This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 19, 2024. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Merge pull request #76 from brown-ccv/feat-pages-cms
feat: page ledes in CMS
- Loading branch information
Showing
11 changed files
with
354 additions
and
414 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@ | ||
export const SITE_TITLE = "MMP" | ||
export const SITE_DESCRIPTION = "Mesoamerican Migration Project" | ||
|
||
|
||
export const LINKS = ["people", "news", "publications", "map", "data", "documentation"] | ||
export const LINKS = ["people", "news", "publications", "study-design", "data", "documentation"] |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ | ||
--- | ||
title: Data | ||
--- | ||
|
||
Instructions to users |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ | ||
--- | ||
title: Documentation | ||
--- | ||
|
||
Instructions about tables |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ | ||
--- | ||
title: Home | ||
--- | ||
|
||
The Mexican Migration Project (MMP) was created in 1982 by an | ||
interdisciplinary team of researchers to further our understanding of the | ||
complex process of Mexican migration to the United States. The project is a | ||
binational research effort co-directed by Jorge Durand, professor of Social | ||
Anthropology at the University of Guadalajara (Mexico), and Douglas S. Massey, | ||
professor of Sociology and Public Affairs, with a joint appointment in the | ||
Woodrow Wilson School, at Princeton University (US). | ||
|
||
Since its inception, the MMP's main focus has been to gather social as well as economic information on Mexican-US | ||
migration. The data collected has been compiled in a comprehensive database that is available to the public free of | ||
charge for research and educational purposes through this web-site. | ||
|
||
The MMP is a unique source of data that enables researchers to track patterns and processes of contemporary Mexican | ||
immigration to the United States. The project is a multi-disciplinary research effort that generates public use data on | ||
the characteristics and behavior of Mexican migrants. | ||
|
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,145 @@ | ||
--- | ||
title: Study Design | ||
--- | ||
|
||
## Design | ||
|
||
The data contained in the various MMP databases have been gathered using an approach that borrows from anthropological | ||
and sociological research methods. In particular, our study employs the Ethnosurvey approach, which combines the | ||
techniques of ethnographic fieldwork and representative survey sampling to gather qualitative as well as quantitative | ||
data. The two kinds of empirical data are compared throughout the study to yield results of greater validity than either | ||
ethnography or a sample survey could provide alone. This method was designed to provide a picture of Mexican-US | ||
migration that is historically grounded, ethnographically interpretable, quantitatively accurate, and rooted in | ||
receiving as well as sending areas. | ||
|
||
Each year, during the winter months (when seasonal migrants tend to return home), the MMP randomly samples households in | ||
communities located throughout Mexico. After gathering social, demographic, and economic information on the household | ||
and its members, interviewers collect basic immigration information on each person's first and last trip to the United | ||
States. From household heads and spouses, we compile detailed year-by-year labor history and migration information; in | ||
addition, for household head migrants, we administer a detailed series of questions about their last trip to the U.S., | ||
focusing on employment, earnings, and use of U.S. social services. | ||
|
||
Following completion of the Mexican surveys, interviewers travel to destination areas in the United States to administer | ||
identical questionnaires to migrants from the same communities sampled in Mexico who have settled north of the border | ||
and no longer return home. These surveys are combined with those conducted in Mexico to generate a representative | ||
binational sample. | ||
|
||
## Selecting Communities | ||
|
||
The process of selecting communities for the Mexican Migration has traditionally relied on anthropological methods. | ||
Communities are chosen after a personal reconnaissance of the geographic area to be studied by the principal | ||
investigators. Because the project initially focused on Western Mexico, the traditional heartland for migration to the | ||
United States, practically all of the earliest communities had significant indices of out-migration, which could easily | ||
be detected using field interviews and simple observations of the frequency of new homes, foreign license plates, | ||
currency exchanges, and international courier services. | ||
|
||
Until 2000, we lacked access to a valid measure to indicate the intensity of emigration from specific municipalities and | ||
the only measure indicating migration was the sex ratio. The only demographic fact regularly considered was the | ||
community's sex ratio, which offer general picture of the intensity of the process of international migration because in | ||
Mexico emigration is so heavily male. After an initial round of fieldwork, investigators compared their preliminary data | ||
with census statistics and formation available from bibliographic sources. However, the MMP has never explicitly sought | ||
to survey only communities with high rates of out-migration. Investigators simply seek to corroborate that there is some | ||
migration from the community in question before proceeding. Then they select four specific locations to represent each | ||
of four levels of urbanization: | ||
|
||
- Ranchos: fewer than 2,500 inhabitants | ||
- Pueblos (Towns): 2,500 to 10,000 inhabitants | ||
- Mid-sized Cities: 10,000 to 100,000 inhabitants | ||
- Large City: usually a particular neighborhood within in a state's capital city | ||
|
||
In the pueblos and ranchos, investigators conduct a complete census of dwellings and undertake random selection from the | ||
resulting list. In mid-sized cities and urban metropolises, investigators generally chose a traditional, | ||
well-established neighborhood–one not dominated by recent rural-urban migrants. As a result, the urban samples are in | ||
reality samples of urban neighborhoods or specifically demarcated quarters. In all cases, the neighborhood must have at | ||
least 1,200 enumerated dwellings, from which a random sample of 200 is taken. | ||
|
||
The methodology of the MMP thus yields results with a high degree of representativeness at the community level, and in | ||
some of the smaller pueblos and ranchos investigators have been able to survey every household in the community. Given | ||
that the sample is not targeted to migrants per se, but surveys the community as a whole, the project needs a fairly | ||
large sample size to generate a significant number of migrants. Traditional methods of cluster sampling generally survey | ||
small numbers of respondents across a large number of areas, but this generally yields small numbers of migrants to | ||
study an inability to make generalizations at the community level. For example, rather than interviewing 20 households | ||
in five communities we interview 100 households in one community, thereby enabling us to make generalizations about | ||
migratory processes at the community level. If the frequency of migration is 30%, on average the surveys would contain | ||
only six migrants in each of the five communities, rather than 30 migrants in one community. | ||
|
||
At present we are able to draw upon an index of migratory developed for municipalities in Mexico’s National Population | ||
Council (CONAPO) based on the 2000 and 2010 census. This index provides reliable information about the level of U.S. | ||
migration prevailing at the municipal level and is particularly useful in identifying new communities of origin for | ||
migrants in new sending states, where heretofore little information has been available. In sum, after 25 years of field | ||
experience, the MMP continues to use anthropological criteria for selecting communities, which are then corroborated | ||
with available data from the census and other sources to confirm the existence of migrants before making the final | ||
selection. | ||
|
||
## Ethnosurvey | ||
|
||
The Ethnosurvey is eclectic and draws on methods and approaches well-known in sociology, anthropology, psychology, and | ||
education. Its contribution and complexity lies in the way all these methods are combined within a single study. The | ||
main idea for the Ethnosurvey is “to complement qualitative and quantitative procedures, so one's weakenesses become the | ||
other's strength, yielding a body of data with greater reliability and more internal validity than is possible to | ||
achieve using either method alone.” (Massey 1987). | ||
|
||
The Ethnosurvey contains a series of tables that are organized around a particular topic, giving coherence to the | ||
“conversation”. It follows a semi structured format to generate an interview schedule that is flexible, unobtrusive and | ||
non-threatening. It requires that identical information be obtained for each person, but questions, wording and ordering | ||
are not fixed. The precise phrasing and timing of each query is left to the judgment of the interviewer, depending on | ||
circumstances. | ||
|
||
In addition, the Ethnosurvey is explicitly designed to provide quantitative data for multi-level analysis by compiling | ||
data at the individual, household, and community levels. Detailed community-level data are compiled at the time of the | ||
survey by the fieldwork supervisor; these data are of great help to interpret the socioeconomic context within which | ||
individuals and households interact (Massey 1987). This small questionnaire is referred to as the Community Data | ||
Inventory. | ||
|
||
## Interview Process | ||
|
||
The questionnaires are applied in three phases. In the first phase, basic social and demographic data are collected from | ||
all members of the household. The interview begins by identifying the household head and systematically enumerating the | ||
spouse and children, beginning with the oldest. All children of the head are listed on the questionnaire whether or not | ||
they live at home, but if a son or daughter is a member of another household, this fact is recorded. A child is | ||
considered to be living in a separate household if he or she is married, maintains a separate house or kitchen, and | ||
organizes expenses separately. After listing the head, spouse, and children, other household members are identified and | ||
their relationship to the head clarified. | ||
|
||
### Phase 1 | ||
|
||
A particularly important task in the first phase of the questionnaire is the identification of people with prior migrant | ||
experience in either the United States or Mexico. For those individuals with migrant experience the interviewer records | ||
the total number of U.S. trips, as well as information about the first and most recent U.S. trips, including the year, | ||
duration, destination, U.S. occupation, legal status, and hourly wage. This exercise is then repeated for first and most | ||
recent migrations within Mexico. | ||
|
||
### Phase 2 | ||
|
||
The second phase of the ethnosurvey questionnaire compiles a year-by-year life history for all household heads, | ||
including a childbearing history, a property history, a housing history, a business history, and a labor history. The | ||
goal of this phase is to capture occupational mobility, health status, migration history, and family formation. | ||
|
||
### Phase 3 | ||
|
||
The third and final phase of the questionnaire gathers information about the household head's experiences on his or her | ||
most recent trip to the United States, including the mode of border-crossing, the kind and number of accompanying | ||
relatives, the kind and number of relatives already present in the United States, the number of social ties that had | ||
been formed with U.S. citizens, English language ability, job characteristics, and use of U.S. social services. | ||
|
||
## Data Coding/Weights | ||
|
||
### Data Coding and File Construction | ||
|
||
After the ethnosurvey questionnaires are completed and revised, data are entered in Mexico. The entry programs perform | ||
initial screening, range checks, and simple tests for logical consistency. The preliminary files are then transferred to | ||
Princeton University, where additional data cleaning is performed, numeric codes are assigned to occupations and places, | ||
and the final data sets are assembled into six primary data files, each providing a unique perspective of Mexican | ||
migrants, their families, and their experiences. SIX primary files have been created, each corresponding to a different | ||
unit of analysis: PERS, MIG, MIGOTHER, HOUSE, LIFE and SPOUSE. Data at the community level have been compiled in the | ||
file: COMMUN. | ||
|
||
### Weights | ||
|
||
The MMP database provides community- and sample-specific weights. For each community, you will see a single weight for | ||
all the households in the home country sample and another weight for all the households in the US sample. | ||
|
||
When working with pooled data from multiple communities, these weights give you the option to adjust your estimates in | ||
order to take into account the relative sizes of all the sampling frames. Whether you will need to weight your estimates | ||
or not will depend on what your goal is. | ||
|
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.