Search

Although women's representation among international migrants in many countries has risen over the last 100 years, we know far less about gender gaps in the labor force participation of immigrants across a wide span of host societies. Prior studies have established that immigrant women are doubly disadvantaged in terms of labor market outcomes in the U.S., Canada, and Israel. These studies suggest an intriguing question: Are there gender gaps in immigrant labor force participation across destinations countries? In this paper, we investigate the extent to which the double disadvantage exists for immigrant women in a variety of host countries. We also examine how marriage moderates this double disadvantage. For the U.S., although we find that immigrant women have had the lowest labor force participation rates compared to natives and immigrant men since 1960, marital status is an important stratifying attribute that helps explain nativity differences. Extending the analysis to eight other countries reveals strong gender differences in labor force participation and shows how marriage differentiates immigrant women's labor force entry more so than men's. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the 1990s, the immigrant population in the United States dispersed to non-traditional settlement locations (what have become known as 'new immigrant destinations'). This paper examines whether the allure of new destinations persisted in the 2000s with a particular focus on the internal migration of the foreign-born during the recent deep recessionary period and its aftermath. Three specific questions motivate the analysis. First, are immigrants, much like the U.S.-born population, becoming less migratory within the country over time? Second, is immigrant dispersal from traditional gateways via internal migration continuing despite considerable economic contraction in many new destination metropolitan areas? Third, is immigration from aboard a substitute for what appears to be declining immigrant internal migration to new destinations? The findings reveal a close correlation between the declining internal migration propensity of the U.S.-born and immigrants in the last two decades. We also observe parallels between the geographies of migration of native- and foreign-born populations with both groups moving to similar metropolitan areas in the 1990s. This redistributive association, however, weakened in the subsequent decade as new destination metropolitan areas lost their appeal for both groups, especially immigrants. There is no evidence to suggest that immigration from abroad is substituting for the decline in immigrant redistribution through internal migration to new destinations. Across destination types, the relationship between immigration from abroad and the internal migration of the foreign-born remained the same during and after the Great Recession as in the period immediately before it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper projects retirement income and Social Security taxes and benefits among the foreign-born and U.S.-born in the United States. Focusing on the Depression and the late baby boom birth cohorts, we find that foreign-born persons have higher poverty rates than the U.S.-born, and as a group do not receive higher lifetime net benefits from Social Security than do the U.S.-born. However, persons from the late baby boom cohort who immigrated after 1969 have higher projected rates of return in Social Security than do U.S.-born persons of the same birth cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]