Introduction & Literature Review Outline: Curran et al.

• Overview (from broad to narrow)– (common knowledge): Migration has momentum

that appears to be driven by migrant networks making it progressively easier to move from one place to another place where migrants already live - cumulative causation theory

– (narrowing)-Limitation of current knowledge: mostly Mexico-U.S. migration focus and few extensions outside this context - puzzle 1 - how does the theory hold outside of U.S.?

Introduction & Literature Review (cont.)

• (Narrowing) Theory requires high demands on data – few datasets– New data from Thailand that is richer than

Mexico-U.S. data and allows extension of theory - new data shows significant variation across origin communities - puzzle 2 - why is there such variation?

Introduction & Literature Review (cont.)

• Our study (narrowing) – different focus on internal rural-urban migration– different focus on gender and gender seems to be

important– has policy implications for patterns of caring for

elderly– Has social implications for reorganizing gender

relations in origin and destination communities

• Roadmap of paper – summary and next steps of paper

Background (Literature Review)

• Gender and migration is the focus of this paper– few quantitative studies of gender and migration,

but before reviewing these studies focus on social capital

– Gender as it relates to social capital & migration

Background (Literature Review)(cont.)

• First, demonstrate importance of social capital for migration (broader literature)– description of the role of migrant networks– there is a lot of evidence supporting the important role

of migrant networks– limited distinctions between character of the tie (family,

friend or other)

• Second, demonstrate how gender might distinguish social capital ties and explain why gender composition of migrant networks matters

Background (Literature Review)(cont.)

• Migration patterns vary across gender– But systematic studies are limited– Men’s and women’s migration different– Differences in gender composition of networks

appears influential • One quantitative study (Mexico-U.S.)• Many qualitative studies indicate women’s networks

differently influence migration than men’s networks

• Summary of our study and brief glimpse into findings

BREAK

Summary of Evidence (Curran et al. 2005)

Evidence about Thailand (Audience is not familiar with Thailand – have to convince them it’s interesting and relevant)Gender paradoxes and importance of gender in

migrant flows (literature review and quotations from field work to show differences in gender behavior

Thai data are unique (map of Thailand, study site) and there is important variation to explain (figure of men’s and women’s migrant prevalence rates)

Evidence Continued

Audience needs to be introduced to data and be convinced of data qualityDescription of Data by year to show that

within year statistics make sense (data are not skewed) and across year change makes sense (values move in the right direction and there is something to be explained – changes in migration experience)

Evidence of Findings

Findings organized by row Trips vs. duration different effects, tested on pooled, men

and women (Table 3, col. 1-3) Social distance matters, tested on pooled, men and

women (Table 3, col. 1-3) Sex composition matters differently, tested on pooled,

men & women (Table 3, col. 1-3) Trips & duration matter differently for men and women

(Table 3, comparing coefficients across col. 2&3) Findings summarized by hypotheses (Table 4) Puzzle – why village effects depress female migration? –

return to qualitative data

Slide 3-5 - Evidence

• Evidence to orient your reader or background evidence

• Evidence of Findings