Why do Skilled People Migrate to Cities? A Spatial Econometric Analysis for Understanding the Impact of the Social Environment on the Attraction of Human Capital to Cities in Turkey

• Authors: Dilcu Gonul , Gulden Erkut
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

 The main focus of this study is on understanding the importance of social dynamics of cities for attracting human capital to urban regions. The principal research question of the article is “if there is a spatial dependency on neighbouring provinces’ social environmental qualities in human capital at­traction for Turkey.” It is believed that developmental disparities among regions can be overcome with a balanced distribution of human capital. In this article, first the concept and importance of human capital and its evolution throughout economic history are explained in order to emphasize the relationship between development and human capital for urban regions. The literature review consists of migration models developed and used in previous studies and recent literature that together consider human capital and its flow with spatial analysis. A review of migration models helps structure the quantitative models’ building blocks, or the concepts to be quantified. Literature that discusses human capital and spatial analysis, at the same time, guides the study in implementing the most appropriate analysis technique. The literature discussed in the paper is focused on human capital migration and urban attractiveness. Its similarity with the current study work is the focus on the relationship between urban environment components and human capital. However, the cited studies lack the “spatial/relational” approach to urban regions which means that the effects of developments in settlements neighbouring the region were ignored. The contribution which we intend to make with the current study is to adapt the spatial econometric analysis to the problem of human capital attraction. Literature review is followed by data used in the empirical part of the study, and brief information on spatial econometric analysis. Next, findings of the empirical spatial econometric analysis of Turkey’s 81 urban regions are provided. Overall, the analysis indicated that undergraduate and post-graduate migrants care about the social prosperity of the neighbouring environment of destination province. The last part concludes with an interpretation of empirical study findings and discusses relevant urban and regional policy instruments.

Keywords

EN

Human capital; human capital attraction; relational approach; spatial econometrics; Turkey; regional development; spillover Effects

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
• Journal: European Spatial Research and Policy
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 26
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 127-148

Dates

published

2019-07-11

Contributors

author

Dilcu Gonul

• Istanbul Technical University, Institute of Science and Technology, Reşitpaşa Mahallesi, 34467 Sarıyer/Istanbul, Turkey

author

Gulden Erkut

• Istanbul Technical University, Urban and Regional Planning Department, Harbiye Mahallesi, Taskisla Cd., No:2, 34367, Şişli, Istanbul, Turkey

References

• ALTAY, H. and ÇELEBIOĞLU, F. (2015), ‘The impacts of political terrorism on gross domestic product in Eurasia: A spatial data analysis’, Eurasian Journal of Business and Economics, 8 (15), pp. 21–37.
• AMIN, A. (2004), ‘Regions unbound: Towards a new politics of place’, Geogr. Ann., 86B (1): 3344.
• AMIN, A. (2007), Re-thinking the urban social, City, 11 (1).
• ANDERSSON, A. (1985), ‘Creativity and Regional Development’, Papers of the Regional Science Association, 56, pp. 5‒20.
• ANDERSSON, R., QUIGLEY, J. M. and WILHELMSSON, M. (2005), Agglomeration and the spatial distribution of creativity, RSAI, pp. 445‒464.
• ANSELIN, L. (2005), Exploring Spatial Data with GeoDa: a workbook, Spatial Analysis Laboratory, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 6180, http://sal.uiuc.edu/ Center for Spatially Integrated Social Science, http://www.csiss.org/ Revised Version, March 6, 2005.
• ANSELIN, L. and BERA, A. K. (1998), ‘Spatial Dependence in Linear Regression Models with an Introduction to Spatial Econometrics’, [in:] ULLAH A. and GILES D. E. A. (eds.) Handbook of Applied Statistics, Marcel Dekker, NY, pp. 237‒289.
• ANSELIN, L., SYABRI, I. and KHO, Y. (2006), GeoDA: ‘An introduction to spatial data analysis’, Geographical Analysis, 38, pp. 5‒22.
• ARMSTRONG, H. and TAYLOR, J. (2000), Regional Economics and Policy, Third Edition, Blackwell Publishers LTD., UK (chapter 6: interregional migration, pp. 141‒165).
• ARVANTIDIS, P., PETRAKOS, G. and PAULEAS, S. (2007), Determinants of Economic Growth: the experts’ view, Paper presented in ERSA-2007, Paris.
• BARRO, R. (1991), ‘Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries’, Journal of Political Economy, 106.2, pp. 407‒443.
• BAUDINO, M. (2016), ‘The impact of human and physical accumulation on Chinese growth after 1994: A spatial econometric approach’, World Development Perspectives, 2, pp. 11‒16.
• BECKER, G. S. (1993), Human Capital: A theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, Third Edition, The University of Chicago, Chicago and London.
• BENHABIB, J. and SPIEGEL, M. (1994), ‘The Role of Human Capital in Economic Development: Evidence from Aggregate Cross-Country Data’, Journal of Monetary Economics, 34, pp. 143‒173.
• BRUNETTI, A. (1997), ‘Political Variables in Cross-Country Growth Analysis’, Journal of Economic Surveys, 11.2, pp. 163‒190.
• CHEN, J. and ZHOU, Q. (2017), ‘City size and urban labor productivity in China: New evidence from spatial city-level panel data analysis’, Economic Systems, 41, pp. 165‒178.
• CONIGLIO, N. D. (2008), ‘Human Capital Accumulation and Migration in a Peripheral EU Region: the case of Basilicata’, Papers in Regional Science, 87 (1), pp. 77‒95.
• ÇELEBIOĞLU, F. (2017), ‘Women Employment in terms of gender inequality across the provinces of Turkey’, Eurasian Journal of Business and Economics, 10 (19), pp. 61‒80.
• ÇETIN, D. and KALAYCI, E. (2016), ‘Spatial Econometric Analysis of R&D Spillovers in Turkey’, Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research, 6 (1), pp. 55‒72.
• EGAN, K., (1992), Imagination in Teaching and Learning, London: Routledge.
• ERDEM, U. (2016), ‘Regional Human Capital Distribution and Disparities in Turkey’, Review of Urban and Regional Development studies, 8 (1), pp. 16‒31.
• EVANS, R. and HARDING, A. (1997), ‘Regionalization, regional institutions and economic development’, Policy and Politics, 25, pp. 19‒30.
• FAGGIAN, A. and MCCANN, P. (2006), ‘Human Capital Flows and Regional Knowledge Assets: a Simultaneous Equation Approach’, Oxford Economic Papers, 52, pp. 475‒500.
• FAGGIAN, A. and MCCANN, P. (2009), ‘Human capital, graduate migration and innovation in British Regions’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 33, pp. 317‒333.
• FLORIDA, R. (2003), ‘Cities and the Creative Class’, City & Community, 2 (1), pp. 3‒19.
• GEZICI, F. and HEWINGS, G. J. D. (2004), ‘Regional convergence and the economic performance of peripheral areas in Turkey’, Review of Urban & Regional Development Studies, 16, pp. 113–132.
• GLAESER, E. (1998), ‘Are Cities Dying?’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12, pp. 139‒160.
• GLAESER, E. and SAIZ, A. (2004), ‘The Rise of the Skilled City’, Brookings-Wharton Papers on Urban Affairs, pp. 47‒105.
• HANUSHEK, E. A. and KIMKO, D. D. (2000), ‘Schooling, Labor-Force Quality and the Growth of Nations’, The American Economic Review, 90 (5), pp. 1184‒1208.
• HUNT, E. K. (2002), History of Economic Thoughts, Updated Second Edition.
• JACOBS, J. (1984), Cities and the Wealth of Nations. New York: Random House.
• JESSOP, B. (1998), ‘The rise of governance and the risks of failure: the case of economic development’, Int. Soc. Sci. J., 155, pp. 365‒378.
• JONES, M. (2009), ‘Phase space: geography, relational thinking, and beyond’, Progress in Human Geography, 33 (4), pp. 487–506.
• KARAHASAN, B. C. and UYAR, E. (2009), ‘Spatial Distribution of Education and Regional Inequalities in Turkey’, MPRA Paper 30130, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2011.
• KARLSSON, C. and ZHANG, W. (2001), ‘The Role of Universities in Regional Development-Endogenous Human Capital and Growth in a Two-region Model’, The Annals of Regional Science, 35, pp. 179‒197.
• KIRDAR, M. and SARAÇOĞLU, Ş. (2007), ‘Migration and Regional Convergence: an empirical investigation for Turkey’, Munich Personal RePEc Archive, Paper No. 2648.
• KNIGHT, J. (1992), Institutions and Social Conflict, Cambridge University Press.
• LESAGE, J. P. and PACE, R. K. (2010), ‘Spatial Econometric Models’, [in:] Fischer M. and Getis A. (eds.) Handbook of Applied Spatial Analysis. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
• LIPSET, S. M. (1959), ‘Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy’, American Political Science Review, 53 (1), pp. 69‒105.
• LIU, Z., LIU, S., JIN, H. and QI, W. (2017), ‘Rural population change in China: Spatial differences, driving forces and policy implications’, Journal of Rural Studies, 51, pp. 189‒197.
• LUCAS, R. E. (1988), ‘On the Mechanics of Economic Development’, Journal of Monetary Development, 22, pp. 3‒42.
• MCCANN, E. and WARD, K. (2010), Relationality/territoriality: Toward a conceptualization of cities in the world, Geoforum, 41, pp. 175–184.
• MORGAN, K. (1996), ‘An Endogenous Approach to Regional Economic Development: The Emergence of Wales’, European Planning Studies, 4 (6), pp. 705–716.
• MORGAN, K. (1997), ‘The learning region: institutions, innovation and regional renewal’, Regional Studies, 31 (5), pp. 491‒503.
• MUNRO, J. M. (1974), ‘Migration in Turkey’, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 22 (4), pp. 634‒653.
• MURDOCH, J. (2006), Post-structuralism and relational space. In Post-structuralist geography: A guide to relational space. London: SAGE Publications Ltd (pp. 1–26).
• RITSILA, J. and OVASKAINEN, M. (2001), ‘Migration and regional centralization of human capital’, Applied Economics, 33, pp. 317‒325.
• ROMER, P. (1990), ‘Endogenous technical change’, Journal of Political Economy, 94, pp. 1002‒1037.
• SIMON, C. (1998), ‘Human Capital and Metropolitan Employment Growth’, Journal of Urban Economics, 43, pp. 223‒243.
• SJAASTAD, L. A. (1962), ‘The Costs and Returns of Human Migration’, Journal of Political Economy, 70 (5), Part 2, pp. 80‒93.
• TUNALI, İ. (1996), ‘Migration and Remigration of Male Household Heads in Turkey, 1963–1973’, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 45 (1), pp. 31‒67.
• VAN DER GAAG, N. and VAN WISSEN, N. (2008), ‘Economic Determinants of Internal Migration Rates: A comparison across five European countries’, Journal of Economic and Social Geography, 99 (2), pp. 209‒222.
• VITON, P. (2010), Notes on spatial econometric models, http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/pvi-ton/courses2/crp8703/spatial.pdf, (9.08.2017).
• WARD, K. (2010), ‘Towards a relational comparative approach to the study of cities’, Progress in Human Geography, 34 (4), pp. 471–487.
• YÜCEŞAHIN, M. M. and KC, S. (2015), ‘Demographic and Human Capital Heterogeneity in Selected Provinces of Turkey: A Scenario Analysis Using Multidimensional Population Projection Model’, Economics and Sociology, 8 (3), pp. 215‒244.

Identifiers

DOI

10.18778/1231-1952.26.1.07