Thanks to immigration and natural increase (more births than deaths), New England has compensated for some loss of population. Nevertheless, a net outflow is a concern to policymakers. The author helps them parse the data and think about implications.New England - Population ; Emigration and immigration - New England

Kenneth M. Johnson

English

Research Papers in Economics

24   Summer 2008
With 14.3 million residents, New England 
is home to just 5 percent of the U.S. pop-
ulation, yet it reflects many of the strands 
that  comprise  the  country’s  demographic 
fabric: densely settled urban cores, expand-
ing  suburbs,  struggling  industrial  towns, 
fast-growing  recreational  and  retirement 
amenity areas, and isolated rural villages. In 
recent years New England’s population grew 
thanks to immigration and more births than 
deaths, but there is a net outflow of exist-
ing residents. Therein lies the challenge for 
policymakers who want to keep the region 
vibrant and diverse. A closer look at the de-
mographics may help.
Population Redistribution 
New  England’s  population  stood  at 
14,270,000 in July 2006, a gain of 347,000 
residents since 2000. This 2.5 percent gain 
was less than half of the nation’s gain and 
lagged  far  behind  the  fast-growing  South 
and  West. The  Boston  metropolitan  area 
included 4,455,000—nearly one-third—of 
the region’s residents, but its growth rate of 
1.5 percent between 2000 and 2006 was   
less  than  half  that  of  the  1990s.  New   
England’s  other  metropolitan  areas  grew 
by  214,000  (2.7  percent)  to  8,015,000, 
a  slightly  slower  pace  than  seen  in  the   
1990s. In contrast, nonmetropolitan New 
England grew faster than during the 1990s. 
With  a  gain  of  70,000  (4  percent),  its   
population reached 1,800,000 in 2006.
Growth  spread  outward  from  the 
metropolitan core of Boston to the urban 
periphery  and  beyond.  (See  the  map, 
“Population Change in New England 2000 
to 2005.”) Gains were greatest on the outer 
edge of the metropolitan area, in adjoining 
nonmetropolitan  areas,  and  in  the  ame-
nity areas of northern New England. Slow 
growth  or  population  losses  were  evident 
in Boston and its inner suburbs and in the 
far north. That was consistent with national 
trends, which showed a pervasive outward 
sprawl of the nation’s metropolitan popula-
tion, fast growth in amenity areas, and losses 
in traditional forest and agricultural areas. 
In another difference from the nation 
as  a  whole,  New  England  is  less  racially 
diverse.  Non-Hispanic  whites  make  up 
82.1  percent  of  the  region’s  population 
compared  with  66.3  percent  nationwide. 
Since 2000, minority populations in New 
England have grown, and the white popula-
tion has declined. As a result, New England 
is slightly more diverse, with its minority 
population increasing from 15.4 percent in 
2000 to 17.9 percent in 2006. 
In metropolitan areas, a non-Hispanic 
white population decline was offset by sub-
stantial  gains  in  the  Hispanic  and  Asian 
populations,  and  modest  gains  among 
African-Americans and others. In nonmetro-
politan New England, however, population 
gains occurred in all groups. Numeric gains 
were  greatest  for  the  95  percent  of  the 
population  that  was  non-Hispanic  white,   
whereas percentage gains were greater for 
the smaller minorities. 
Unpacking the Changes
New  England’s  population  grew  because 
gains from immigration and from natural 
increase  (births)  were  sufficient  to  offset 
a  significant  net  domestic  outmigration. 
Population gains were greatest in nonmet-
ropolitan New England, where U.S. inter-
nal migration fueled most of the growth—
supplemented by modest immigration and 
enough births to offset deaths. In all, some 
53,000 domestic migrants (3.1 percent) and 
9,000 immigrants (0.5 percent) moved to 
rural New England. There were 7,000 more 
births than deaths (0.4 percent). Migrants 
were  attracted  by  recreational  and  scenic 
amenities or were city dwellers seeking less 
expensive communities. 
Metropolitan  areas  did  less  well.  In 
Boston,  for  example,  immigration  and 
natural  increase  barely  covered  the  loss 
of domestic migrants. Between 2000 and 
2006, natural increase contributed 130,000 
(3.0 percent) new residents to the Boston 
metropolitan  area.  (See  “New  England 
Components  of  Demographic  Change.”) 
This natural increase offset net outmigration 
of  66,000  (-1.5  percent),  which  occurred 
because the influx of 164,000 (3.7 percent) 
immigrants  was  not  sufficient  to  offset  a   
net  domestic  migration  loss  of  229,000 
(-5.2 percent). 
In metropolitan areas outside of Boston, 
gains from natural increase and immigrants 
made up for losses from domestic outmi-
gration.  Natural  increase  in  non-Boston 
metro areas was 147,000 (1.9 percent), and 
Demographic Trends
at Mid-Decade
in New England
by Kenneth M. Johnson
Carsey Institute, University of New HampshireCommunities & Banking    25
Loss of More than 4 %
Loss of 2 to 4 %
Loss of 0 to 2 %
Gain of 0 to 2 %
Gain of 2 to 4 %
Gain of 4 to 8 %
Gain of More than 8 %
Population Change 
in New England
2000 - 2005
Analysis: Kenneth M. Johnson
Data work: Neil Holmgren
Map: David J. Goldblatt
Note:  The units on this map are the 
minor civil divisions of New England. 
Generally, they are called towns. In cases 
where municipalities (sometimes called 
cities) exist, they have been taken out of 
the surrounding minor civil divisions, and 
the two have been shown separately.26   Summer 2008
the influx of 168,000 immigrants (2.1 per-
cent) exceeded the loss of 101,000 domestic 
migrants (-1.3 percent). 
There were interesting regional differ-
ences in the contribution of migration and 
natural increase. A net influx of migrants 
from elsewhere in the U.S. (including south-
ern New England)—together with modest 
natural increases and immigration—was the 
primary cause of growth in northern New 
England. The southern tier (Massachusetts, 
Connecticut, and Rhode Island) grew more 
slowly and only because immigration and 
births offset domestic losses. The domestic 
migration loss from Massachusetts was so 
large that it negated a net gain elsewhere 
in New England, producing a substantial 
regionwide domestic migration loss. 
Age-Specific  
Migration Patterns
Migration trends also vary by age.1 Between 
1990 and 2000, New England had a net 
migration  gain  of  181,000  people  under 
the age of 30 but a loss of 164,000 among 
people over 30. The Boston metropolitan 
region had a substantial 
influx of 20-to-29-year-
olds, which resulted in 
a young adult popula-
tion  22  percent  larger 
than  it  would  other-
wise have been. Boston 
lost migrants at almost 
every other age, howev-
er, except for a modest 
gain among those aged 
10 to 19. (See “Net Mi-
gration  by  Age,  1990 
-  2000.”)  Other  New 
England  metropolitan 
areas  saw  net  age-spe-
cific outmigration, too. 
But except in the case 
of  20-to-29-year-olds, 
age-specific  outmigra-
tion was at a lower rate 
than Boston’s. 
Nonmetropolitan 
New  England  saw  a 
net inflow of migrants at almost every age 
except young adults, a persistent concern for 
the region. The nonmetropolitan migrants   
were mostly in their 50s and 60s, though 
there  were  also  significant  inflows  of 
30-to-49-year-olds  with  children.  In   
contrast,  metro  areas  lost  retirement-age 
migrants and families. 
What the Future Holds
With only modest natural increase and an 
aging  population,  future  growth  in  New 
England depends on net migration inflow. 
Consider  this  Internal  Revenue  Service 
data. From the beginning of 2001 to the 
end of 2005, 251,000 more people left New 
England for other areas of the United States 
than came to it. The sheer volume of migra-
tion that produced this net change is stun-
ning: More than 2,275,000 people moved 
in and out of the region in that period.
Only the Mid-Atlantic states gave a sig-
nificant number of migrants to New England. 
Although 293,000 New Englanders moved 
to the Mid-Atlantic region, nearly 348,000 
people migrated here, resulting in a net gain 
of 55,000. (See “Regional Migration Flows 
To and From New England, 2000 - 2005.”) 
However,  in  migration  exchanges  with   
the  Midwest,  New  England  barely  held   
its  own.  It  lost  243,000  people  to  the   
South and a more modest number to the 
West (38,000).2  
New England Components of 
Demographic Change, 2000-2006
percent change
Boston 
Metropolitan 
Area
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
Nonmetropolitan 
Areas
Other 
New England 
Metropolitan Areas
Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates, March 2007
Population change
Natural Increase
Domestic Migration
Immigration
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
Net Migration in New England, by Age 
1990-2000
rate per 100
expected population
60 to 69
Age in Years
0 to 9 10 to 19 20 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 59 70+
Boston Metropolitan Area
Other New England Metropolitan Areas
Nonmetropolitan Areas
Source: Johnson, et al., 2005Communities & Banking    27
Demographic trends have implications 
that  reach  beyond  population  redistribu-
tion.  Households  leaving  New  England 
had an aggregate income of roughly $39.6 
billion in the year they migrated, whereas 
those  moving  in  earned  $33.7  billion. 
(See “Regional Migrant Income Flows To 
and From New England, 2000 - 2005.”) 
Despite significant income gains ($3.5 bil-
lion)  from  migration  exchanges  with  the 
rest of the Northeast, New England lost in 
exchanges with the South ($8.2 billion) and 
with the West ($1.5 billion). So, in addition 
to  losing  251,000  people,  New  England 
lost nearly $6 billion of income in migra-
tion exchanges with other regions. Because 
migrants moving to New England gener-   
ally  earn  more  than  those  leaving,  that 
income loss was entirely due to the net out-
flow of people.
In  sum,  the  demographic  changes 
underway have important implications for 
the future size, composition, and distribu-
tion  of  the  region’s  population.  For  New 
England to continue to be a vibrant and 
diverse region, planners and policymakers 
need  to  consider  how  these  demographic 
trends  are  likely  to  impact  the  future 
needs  of  its  14.3  million  people  and  the 
numerous  institutions,  organizations,  and 
companies that serve them. First on their 
policy agenda should be a plan to stem the   
outflow of domestic migrants. The loss of 
so  many  New  Englanders  diminishes  the 
region’s  economic  and  social  capital  at  a 
time when they are critically important to 
the region’s future.
Kenneth M. Johnson is the senior demog-
rapher at the University of New Hampshire’s 
Carsey  Institute  in  Durham  and  professor 
of sociology. The research was funded by the 
Carsey Institute and by the Northern Research 
Station of the U.S. Forest Service, Economic 
Research  Service  and  Cooperative  States   
Research  Service  of  the  U.S.  Department   
of Agriculture. 
Endnotes
1Because  the  data  and  computational  demands  re-
quired to produce such estimates are substantial, they 
can be produced only with data from the decennial cen-
sus. For a detailed discussion of the methods used, see 
K.M. Johnson, P.R. Voss, R.B. Hammer, G.V. Fuguitt, 
and S. McNiven, “Temporal and Spatial Variation in 
Age-Specific Net Migration in the United States,” De-
mography 42, no. 4 (2005): 791-812.
2Migrants from foreign areas include U.S. residents 
returning  from  overseas  assignments.  However,  very 
few immigrants are included in this group because only 
people who filed income tax returns in two successive 
years are included in IRS records.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Regional Migration Flows to and from 
New England, 2001-2005
number of migrants
in hundreds of thousands
Other 
Northeast
Midwest South West Foreign
Source: Internal Revenue Service (2001-2006 data)
Migrants to New England
Migrants from New England
0
$3,000
$6,000
$9,000
$12,000
$15,000
$18,000
Regional Migrant Income Flows 
to and from New England, 2001-2005
aggregate income
in millions
Other 
Northeast
Midwest South West Foreign
Source: Internal Revenue Service (2001-2006 data)
Migrants to New England
Migrants from New England
This Communities & Banking article is copyrighted 
by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. The views 
expressed are not necessarily those of the Bank or 
the Federal Reserve System. Copies of articles may 
be  downloaded  without  cost  at  www.bos.frb.org/
commdev/c&b/index.htm.

Demographic trends in New England at mid-decade

http://www.bostonfed.org/commdev/c&b/2008/summer/Johnson_NE_demography.pdf

Demographic trends in New England at mid-decade

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics