Previously we have demonstrated that long-distance family migration has a negative effect on the employment status of partnered women in both Great Britain (GB) and the USA; in fact the results for GB and the USA were remarkably similar. Here we investigate three issues that might have masked potential differences in the results between GB and the USA. First, a decision needed to be made about the most appropriate cut-off to distinguish between short- and long-distance migration. Given the different size of the landmasses in GB and the USA it is questionable whether a similar distance cut-off should be adopted in both places. Second, a 1-year interval is used to define migrants in the GB census and a 5-year interval is used in the USA. The longer post-migration period, during which employment may be found, in the USA may have influenced our findings. Third, most 'tied migration' studies compare those in full- or part-time employment with the economically inactive and unemployed. However, individuals are economically inactive or unemployed for very different reasons and we therefore distinguish between these groups in the analysis.
|Translated title of the contribution||A Controlled Donor Imputation System for a One-Number Census|
|Pages (from-to)||465 - 480|
|Number of pages||16|
|Journal||Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A|
|Publication status||Published - 2002|