaning that between May 2020 and August 2021 there was less net loss from the UP than is typical. • These patterns vary across space, with some areas attracting/losing more than others in the pandemic year (May 2020-Apr 2021). Alger and Iron counties both saw net positive migration in the pandemic year itself. Marquette, Mackinac, Dickinson, Iron, Houghton, Keweenaw, and Alger counties saw the greatest increase in netflow in the pandemic year relative to the three years prior. The pandemic resulted in little change to migration in Baraga, Luce, Ontonagon, and Schoolcraft counties.
User Submitted?: No
Authors: Petersen, Julia; Winkler, Richelle
Publisher:
Data Collections: IPUMS NHGIS
Topics: Health, Migration and Immigration
Countries: