between the 2002-3 and 2015-16 measurements, the share of moves that were 50 miles or less rose from 32.3% of all moves to 42.3% of all moves. The main offsetting decline was in moves of between 200 to 499 miles, which fell from 20.7% of all moves back in 2002-3 to 13.8% in 2015-16.
Those strike me as large changes. Taylor discusses many possible explanations. One story that he does not consider is the possibility that employment opportunities and housing construction have become disconnected. In cities where they might be job opportunities, such as San Francisco, housing is not allowed to be built. In places where housing is allowed to be built, there are not as many job opportunities.
We were still in a jobs recession in 2002-2003 which reached bottom in 2003 so it doesn’t surprise me moves had to be farther to find work.
One contribution could be that it’s a lot harder to move two-income families as both partners need to find new jobs.
As well, a lot of jobs in the “commanding heights” sector, like nursing or teaching, have an element of local seniority. Moving out of the area often loses/hurts seniority and you start at a lower position in your new job.
It’s a perfect storm of various factors. My last two moves were to different locations in the same metro area, and each factor has affected my path.
1. Dual income problem: hard to make moves that work simultaneously for both.
2. Single-institution career-track investments. Retirement benefits, rank, tenure, internal social network trust and reputation, organization-specific human capital, etc. These things make it hard to move laterally, even in the same field, without giving up a lot of built up benefits.
3. Lifestyle instead of employment moves. People are getting married and having kids later. While working for the same employer in the same metro and moving up the ladder, one might move from roommating to single occupancy apartment, to cohabitation relationship in another place, to family house in the suburbs with ‘good schools’. My parents’ generation seemed to settle down and put down roots early after one early career-based move.
4. Renting is up vs homeownership, which facilitates more moves in general while keeping the same job.
5. Networking seems more important for jobs these days, and connections are likely to be made in the same region, where moving might still make sense because commuting congestion is very high.
6. Local-based occupational licensure without reciprocity makes it very costly to move across jurisdictions once one is already established. It’s not just bar membership or medical boards either.
If you include “rest of the world” as a state, I bet mobility hasn’t decreased much.
It could be that people have already moved from small to mid-sized towns to larger urban areas. When a job change is required, they can do so in the same metro area, which might only require a local move if at all. I’ve changed employers 9 times in the past 17 years, all while living in the same house.