Brazilian migratory dynamics: a review of empirical literature
in the light of classical, neoclassical, and structuration
theories of migration
Dinâmica migratória brasileira: uma revisão da literatura
empírica à luz das teorias clássicas, neoclássicas e
estruturacionistas das migrações
Fecha de recepción: 30 de agosto de 2023
Fecha de aceptación: 1 de abril de 2024
1
Joice Pereira de Souza
Luís Abel da Silva Filho2
1Graduada em Ciências Econômicas pela Universidade Regional do Cariri - URCA. Correo electrónico:
joiceeconomia@outlook.com. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-9307-8450
2Professor Adjunto do Departamento de Economia da Universidade Regional do Cariri - URCA. Correo
electrónico: abeleconomia@hotmail.com; luis.abel@urca.br. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7453-1678
Resumo
Nas últimas décadas o Brasil passou por transformações acentuadas nos fluxos, volumes e
nas peculiaridades dos movimentos migratórios, deixando de ser predominantemente
rural, para um país onde a maioria dos indivíduos vivem em áreas urbanas. Diante disso,
este artigo tem como objetivo fazer uma revisão da literatura acerca da dinâmica
migratória brasileira, destacando as principais evidencias empírica encontradas e
associando-as as principais teorias da migração. As principais teorias da migração
analisadas tomam como base a visão clássica, neoclássica e estruturalista que corroboram
de forma significativa as análises das migrações internas e internacionais. Constatou-se,
que, o principal motivo que influencia o deslocamento populacional interno no Brasil é a
busca por melhores condições de trabalho, especialmente com rendimentos superiores
àqueles auferidos na região de origem dos migrantes.
Palavras-chave: migração; clássicos; neoclássicos; estruturalistas.
Abstract
In recent decades, Brazil has undergone marked transformations in the flows, volumes,
and peculiarities of migratory movements, from predominantly rural to a country where
most individuals live in urban areas. Therefore, this article aims to review the literature on
Brazilian migratory dynamics, highlighting the primary empirical evidence and associating
them with the main migration theories. The main theories of migration analyzed are based
on the classical, neoclassical, and structuralist views that significantly corroborate the
analyses of internal and international migrations. It was found that the main reason
influencing the internal population displacement in Brazil is the search for better working
conditions, especially with incomes higher than those earned in the region of origin of the
migrants.
Keywords: migration; classics; neoclassical; structuralists.
Introducción
Population mobility in Brazil is related to several aspects, especially the change caused by
the displacement of individuals from rural to urban areas, a process known as rural exodus,
which resulted mainly in socioeconomic transformations in the national territory (Becker,
1993; Baeninger, 2005, 2012; Brito, 2012; Brito, 2006; Lisbon, 2008; Brumes; Silva, 2011
de Lima et al., 2020). This population dynamic comprises three components: birth,
mortality, and migration. Thus, any change in one of them interferes with the others and
consequently alters the composition of society (Lisboa, 2008).
Different phases were identified in Brazil in which changes in demographic components
occurred. Over many decades, birth and mortality rates have been very high, contributing
significantly to spatial conformation. Thus, some transformations in Brazil allowed the
beginning of the demographic transition, especially from the 1950s onwards, in the
Northeast-Southeast direction. The reduction influenced this factor in the number of
deaths directly related to improvements in the well-being of the entire population (Lisboa,
2008; Baptist, Skelder, 2019).
Other economic changes boosted migratory movements, such as the drop in fertility, the
increase in violence, the exhaustion of agricultural frontiers, and the relative dispersion of
industry, causing changes in the organization of economic activities, especially industrial
ones (Queiroz; Santos, 2011; Baeninger, 2012).
From around 1960 to 1970, industrial activity in the urban area was registered and in great
concentration, as was the modernization process of Brazilian agriculture. These processes
developed simultaneously, resulting in large migratory flows towards the metropolitan
region. During this period, long-distance spatial mobility was developed from government
incentives for constructing Brasília and the Amazon Frontier (Brumes & Silva, 2011; Silva
Filho & Maia, 2023).
According to Brito (2006), the rapid urban expansion of Brazil has been incorporated into
the formation of large metropolitan regions since 1970, mainly in the cities of São Paulo
and Rio de Janeiro. According to the author, at that time, more than half of the urban
inhabitants lived in cities with more than 100,000 inhabitants, and a third lived in cities
with more than 500,000 inhabitants. Consequently, this substantial redistribution of
population aspects changed the profile of the rural population, demonstrating that
concentration and urbanization in large cities occurred simultaneously (Sahota, 1980).
From 1980 onwards, economic changes began to develop at the national and international
level, which affected demographic, economic, and political problems. Among them are the
neoliberal policies that began in the United States and England and later had repercussions
in Brazil through the outsourcing and privatization of services. As a result, several
questions have arisen about these problems and how they would influence internal
migration (Queiroz; Santos, 2011).
In the 1990s, trends related to internal displacement in Brazil showed that long-distance
migrations were reduced, especially those directed to agricultural frontiers; there was a
recovery of migratory flows in the intra-regional area, notably in the states of the
Northeast; there was the emergence and strengthening of poles of migratory absorption,
both intra-regional and inter-regional, enabling most of the conditions to receive many
migrants; and the states of Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, the Federal District, and Goiás
remained as absorption areas for long-distance migrations, especially those coming from
the Northeast (Baeninger, 2012).
Brazil had remarkable transformations, flows, volumes, and peculiarities of migratory
movements in this context. Thus, migrations ceased to be predominantly of the
countryside-city type and gained new dimensions where new places of population
attraction differed from the previous places. In this way, people began to migrate to areas
where they were more economically developed, that is, to regions where economic
activities were more dynamic and there were more job opportunities and prospects for
intergenerational mobility of wealth (Heckman, 1979; Lisbon, 2008; Johnson and; Salt,
2018).
According to Freguglia and Procópio (2013), population displacements between regions are
a common aspect of the Brazilian labor market, which has striking characteristics such as
wide territorial extension and disparities in labor income levels across the country.
Therefore, it reflects the poor distribution of productive activities and differentials in
remuneration for work.
On the other hand, Lima and Vale (2001) argue that the incentive for Brazilians to migrate
is linked to a historical factor, being part of the composition of society and the production
of its space. This event is related to the rigidity of the social pyramid in Brazil. Therefore, to
improve economically or ascend socially, it is necessary to migrate to another region. Thus,
in addition to the fact that migrants are sensitive to economic incentives, they tend to have
higher incomes and consequently demonstrate consumption needs. Therefore, population
mobility is characterized as people's response to financial situations in which geographical
transformations are based on the possibility of acquiring better salaries (Mincer, 1978;
Massey, 1993; Queiroz; Santos, 2011; Lima et al., 2019).
Although the factors influencing the migratory process are predominantly economic,
subjective factors such as cultural, religious, and family characteristics must be
considered. Consequently, migration patterns began to be analyzed, reflecting the
constant changes in countries' political, economic, and cultural relations (Lisboa, 2008;
Rodrigues, 2015; Riggoti, 2019; Silva Filho & Santos, 2021).
Because of this, it is necessary to consider not only the condition of activity but also that of
occupation. That is, how migrants are inserted in the labor market and how inequalities
between migrants and non-migrants employed in the Brazilian labor market persist.
Observing the level of activity and analyzing only the economic aspect can have
repercussions on social and economic issues that are less common in studies on the
insertion of migrants in destination regions in recent periods (Silva Filho, 2017; Silva Filho
et al., 2022).
Thus, this article aims to review the literature on Brazilian migration dynamics, highlighting
the primary empirical evidence and associating them with the main migration theories –
classical, neoclassical, and structuralist. The article is structured in five sections to achieve
the proposed objective. In addition to this introduction, the second section presents the
methodological procedures adopted. In the third section, the literature on the
determinants of migration is reviewed based on the classical, neoclassical, and
structuralist views. The fourth section emphasizes the empirical evidence of internal
migrations and their association with the timely migration theory; the fifth section is the
final consideration.
Methodological procedures
The methodological procedures used in this article followed two stages: i) the first
searched the national and international literature for evidence on theoretical models that
seek to understand the migratory movement of the population. This allowed us to find
evidence from three main currents: classical, neoclassical, and structuralist. ii) the second
sought to review the empirical literature on Brazilian migrations in national and
international journals and, subsequently, to associate the results of each piece of evidence
found with one or more migration theories.
The definitions of migratory visions or theories are based on different postulates, which
always merge into the finalistic aspects. You always have source and destination locations
that influence migration decisions. Although these theoretical definitions have similarities,
the main peculiarities of each one are highlighted below, according to the literature cited
throughout the work. A table with the principal authors of each theoretical current used in
this work is also included.
Board 1: Classification of authors in the different theoretical currents used in this study
(free classification by authors)
Classic view
• It assumes that migration takes place to promote the general balance between the
supply and demand of labor, to result in wage equilibrium in the place of origin and
destination of migrants. In other words, this dynamic occurs until the balance between
supply and demand for work is equalized, thus promoting wage balance in this market.
Neoclassical view:
• They are based on rational choice, utility maximization, mobility of factors of production,
wage differentials, and employment opportunities. In the neoclassical model, the sufficient
condition for rural-urban urban-urban migration is regional/sectoral wage differentiation.
Structuralist View:
• A country's productive structure, evidenced by regional inequality, is the main driving
force of internal migration. The reasons for migration are divided into two: The first is
called the factor of change, characterized mainly by the mechanization of agriculture; The
second is stagnation, caused by people's pressure for structural transformations in the
productive dynamics. For structuralists, internal migrations are directly influenced by the
global conjuncture from the industrialization process, historically conditioned as an
instrument of spatial redistribution of individuals who adapt to changes in economic
activities.
The searches were carried out using the main search engines for journal articles: Scielo,
Scopus, Google Scholar, Science Direct, Capes Journals, and World Wide Science. The
searches were conducted between January and July 2022, and articles were selected
between August and November 2022.
The inclusion criteria for the first part – theories of migration – were based on the
assumptions of articles that defended a theoretical current as a postulation of a population
migration model and that this was cited in more than 20 articles located in the different
search engines already explained. In the case of the second approach – empirical evidence
of Brazilian migration – the inclusion criterion was the empirical analysis of the Brazilian
migratory dynamics using data from the Census (which should occur every ten years in
Brazil) or from the National Household Sample Survey (Annual Survey, which became
quarterly as of 2012), both from the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics – IBGE,
published in specialized journals from the year 2000 until the year 2023.
With the inclusion criteria presented above, we sought to organize a section with
references to the theories of migration, evidenced in the theoretical models and the
empirical evidence found for Brazil. Then, a table was built with the primary empirical
research on the Brazilian migratory dynamics and its respective association with one or
more theoretical currents on migration.
Determinants of migration: a review of the literature
Classic View
The factors that influence population mobility can be interpreted in the works of some
classics of economics and sociology[1] , where migration is analyzed by the transformation
of rural areas into urban spaces (urbanization), by the modernization of society's means of
production (industrialization), and by the development of capitalists' means of capital
accumulation (Oliveira, 2014).
Adam Smith (1996), in his work "The Wealth of Nations," described that the wages offered
in Europe's great industrial and commercial locations in the eighteenth century attracted
many migrants, mainly caused by the Industrial Revolution. This author proposed that
wages and profits should reach equality between the city and the countryside. The stimuli
lead these factors to the concentration of capital and labor in urban centers. Thus, "[...]
both capital and labor naturally seek the most advantageous employment, thus running
whenever they can to the city and abandoning the countryside" (Smith, 1996, p. 170).
This fragmentation of the market in urban areas is caused by fierce intra-capitalist
competition. This dispute, in turn, decreases capital returns. Consequently, due to an
ample labor supply in this labor market, wages are reduced considerably. This factor leads
a part of the capital to move to the countryside due to the possibility of obtaining higher
profits since the competition is less. On the other hand, there is a demand for agricultural
labor that provides better wages (Smith, 1996).
For Malthus (1996), this displacement was understood as an inevitable consequence of
overpopulation. In his theory of overpopulation, he argued that population increases
decreases, or remains stationary according to the subsistence level. Thus, individuals grow
in geometric progression, and food increases arithmetically. In this way, there would be a
tendency for food shortages, creating barriers to population development. Therefore,
moving to another region would allow them to escape this cycle of misery and poverty.
Ravenstein (1980), Marx (1983), Smith (1996), Malthus (1996), Durkheim (1999).
1
As a result of this detachment from the cities, real wages are reduced, and capital
accumulation accelerates. However, lowering wage levels and the relative scarcity of food
caused by migratory flows from the countryside to the city cause situations that generate
jobs in agriculture and, therefore, increase the supply of subsistence goods (Malthus,
1996).
In contrast to Malthus (1996), Karl Marx (1983) described the reason why misery is caused
by big capitalists intentionally reducing wages to maximize their earnings. Thus, in
reporting the relationship between capital and labor, he emphasizes that the worker is free
and can move around without worrying about territorial demands. However, since the
proletariat does not have the means to guarantee its reproduction, it is forced to migrate to
"sell" its labor power, which is its only commodity. Workers are then analyzed as
expropriated individuals and, therefore, forced to migrate for a job that allows them better
incomes and, consequently, better living conditions. Thus, for Marx (1983), the process of
population migration cannot be separated from the migration of capital (accumulation of
wealth), as they are configured as extensions of the same system of capital accumulation.
Émile Durkheim (1999), in his work "On the Division of Social Labor," portrayed the
modification of organic solidarity based on the division of labor and economic dependence
that was related, in most cases, to the decay of the shared belief system, resulting in a
social collapse. These factors have provoked conflicts between social groups, including
suicides and crimes. Thus, migration became one of the factors that weakened these
traditions, described by the author as a factor that modifies the social structure, enabling
greater equality among people.
According to Muniz (2009) and Castanho (2013), one of the first classical models related to
migration was described by Lewis (1954), who developed a dualistic conception of the
economy, dividing it into two sectors: a capitalist one, encompassing more urban and
industrialized sectors of society; and another for subsistence, which includes agricultural
activities and rural areas. This model generally describes that the capitalist sector pays a
higher wage than the agricultural sector, thus attracting an unlimited labor supply.
Based on the assumptions of this model, Muniz (2009) described that there would be a
labor shortage in the countryside, causing a tendency to increase agricultural income,
which would cause a decrease in wages in rural and urban areas. As a result, it would bring
stability between marginal productivity in these two sectors and encourage the end of the
adjustment process through migration.
However, migration only had a more systematic approach than the classical studies of
Ravenstein (1980). In the conception of Caetano (1995), Ravenstein (1980) sought to
identify the laws that order migrations through their unstable character, being a pioneer in
one of the theoretical principles on the analysis of migrations: the existence of poles of
attraction of individuals that are distinguished from regions of dispersion by the labor
force.
Ravenstein (1980) described cities as poles of attraction, mainly because commercial and
industrial activities provide diverse employment and income opportunities. Thus, there is a
link between migration and change in economic activity. Therefore, migrants are attracted
to more developed regions because there is a greater possibility of being incorporated into
the labor market, thus having a better financial condition.
Ravenstein (1980) also pointed out that migrants moving to large urban centers are mainly
people from nearby localities, given that the costs associated with displacement are
proportional to the distance from the place of origin to the area of destination of origin.
Therefore, the expansion of cities at this accelerated pace cannot be explained only by the
displacement of peripheral regions but also by the fact that fertility is relatively higher than
mortality.
Thus, the classical view seems to assume that migration causes the general equilibrium
between the supply and demand of labor, which induces wage equilibrium at migrants'
places of origin and destination.
Neoclassical view
Among neoclassical theorists, Sjaastad (1962) has divided the expenses and returns of
migration into two categories: monetary and non-monetary. The first covers all expenses
related to the movement of migrants. The other is composed of the opportunity costs of
this displacement, such as, for example, the time lost in the trip and in the search for
another job, as well as the psychic costs related to the abandonment of acquaintances and
the place of origin. Therefore, the individual, as a rational being, will only decide to migrate
if there is a possibility that the income earned in the destination region will be higher than
the costs linked to his displacement. Thus, it analyzed migration as an investment factor
that generates expenses but can be converted into human capital.
Thus, Sjaastad (1962) developed the idea of selectivity. This conception is initially
formulated considering the age group, where migrants already in adulthood are positively
selected as they seek to invest more and more in their level of education. However, they
must also consider influential or psychological factors that can positively or negatively
influence the migrant's departure from their place of origin, also known as their place of
birth.
In turn, Schultz (1967) created the theory of human capital. The author proposes that the
knowledge acquired by the individual, despite being something that cannot be sold,
positively influences the production of goods and consumption. These characteristics are
explained by the assumption that individuals need to qualify to obtain better incomes,
considering that this qualification makes it possible to increase their efficiency in the labor
market. Thus, the displacement of migrants, especially their expenditure on education, is
essential in receiving higher wages than their place of origin.
Converging with the theoretical approach proposed by Sjaastad (1962), Lee (1980)
described a positive selection for the highly qualified individual; otherwise, there is an
adverse selection. The cities of origin and destination characteristics are also considered,
representing essential elements in the decision to migrate. Thus, the differences in the
economic spheres cause the displacement of the population from the less developed
regions to the more developed ones. He named the region of attraction the reason
individuals choose their fate and qualified the region of expulsion as the cause that leads
people to leave their place of origin. However, he reported that the decision to migrate is
not entirely rational because people only migrate occasionally, making this choice with
themselves in mind.
Borjas (1987) also described selective migration, basing his studies on the skills of workers
and the prospects of returning immigrants from the United States. Through his analyses,
he reported that the possibility of people migrating is positively motivated by the
differences in income acquired at the place of destination concerning the place of origin
and negatively influenced by the expenses related to the displacement of migrants.
Therefore, migration occurs when net returns are favorable.
According to Chiswick (1999), economic migrants are characterized by moving from one
place to another, a migratory movement within the country or across national borders, in
search of better employment opportunities. In his model of positive migration based on the
work of Sjaastad (1962), Chiswick (1999) modeled the costs involved in the returns of
these displacements and the prices of human capital, considering that there are two types
of workers: low-capacity and high-capacity. Capacity and skill levels are known to
employees and potential employers at no cost.
Chiswick (1999) describes the high capacity of workers as having several characteristics:
ambition, aggressiveness, perseverance, and entrepreneurial capacity, among others.
Through his model, he explained that for the most qualified individuals, the rate of return is
higher than for those with low ability since there are monetary expenses to travel. This
income grows as these skills also increase. Thus, there is a positive selection, as they have
stimuli to migrate. However, without these investments, there is no selectivity in migratory
flows.
Freguglia and Procópio (2013) emphasized these studies by Chiswick (1999). The authors
described that the reception of migrants is initially less possible than that of non-migrants
because the costs related to travel to the destination region can be high. However, there is
a process of appropriation of the worker after migration, where the income earned
becomes higher than that of local workers, allowing him to have an advantage of moving in
the long term. Thus, considering the self-selection of migrants, migration becomes a factor
that can contribute to income inequality.
Santos Júnior, Menezes-Filho, and Ferreira (2005) also argued that the positive selection
of migrants causes an increase in income inequality because migrants have characteristics
that are not observable about non-migrants, among them greater motivation, aptitude, and
entrepreneurship. In this way, as more prosperous states absorb more skilled labor to
work, these workers are paid more and contribute to increased income levels.
Freguglia (2007) also described these characteristics, in which migrants, when moving to
the place of destination, may present unobservable factors that, when put into practice in
this region, contribute to increasing their productivity. Therefore, he described how the
differences between migrants and non-migrants directly impact the destination area and
can influence the worsening of income inequalities.
Cambota and Pontes (2012) also argued that internal migration could be understood as the
displacement of individuals living in regions with a low level of development to more
developed areas. One of the critical elements for this change is the search for better job
opportunities. However, this factor can affect social inequality, as jobs that require this
migratory movement provide more income to migrants than to non-migrants.
Thus, not only demographic, social, and economic characteristics but also unobservable
attributes provide better incomes to migrants. Moreover, these unobservable components
directly affect the pay gaps. Therefore, even if migrants and non-migrants have the same
levels of education and equivalent demographic characteristics and are in the same field of
activity, wage inequalities will persist (Gama & Machado, 2014; Silva Filho et al., 2022).
Contrary to this thought, Martine (1987) described migration as not a social problem but a
solution to this obstacle, as it is part of the development process. However, it can only be
considered a problem if natural disasters cause the reasons for this population's mobility
or when their characteristics have implications for the very development of society.
Ramalho (2008, p. 23) described that "in the neoclassical model, the sufficient condition
for rural-urban migration is regional/sectoral wage differentiation." For this reason,
population displacement is considered a joyful event since the reallocation of labor allows
for the readjustment of pre-existing instabilities caused by the poor distribution of
resources. Thus, markets tend to balance themselves through the free displacement of
jobs from the factors of production, with no possibility of unemployment in society
(Cançado, 1999).
In summary, " neoclassical migration theories are based on rational choice, utility
maximization, mobility of factors of production, wage differentials, and employment
opportunities" (Bassan, 2017, p. 58). Therefore, this theoretical line follows the idea that
migration constitutes an economic process where individuals' rational choices aim at a
more significant future income and, consequently, a better quality of life.
However, this neoclassical analysis is based on the conception that individuals are rational
and that this migratory process conditions a general balance between the supply and
demand of labor in both regions (origin and destination), resulting in the interspatial
homogenization of incomes, proving to be incapable of explaining the determinants of
migration in areas with late development. For this reason, they are questioned by
structuralists (Silva Filho, 2017; Silva Filho & Maia, 2023).
Structuralist view
At the end of the 1960s, especially in Latin America, a different view of migration was
created through the conjuncture of less developed countries, also called peripheral
countries, in which attempts were made to associate migrations with the characteristics
implicit in economic expansion. This approach became the historical-structural bias
(Ferreira, 2001; Ramalho, 2008).
One of the main contributions of migratory movements, especially internal migrations in
developing countries, has been described by Singer (1980), Wood (1982), and Massey
(1993). These authors, except for occasional divergences, affirmed that migratory flows
are directly related to capitalist development, especially after the industrialization process
in which there were changes in production techniques and the social division of labor. As a
result, he reported that industrialization generates regional imbalances that motivate these
migratory displacements. Thus, regional inequality is the main driving force of internal
migration.
In this context, Singer (1980) reported two factors: expulsion and attraction. The reasons
for the removal are divided into two: The first is called the factor of change, characterized
mainly by the mechanization of agriculture. This mechanization increases production, but
the labor supply decreases, causing labor displacement from rural to urban areas. The
second reason is stagnation, caused by people's pressure for fertile land. Thus, with the
increase in population, it becomes more and more difficult for people to stay in the
countryside since the introduction of new land is limited since most of it is concentrated in
the hands of big capitalists. As a result, people migrate not only to earn better incomes but
also because, in many cases, they are expelled from their place of origin.
According to Singer (1980), Wood (1982), and Massey (1993), migration is understood as a
social process historically conditioned by industrialization and by institutional and
structural factors arising from the economic changes that peripheral countries have
undergone. For this reason, these authors did not seek to understand migratory
displacement by its appearance but rather to interpret it from a global perspective.
According to Nogueira (1995) and Ferreira (2001), the structuralist approach analyzes that
migratory flows are caused by the conditioning of variations in productive structures,
affecting all social classes in different ways. Therefore, migration is not characterized by
the sum of individual decisions but by the determination of the capital strategy, which, by
provoking regional inequalities where wage and income differentials become increasingly
discrepant between regions, directly influences the migratory process from peripheral
areas to the central part.
These groups are motivated by other phenomena that are also determined and related to
structural change processes. Therefore, migration is analyzed as the potentiating element
of inequality between regions and is also an essential component in capital concentration
(Ferreira, 2001). Thus, for this theoretical line, the migratory flow is configured as a
process historically determined and influenced by the patterns of capital accumulation in
which labor mobility is subject to the interests that govern the capitalist system (Silva
Filho, 2017).
Muniz (2009) described historical structuralists as analyzing migration as a process
resulting from the social, political, and economic conjuncture. As a result, migratory flows
are incorporated into a broad field. They may go beyond individual wills to the detriment of
collective interests. Therefore, the social and economic scenario in which migrants are
inserted must be considered to understand the reasons for population displacements.
Silva Filho (2017, p. 16) states that the "historical-structural approach proposes that the
decision to migrate stems from the desire for better salaries and working conditions
offered at the destination concerning the place of origin." In this way, subjective factors, as
well as migrants' characteristics, are not the main reasons for labor displacement but the
structural causes (usually of an economic nature) that lead people to move from one region
to another.
The migrant, when entering the place of destination, is subject to the contradictions of that
place because the new existing social relations present themselves in different ways from
those they were used to experiencing. Thus, when adapting to the new place, the individual
begins not only to acquire the characteristics of the environment but also to transmit the
ideologies, cultures, and all the knowledge he brings from his origin, provoking a process of
change without losing his identity. However, when this uprooting does not happen, the
migrant begins to experience different realities, living in this new place without inserting
himself in it, making it difficult for him to enter the labor market (Brumes; Silva, 2011;
Bassan, 2017).
These characteristics are reinforced by Paviani (1993) when he reports that individuals will
only effectively participate in the local production process when they adapt to the new
region because, in addition to leaving their families, they also abandon the local culture to
enter a new region or space in the search for better living conditions. Consequently, they
need to settle in the destination to alleviate the feeling of uncertainty and achieve a sense
of well-being. However, this stabilization in the destination region presents a socio-spatial
and sociocultural identification limitation. Therefore, some motives encourage this fixation
of the migrant, and others dispel any effort or attempt to carry it out (Brumes; Silva, 2011).
Thus, for structuralists, internal migrations are directly influenced by the global
conjuncture, based on the industrialization process, historically conditioned as an
instrument of spatial redistribution of individuals who adapt to changes in economic
activities (Caetano, 1995).
For this reason, Bassan (2017, p. 50) reported that "although there are different types of
mobility and the concepts present certain specificities in their approach, the definitions
always start from the determination of a place of origin and destination." However,
migration must be understood as a phenomenon that provides not only population
displacement but also the process that represents the fundamental social, economic, and
personal transformation directly related to the historicity of this movement.
For this reason, migratory flows are not a process that can be understood by themselves
but are historically determined based on the conjectural and structural transformations
arising from the capital accumulation system of the big capitalists (Ferreira, 2001).
Consequently, by emphasizing the reproduction processes of capital, they described
methods for understanding the migratory motives that intervene in the copying of society.
That is, in social groups. Thus, his studies focused not on individual behavior but on the
collective attitudes of geographic areas (Brumes; Silva, 2011; Brumes, 2013).
Table of empirical evidence of internal migrations and their
association with the theory of timely migration
The table below presents the empirical studies considered in this article on dance
migrations. The authors of this study classified them according to their understanding of
the approach given in the articles presented in chart one and its outcome in a theoretical
current on migration.
Board 2: Empirical articles, journals, authors, and their association with the migration
theory correspond to the authors' results.
The empirical bibliography on migration and labor income differentials in Brazil shows that
migrants are positively selected and that unobservable characteristics significantly affect
the migration decision and impact labor income in their favor. In addition, it is possible to
understand that the classical, neoclassical, and structuralist migration theories are present
in Brazil's empirical evidence in such a way that they explain, depending on the starting
question of the research, the national migratory phenomenon.
Thus, it is emphasized that some evidence should be highlighted:
• Migration in Brazil occurs mainly due to the opportunity to work in the places of
destination, even with changes in the migratory dynamics recorded over the years,
according to the empirical literature;
• Low labor supply in regions with less economic dynamism drives the movement of the
population to leave in search of job opportunities in other regions of the country;
• Wage differentials between the regions, due to structural issues in their productive
dynamics, drive the internal migratory movement of the country;
• Brazilian migrants are positively selected; that is, they have unobservable characteristics
such as ambition to grow professionally and economically, courage to seek new
opportunities, determination, and willingness to improve the economic situation, among
others, which affect both their migration decision and their salary differentials in the
destination regions;
• There is wage inequality between migrant men and women, with the wage premium
being higher for men who migrate to the detriment of migrant women;
• Migration in Brazil, over the years, has been an excellent opportunity to change the social
position of the population;
• Migration in Brazil presents characteristics that are essentially predominant due to the
idea of better living conditions in the destination regions to the detriment of the original
regions.
Table 1 shows the percentage share of Brazilian migrants, according to place of birth,
based on data from the demographic censuses of 1991, 2000, and 2010. The table shows
the participation of people who were born in a region other than the one where they lived
at the time of the survey (major regions) – inter-regional migrations –; people who were
born in a different state from the one they lived in at the time of the survey (Federation
Unit) – interstate migration –; and, people who were born in a different municipality from
the one they lived in at the time of the research (municipalities) – inter-municipal
migration.
Table 1: Percentage share of migrants according to birth moonlight information in major
Brazilian regions, states, and municipalities – 1991, 2000, 2010.
The data show that interregional migration occupies its lowest relative participation,
similarly to the others. In addition, interstate migration, which is higher than interregional
migration but lower than intermunicipal migration, occupies the most significant relative
share among them in the national territory.
Table 2 shows the relative participation of the Brazilian population by household condition
(urban and rural).
Table 2: Percentage distribution of the Brazilian population by urban and rural households
– 1991, 2000, 2010.
The data plotted in the table show that over the years, the share of people living in street
areas has decreased relative to those living in urban areas. These results may be
associated with changes in the migratory dynamics and in the way of life of the country's
population.
Final considerations
The objective of this article was to review the literature on Brazilian migration dynamics,
highlighting the primary empirical evidence found and associating them with the main
migration theories. To this end, we resorted to a review of the theoretical literature on
migration and the empirical evidence in Brazil. Initially, the classical, neoclassical, and
structuralist views that significantly influenced the studies of internal migrations were
analyzed, followed by empirical studies on internal migrations in Brazil.
In the classical view, migration is analyzed because of urbanization, industrialization, and
the development of the means of capital accumulation by the big capitalists. They describe
a link between migration and change in economic activity, where wages and profits reach a
level playing field between town and country. Therefore, they assume that the general
balance between labor supply and demand is caused by migration, leading to wage
equilibrium at the place of origin and destination of migrants.
In the neoclassical view, the relations between employment and the market and wages
and goods are the main reasons that induce individuals to migrate in search of work and
income. Therefore, they underline that migration is an economic process analyzed as an
investment, where the individual has complete information about the place of destination,
deciding to migrate if there is a possibility of improving their living conditions based on
more significant financial gains. Thus, workers migrate to regions where labor is scarcer,
and capital is high because productivity and income are high because of the correlation
between capital and labor. Therefore, people tend to migrate from poorer regions to more
affluent areas due to inequalities between work and income.
On the other hand, structuralists believe that migratory flows constitute a social process
related to the conjectural and structural transformations resulting from capitalist
accumulation. When these characteristics intensify, income differentials become
increasingly unequal between regions, directly influencing individuals to move from
peripheral to central locations. For this reason, migration cannot be understood
independently, given that constraints on production structures affect social classes
differently. Thus, structural (often economic) reasons influence migratory flows and
increase regional inequalities. However, other elements of life in society, such as values,
cultures, beliefs, etc., should also be considered as drivers of migration.
In addition, it was found that these economic theories have a common point: regardless of
the mode of production, migration is associated with the economic drivers of employment
and income. Thus, the main factor influencing population displacement is the search for
better working conditions, especially with higher salaries than those earned in the region of
origin.
In Brazil, the migratory movement, according to what was found in the evaluation of the
empirical bibliography, occurs mainly through the search for employment in the most
economically dynamic regions. In addition, the search for better salaries and the possibility
of social ascension drives part of the population to migrate. Thus, these studies show no
evidence of forced migration, such as in countries that face wars, at an instant. Thus, the
decision to migrate seems to reflect the individual's decision in search of better
opportunities in the labor market and the desire to become socially enlightened by
improving their quality of life.
In this sense, it is essential to emphasize that migration should be analyzed from an
economic perspective and added to the social character. For this reason, it must be
understood that in the spaces of migratory flows, there is not only the exchange of people
but also the exchange of information, ideologies, and cultures that directly corroborate the
social transformations in the places of destination.
References
Baeninger, R. (2005). São Paulo e suas migrações no final do século 20. São Paulo em
perspectiva, v. 19, n. 3, p. 84-96, jul./set.
Baeninger, R. (2012). Rotatividade Migratória: um novo olhar para as migrações internas
no brasil. Rev. Inter. Mob. Hum., Brasília, Ano XX, n. 39, p. 77-100, jul./dez.
Bassan, D. S. (2017). Mobilidade espacial: a dinâmica das migrações e a trajetória dos
migrantes na região do vale do Paranhana/RS – Brasil. 252 p. Tese (Doutorado em
Desenvolvimento Regional) - Universidade de Santa Cruz do Sul, Rio Grande do Sul.
Bastia, T. & Skeldon, R. (2019). Routledge Handbook of Migration and Development. New
York: Routledge.
Batista, N. N. F., & Cacciamali, M. C. (2009). Diferencial de salários entre homens e
mulheres segundo a condição de migração. Revista Brasileira de Estudos de População,
26, 97-115.
Becker, G. S. (1993). Human Capital: a theoretical and empirical analysis, with special
reference to education. University of Chicago press.
Borjas, G. J. (1987). Self-selection and the earnings of immigrants. The American
Economic Review, v. 77, n. 4, pp. 531-553.
Brito, F. (2006). O deslocamento da população brasileira para as metrópoles. Estudos
Avançados, v. 20, n. 57, p. 221-236.
Brumes, K. R. & Silva, M. da. (2011). A migração sob diversos contextos. Boletim de
Geografia. Maringá, v. 29, n. 1, p. 123-133.
Brumes, K. R. (2013). Estudos sobre Migrações: Desafios, Diversidades e Evoluções.
LEOPOLDIANUM, v. 39, n. 107/108/109, p. 13-30.
Caetano, A. J. (1995). Migração nos municípios das capitais da Região Norte na década de
70. 1995. 112 p. Dissertação (Mestrado em Demografia) - Centro de Desenvolvimento e
Planejamento Regional, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte.
Cambota, J. N. & Pontes, P. A. (2012). O Papel da Migração Interna na Convergência de
Rendimentos do Trabalho no Brasil, no Período de 1994 a 2009. Revista EconomiA,
Brasília (DF), v. 13, n.1, p.131–147, jan/abr.
Castanho, J. A. G. (2013). Impactos dos fluxos migratórios nas atividades económicas: o
caso da região do algarve. 2013. 335 p. Tese (Doutorado em Economia) - Universidade do
Algarve, Portugal.
Chiswick, B. R. (1999). Are immigrants favorably self-selected? The American Economic
Review, v. 89, n. 2, p. 181-185.
da Silva Freguglia, R., Gonçalves, E., & da Silva, E. R. (2014). Composition and
determinants of the skilled out-migration in the Brazilian formal labor market: A panel data
analysis from 1995 to 2006. EconomiA, 15(1), 100-117.
de Assis, R. S., & da Silva Alves, J. (2014). Hiato salarial entre homens e mulheres no Brasil
segundo condição migratória: o mercado de trabalho é segregado ou discrimina?. Revista
Econômica do Nordeste, 45(1), 120-135.
Durkheim, E. (1999). Da divisão do trabalho social. Tradução Eduardo Brandão - 2. ed. –
São Paulo: Martins Fontes.
Ferreira, E. W. (2001). Migrações internas: algumas considerações teóricas. Revista CEPPG
-Centro de Ensino Superior de Catalio, v. 03, n. 04.
Ferreira-Batista, N., & Cacciamali, M. C. (2012). Migração familiar, trabalho infantil e ciclo
intergeracional da pobreza no estado de São Paulo. Nova Economia, 22, 515-554.
Freguglia, R. da S. & Procópio, T. S. (2013). Efeitos da mudança de emprego e da migração
interestadual sobre os salários no brasil formal: evidências a partir de dados em painel.
Pesquisa e planejamento econômico, v. 43, n. 2, agosto.
Freguglia, R. da S. (2007). Efeitos da migração sobre os salários no Brasil. 2007. 126 p.
Tese (Doutorado em Teoria Econômica) – Faculdade de Economia, Administração e
Contabilidade, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo.
Gama, L. C. D., & Hermeto, A. M. (2017). Diferencial de ganhos entre migrantes e não
migrantes em Minas Gerais. Revista Brasileira de Estudos de População, 34, 341-366.
Gama, L. C. D.; Machado, A. F. (2014). Migração e rendimentos no Brasil: análise dos
fatores associados no período intercensitário 2000-2010. Estudos Avançados, São Paulo,
v. 28, n. 81, p. 155-174.
Gries, T., Kraft, M., & Pieck, C. (2011). Interregional migration, self-selection and the
returns to education in Brazil. The Annals of Regional Science, 46(3), 707-732.
Heckman, J. J. (1979). Sample Selection bias as a Specification Error. Econometrica:
Journal of the econometric society, vol.47, n.1, p. 153-161. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2307/1912352.
Johnson, J. H. & Salt, J. (2018). (Ed.). Labour Migration: the internal geographical mobility
of labour in the developed world. New York: Routledge.
Lee, E. S. (1980). Uma teoria sobre a migração, In: MOURA, H, A, (org.). Migração interna:
textos selecionados, Fortaleza: Banco do Nordeste do Brasil S/A.
Lewis, W. A. (1954). Economic development with unlimited supplies of labor. The
Manchester School, v. 22, n. 2, p. 139-191.
Lima, C. F., Costa, E. M., Mariano, F. Z., Justo, W. R., & de Carvalho Castelar, P. U. (2020).
Migration of labor: differential of income between rural and urban trade union workers in
Brazil. Journal of Economic Studies, 47(4), 939-966.
Lima, L. C. & Vale, A. L. F. (2001). Migração e mudança social: influência do migrante do
sertão nordestino no Norte do Brasil. Revista Scripta Nova, v. 82, n. 94.
Lima, Y. C.; Filho, L. A. & Cavalcanti, D. M. (2019). Migração, Seleção e Diferenciais de
Renda na região Norte do Brasil em 2010. Revista Brasileira de Estudos Regionais e
Urbanos, 13(1), 141-160.
Lisboa, S. S. (2008). Os fatores determinantes dos novos movimentos migratórios. Revista
ponto de vista, v. 5, p. 83-96.
Maciel, F. T., & da Cunha, M. S. (2013). Migração e diferenciais de rendimento no Brasil:
uma análise sobre o efeito do tempo de chegada ao local de destino. Revista Econômica do
Nordeste, 44(3), 627-650.
Malthus, T. R. (1996). Princípios da economia política e considerações sobre sua aplicação
prática. Abril cultura, coleção os economistas.
Martine, G. (1987). Migração e metropolização. São Paulo em Perspectiva, Fundação
Seade, v. 1, n. 2, p. 28-31, São Paulo, jul./set.
Marx, K. (1983). O capital: crítica da economia política – o processo global da produção
capitalista. Tradução de Regis Barbosa e Flávio R. Kothe. São Paulo: Abril Cultural, v. 3.
Massey, D. S. et al. (1993). Theories of international migration: A review and appraisal.
Population and Development Review, v. 19, n. 3, p. 431-466. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2307/2938462.
MASSEY, D. S. et al. Theories of international migration: A review and appraisal. Population
and Development Review, [s.i.], v. 3, n. 19, p.431–466, 1993. Disponível em:
http://bit.ly/2PApllp. Acesso em: 30 maio 2022.
Mincer, J. (1978). Family migration decisions. Journal of Political Economy, v. 86, n. 5, p.
749-773. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3386/w0199.
Muniz, J. O. (2009). Um ensaio sobre as causas e características da migração. Avaliação da
Dinâmica Demográfica, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais – CEDEPLAR/Demografia.
Nogueira, O. J. O. (1995). População emigrante de Minas Gerais segundo o lugar de
destino (1960-1980). 1995. Dissertação (Mestrado em Economia) - Universidade Federal
de Minas Gerais, CEDEPLAR, Belo Horizonte.
Oliveira, M. (2014). O tema da imigração na sociologia clássica. Revista de Ciências Sociais,
Rio de Janeiro, v. 57, n. 1.
Queiroz, S. N. & Santos, J. M. (2011). Saldos Migratórios: Uma Análise por Estados e
Regiões do Brasil (1996-2006). Revista Econômica do Nordeste, v. 42, p. 309-332.
Queiroz, S. N. (2013). Migrações, retorno e seletividade no mercado de trabalho cearense.
2013. 251 p. Tese (Doutorado em Demografia) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, São
Paulo.
Ramalho, H. M. B. (2008). Migração Rural-Urbana no Brasil: Determinantes, Retorno
Econômico e Inserção Produtiva. 2008. 200 p. Tese (Doutorado em Economia) –
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife-PE.
Ramalho, H. M. D. B., & Silveira Neto, R. D. M. (2012). A Inserção do migrante rural no
mercado de trabalho urbano no Brasil: uma análise empírica da importância dos setores
informal e formal. Estudos Econômicos (São Paulo), 42, 731-771.
Ravenstein, E. G. (1980). As leis da migração. In: Moura, H. A, (coord.). Migrações internas:
textos selecionados. Fortaleza: Banco do Nordeste do Brasil S/A.
Rigotti, J. I. R.; Campos, J.; Hadad, R. M. (2017). Migrações Internas no Brasil: (des)
continuidades regionais à luz do Censo Demográfico 2010. Revista Geografias, p. 8-24.
Rodrigues, K. C. T. T., de Souza, S. C. I., Moura, F. K. F., & Maia, K. (2016). Diferencial
salarial segundo a condição de migração e gênero nos estados da região sul do Brasil.
Economia & Região, 4(1), 7-23.
Rodrigues, K. C. T. T.; Moura, F. K. F.; Souza, S. D. C. I. & Maia, K. (2015). Diferença Salarial
Segundo a Condição de Migração e Sexo na Bahia. Revista Economia e Desenvolvimento,
v.14; n.2.
Rodrigues, K., Moura, F. K. F., de Souza, S. D. C. I., & Maia, K. (2015). Diferença salarial
segundo a condição de migração e sexo na Bahia. Revista Economia e Desenvolvimento,
14(2), 181-195.
Sahota, G. S. (1968). An economic analysis of internal migration in Brazil. Journal of
political economy, 76(2), 218-245.
Santos Júnior, E.R.; Menezes-Filho, N. & Ferreira, P. C. (2005). Migração e seleção e
diferenças regionais de renda no Brasil. Pesquisa e Planejamento Econômico, v. 32, n. 3.
Schultz, T. (1967). O valor econômico da educação. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar.
Silva Filho, L. A. & Maia, A. G. (2023). Migration, Selection and Income Differentials in
Brazilian Labor Market. JOURNAL OF DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC POLICIES, v. 25, p.
31-55, 2023.
Silva Filho, L. A. (2017). Migração: inserção socioeconômica, condição de atividade e
diferenciais de rendimentos no Brasil. 2017. 130 p. Tese (Doutorado em Economia) -
Instituto de Economia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, São Paulo.
Silva Filho, L. A., & Santos, R. A. H. V. (2021). Migração, seleção e diferenciais de
rendimentos do trabalho em Pernambuco–2000/2010. Nexos Econômicos, 15(1), 54-81.
Silva Filho, L. A., Santos, R. S., Souza, J. P., & Silva, Y. C. (2023). Seleção migratória e
rendimentos do trabalho na região metropolitana do cariri–2000/2010. RDE-Revista de
Desenvolvimento Econômico, 1(51).
Silva Filho, L. A., Souza, J. P., & Almeida, A. N. (2022). Diferenciais de rendimentos do
trabalho entre migrantes por raça/cor: uma abordagem por regressões quantílicas–
2000/2010. Revista da ABET, 21(1).
SINGER, P. (1980). Migrações internas: considerações teóricas sobre o seu estudo. In
Moura, H. (org.). Migração Interna: Textos selecionados. Fortaleza: Banco do Nordeste do
Brasil S.A.
SJAASTAD, L. A. (1962). The Costs and Returns of Human Migration. Journal of Political
Economy, v. 70, n. 5, p. 80-93.
SMITH, A. (1996). A riqueza das nações. Abril cultura, coleção os economistas.
WOOD, Charles H. Equilibrium and historical-structural perspectives on migration.
International Migration Review, [S.I.], v. 16, n. 2, p.298–319, jan. 1982. Quarterly. SAGE
Publications. Disponível em: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019791838201600202. Acesso
em: 10 nov. 2019.
