Do jobs follow people or people follow jobs? A meta-analysis of Carlino-Mills studies

The issue whether ‘jobs follow people’ and/or ‘people follow jobs’ has recently emerged as one of the leading themes in regional and urban science. Much of the interest herein stems from alleged inconsistencies in the empirical evidence, which naturally raises questions as for the reasons why. Arguably, the nature of causality differs across space as well as time, while speculations have been rife about a number of methodological issues that may play a crucial role in shaping the research outcomes. In this paper a preliminary attempt is described to clarify these matters, by focusing on an articulate literature of 37 so-called ‘Carlino-Mills studies’. Specifically, a statistically supported literature review, referred to as ‘meta-analysis’, is presented in which the study results are evaluated and systematically related to a variety of study characteristics that underlie these results. By listing 308 study results reported in this literature, it is revealed that the empirical evidence is conform popular belief highly inconclusive, albeit that most of the results point towards ‘jobs follow people’. The findings of the meta-regression analyses indicate that the spatial setting of the study, the adopted model specification, and variables measurement in particular affect the research outcomes that indicate the jobs-people direction of causality. No evidence is found that the examination of data referring to a particular time period, population and/ or employment group make much of a difference.

Do jobs follow people or people follow jobs? A meta-analysis of Carlino-Mills studies

The issue whether 'jobs follow people' and/or 'people follow jobs' has recently emerged as one of the leading themes in regional and urban science. Much of the interest herein stems from alleged inconsistencies in the empirical evidence, which naturally raises questions as for the reasons why. Arguably, the nature of causality differs across space as well as time, while speculations have been rife about a number of methodological issues that may play a crucial role in shaping the research outcomes. In this paper a preliminary attempt is described to clarify these matters, by focusing on an articulate literature of 37 so-called 'Carlino-Mills studies'. Specifically, a statistically supported literature review, referred to as 'meta-analysis', is presented in which the study results are evaluated and systematically related to a variety of study characteristics that underlie these results. By listing 308 study results reported in this literature, it is revealed that the empirical evidence is conform popular belief highly inconclusive, albeit that most of the results point towards 'jobs follow people'. The findings of the meta-regression analyses indicate that the spatial setting of the study, the adopted model specification, and variables measurement in particular affect the research outcomes that indicate the jobs-people direction of causality. No evidence is found that the examination of data referring to a particular time period, population and/ or employment group make much of a difference

Location changes of jobs and people:analyses of population-employment interactions and impacts of gender and geography

Volgt wonen werken of volgt werken wonen? Die vraag staat centraal in het promotieonderzoek van Gerke Hoogstra. Hij concludeert dat het moeilijk is om voor een bepaalde regio zonder meer vast te stellen of werkgelegenheidsveranderingen voorafgaan aan bevolkingsveranderingen of dat bevolkingsveranderingen juist voorafgaan aan werkgelegenheidsveranderingen. Hoogstra zet vraagtekens bij ruimtelijk-economisch beleid dat gericht is op het bevorderen van bevolkingsgroei met de verwachting dat de werkgelegenheidsgroei dan vanzelf zal volgen, omdat voor dat beleid de wetenschappelijke onderbouwing ontbreekt. Hoogstra verrichtte een meta-analyse op 37 studies die inzicht geven in de interacties tussen bevolkingsgroei en werkgelegenheidsgroei. De resultaten van die studies vertonen grote verschillen, maar wijzen vooral op ‘werken volgt wonen’. De verschillen in de resultaten zijn volgens Hoogstra te verklaren op basis van zowel empirische als methodologische factoren. De promovendus deed ook onderzoek naar de invloed van afstand en geslacht. Analyse van postcode-data van Noord-Nederland laat zien dat de interacties zich uitstrekken over een afstand van ongeveer 7 tot 60 kilometer hemelsbreed en 45 minuten reistijd over de weg. Voor zowel de werkgelegenheid van mannen als die van vrouwen geldt dat vooral geldt dat ‘werken wonen volgt’, maar wel op verschillende afstandsintervallen (< 15 minuten reistijd bij de werkgelegenheid van vrouwen en 30-45 minuten reistijd bij de werkgelegenheid van mannen). Voor beide werkgelegenheidsgroepen geldt dat de werkgelegenheidsgroei in een postcodegebied bovenal wordt bepaald door de werkgelegenheidsgroei in nabijgelegen postcodegebieden binnen een reisafstand van 30 minuten.

Gender, Space, and the Location Changes of Jobs and People: A Spatial Simultaneous Equations Analysis

This article summarizes a spatial econometric analysis of local population and employment growth in the Netherlands, with specific reference to impacts of gender and space. The simultaneous equations model used distinguishes between population- and gender-specific employment groups, and includes autoregressive and cross-regressive spatial lags to detect relations both within and among these groups. Spatial weights matrices reflecting different bands of travel times are used to calculate the spatial lags and to gauge the spatial nature of these relations. The empirical results show that although populationemployment interaction is more localized for women's employment, no gender difference exists in the direction of interaction. Employment growth for both men and women is more influenced by population growth than vice versa. The interaction within employment groups is even more important than population growth. Women's, and especially men's, local employment growth mostly benefits from the same employment growth in neighboring locations. Finally, interaction between these groups is practically absent, although men's employment growth may have a negative impact on women's employment growth within small geographic areas. In summary, the results confirm the crucial roles of gender and space, and offer important insights into possible relations within and among subgroups of jobs and people

Determinants of Variation in Population-Employment Interaction Findings: A Quasi-Experimental Meta-Analysis

This article reports about a metaregression analysis of empirical results generated using data for the northern Netherlands (1988-2002) in order to investigate the ambiguity in results in the population-employment interaction literature. Specifically, the analysis deals with the issue whether "jobs follow people" or "people follow jobs." The article starts with introducing the basics of quasi-experimental meta-analysis and with identifying some advantages of using quasi-experimental meta-analysis as compared with the standard meta-analysis approach. Two subsequent sections document the selection of the population-employment interaction model and salient characteristics of the data set as well as the setup of the primary analyses. A total of 4,050 quasi-experimental empirical results for the jobs-people direction of causality are generated using different specifications and estimators for a spatial econometric interaction model. The subsequent metaregression analysis reveals that the empirical results are largely shaped by the spatial, temporal, and employment characteristics of the data sampling. The results also appear much more sensitive to different measurements of the model's key variables when compared with alternative specifications of the spatial weights matrix. The main determinant driving empirical results about jobs-people causality are differences in model specification and estimation, as revealed by an inherent bias in parameter estimates and misguided inferences for some of the commonly used specifications. Finally, suggestions for future research are identified

Do jobs follow people or people follow jobs? A meta-analysis of Carlino–Mills studies

Do jobs follow people or people follow jobs? A meta-analysis of Carlino–Mills studies. Spatial Economic Analysis. This study examines the classic question as to whether ‘jobs follow people’ or ‘people follow jobs’ by performing a meta-analysis of 321 results from 64 Carlino–Mills studies. It is found that the results are highly divergent, but that more results point towards ‘jobs following people’ than towards ‘people following jobs’. When it comes to the reasons for the variation in results, we find that the results are mostly shaped by the geographical location, spatial resolution, and population and employment characteristics present in the data, as well as by the model’s specification, its functional form and the spatial weight matrix specification