THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MIGRATION AND COMMUTING AT CURITIBA - - PDF document

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MIGRATION AND COMMUTING AT CURITIBA METROPOLITAN REGION (CMR) AND ITS INTERACTION WITH THE LABOR MARKET.

Crislaine Colla - Department of Demography - Cedeplar – UFMG Alisson Flávio Barbieri - Department of Demography - Cedeplar – UFMG Vanessa Cardoso Ferreira - Department of Demography - Cedeplar – UFMG This work was developed with the support of CNPq and Cedeplar XXVIII IUSSP International Population Conference in Poster Session “Migration and Urbanization” – 30th October 2017 Abstract: The objective of this article is to identify the relationship between migration and commuting at Curitiba Metropolitan Region (CMR), considering the interaction of the labor market and the distribution of economic activities between the years 2000 and

• 2010. The analysis of migration and commuting used the microdata from the IBGE

Demographic Census of 2000 and 2010. Information about the labor market is collected through the employment data of 2000 and 2010. To better understand the location of activities and employment, and if the changes that have occurred are characterized as activities restructuring or redistribution at CMR, we calculated the Redistributing Coefficient and Restructuring Coefficient. The results found in the migration show a reduction of intra-metropolitan migration between 2000 and 2010 and the municipality

• f Curitiba is the one with the highest emigration. The intra-metropolitan commuting

movement for work shows a significant increase between 2000 and 2010, and the municipality that receives the major commuting movement is Curitiba. The results found the coefficients shows that there are no significant changes in the spatial distribution of activities or in the productive structure, indicating that factors other than the labor market would be significant to explain the relationship between migration and commuting. Key words: Curitiba Metropolitan Region, igration; commuting; labor market.

• 1. INTRODUCTION

The demographic modifications occurring in the Brazilian metropolitan regions, especially when it comes to migration and commuting, require the understanding of other processes, especially those related to urban dynamics and the labor market. These, in turn, are closely related to the configuration of urban network and metropolitan regions. These regions has presented modifications over the last decades, mainly since 1980, which also configured changes in the location and distribution of economic activities and people. Urbanization and metropolization processes, evidenced by industrialization, bring great modifications in the organization of urban space, which results in effects on the mobility of individuals. According to Pereira (2008), until the 1950s and 1960s, urban networks were dispersed and poorly articulated. Until the 1970s there was a large population concentration in bigger centers and migration was predominantly long distance and rural-urban. Starting in the 1970s and 1980s, the national urban scene experiences changes such as the loss of attractiveness of large centers to medium-sized cities (especially in the metropolitan margins). Besides short-distance and intra- metropolitan migration is highlighted. Furthermore, according to the author, changes in urban dynamics, also related to advances in technology of transports, impacted urban structure by affecting the spatial re(localization) of productive activities and also of residential areas. Curitiba Metropolitan Region (CMR) is located in the Southern Region of Brazil, in the state of Paraná, and has also suffered transformations, as well as a large part of Brazilian urban agglomerations (Figure 1). The CMR was created by a federal law in 1973 and today it is composed of 29 municipalities. Curitiba (Capital of the State of Paraná) is the main destination of the migrants of the state and also presents the largest flows of commuters Paraná. Curitiba also has a diversified industrial structure with the presence of the main modern industrial segments of metal-mechanics and a more complex tertiary sector.

Figure 1: Map of Curitiba Metropolitan Region

Since the 1990s, a phenomenon widely observed in large metropolise is the trend

• f higher growth in peripheral municipalities, with population evasion from the capitals

(core) to the metropolitan periphery, here called metropolitan surroundings. Great population dispersion in being observed associated with changes in urban structure and the labor market (Brito 2007; Silva 2012). Curitiba Metropolitan Region also went through this process, in which the municipalities around the CMR have received incentives for the installation of industries, including the automotive sector. These changes characterize a productive reconfiguration in the region. Some surrounding municipalities had a relative increase of jobs, comparing with the central city, in addition to attracting more immigrants and commuters. The ongoing transformations bring a great number of effects on metropolitan dynamics as a whole, especially in the spatial configuration of activities. This configuration is closely associated with the distribution of jobs, which is one of the main conditioning factors for migration and population mobility. However, this same configuration leads to separation between work place and place of residence, emphasizing the importance of commuting as a mobility option. In the metropolitan regions, the migration and commuting of the population are very important characteristics and are crucial factors. Besisdes it can be used to

characterize the process of metropolization, as well as can be adopeted as criterion to identify the integration between the municipalities. While studying the types of mobility, it is observed that there is a relationship between migration and commuting, which can be of substitution or complementarity. When we deal with the process of choosing between migration and commuting and their interaction, we express the location decision between the work place and residence place. But these choices are influenced by changes in the process of urban dynamics, which will have an impact on the urban structure and the labor market. In turn, urban structure and labor market interact to consolidate migratory flows and commuting movements. However, it should be consider that changes in the location of activities and jobs do not completely explain migration and commuting. Besides the specificities of the housing market and other factors in the urban structure would have a greater effect on the mobility of metropolitan regions. and would be the main links between migration and

• commuting. Analyzing the relationship between migration and commuting requires the

identification of the effects of residential deconcentration, the regional restructuring of economic activities and the primary factor that determines the mobility. Considereing the changes occurred, the mobility scenario, and the structure of the urban space in the CMR, the aim of this paper is identify the relationship and interaction between migration and commuting in the CMR. These aspects will be related to the evolution of the labor market and the distribution of economic activities among the 2000 and 2010. Besides it is intendet to observe whether the spatial reconfiguration of activities and jobs would be the main constraints of intra-metropolitan mobility.

• 2. THE RELATION OF MIGRATION, COMMUTING AND LABOR MARKET

The transformation and creation of the Brazilian Metropolitan Regions (MRs) are the result of many actors and variables that, together, determine the socio-spatial

• rganization of the population and productive activities. The organization of the territory

and its interaction are important characteristic of the metropolises and the urban agglomerations.

Metropolitan regions were legally constituted in the 1970s and are part of the process of urbanization and metropolization, which occurred in an accelerated way. Together with its creation are already occurring central phenomenos for the social

• rganization of urban space. According to Ribeiro (2007), several socioeconomic

transformations have occurred and still occur since the 1970s, and it is characterized by a process of population absorption within metropolitan spaces. Thus, the municipalities around the poles absorb, since the 1990s, a larger share

• f the population of the MRs. There is also a trend of deconcentration of economic

activities, both in industry and services, and the search of spaces located in the margins

• f the poles and industrial centers. It should be emphasized that this trend does not cause

a change in the model of productive organization of the territory, it is considered only a relative dispersion, which has been observed in the MRs and the medium cities. Singer (1975) consider the internal migrations as historically conditioned and the result of a global process of change. Migration and mobility would be determined by industrialization, from its characteristics such as the spatial agglomeration of activities which, in turn, would be determined by the concentration of capital. Therefore, it analyzes the internal migrations under the historical-structural prism showing their relations with capitalism, development and the labor market. Relating migrations and capitalism, the author presents the relationship between the price system, industrialization and the specialization and concentration of activities. The concentration of capital leads to the concentration of activities, which is possible by agglomeration economies. Metropolitan regions can be allocated in this characterization and its activities have a certain core deconcentration, although it remains in a specific

• region. This specific region passes initially by the agglomeration economies and also the

agglomeration diseconomies, causing a redistribution of the companies and jobs for the

• thers cities of the region. However, the core remains the main node of the region.

Within these metropolitan spaces, migration and commuting are important and determining points for economic, demographic, and social dynamics. In its various definitions, one of the most relevance is the fact of characterize movements and mobility from the definition of residence place and work place. The decentralization of jobs and the growth of surrounding cities alter urban spatial structures and change patterns and processes of displacement. The emergence of

a polycentric city has changed the link between the workplace and the residence place, an essential relationship when studying urban mobility (Clark et al. 2003). Haas and Osland (2014) indicate that there are several definitions of migration in the literature. In general, migration may involve changes in both the residence place and the workplace. Commuting, on the other hand, could be defined as a regular displacement between home and work, which characterizes the separation between the workplace and residence place. In this way, commuting and migration are important measures to

• vercome spatial separations. The geographical distances between places and the

characteristics of places are therefore essential for the existence of interactions between commuting, migration, housing and labor markets. Spatial mobility of population is conditioned by numerous factors that affect the migration process. The decision of individuals on the type of spatial mobility depends on the dominant influence that results from the combination of external determinants (labor market and urban structure) and internal determinants (characteristics of the migrant and his / her family) (Lukic 2009). Individual decisions between migration and commuting are related to labor mobility and geographic labor mobility, i. e., spatial variations in employment

• pportunities. Migration and commuting can be considered general special cases of labor

mobility where the location of residence and work, maximizes the utility and disutility net of moving between home and work (Eliasson et al. 2003). For Gurierrez-i-Puigarnau and Van Ommereen (2014), some of the causes for change of residence are the relocation of companies and infrastructure changes that can increase or decrease congestion, affecting travel time and migration and commuting costs. Eliasson et al. (2003) present results that show that the probability of choosing commuting increases significantly with interregional accessibility to job opportunities. Commuting movements are preferable to migration for people living in metropolitan areas and there are indications that unemployment increases the likelihood of mobility as well as migration. Congdon (1983) also notes that migration and commuting seem to balance the differences in labor demand between neighborhoods and cities in metropolitan areas, and it can be expected that the choice between them may reduce the differences in unemployment.

Shuai (2012) also lists some reasons that influence the choice of movement such as opportunities in the labor market, events in the life cycle, reproductive period, i. e., demographic variables and population dynamics are important for migratory flow. In addition, the variables age structure, schooling, age also appear in the results. As discussed above, the decision of spatial adjustment (it means, whether the residence is adjusted according to the location of the work or vice versa), is important to identify the conditions and causal factors that generate the adjustment. The relation between migration and pendularity can be of complementarity or

• substitution. Reitsma and Vergoossen (1987) emphasize that migration decisions require

the study of the separation of spatial distribution from residence place and work place and that commuting is considered the key factor. People can migrate from a change in work, and in this case they are called migrant workers and do not opt for commuting (substitution). Another situation occurs when the individual migrates without necessarily having a change in the workplace, and, in this case, migration occurs for residential reasons and commuting is part of the decision process and in this case is called residential migrants (complementarity). Congdon (1983) emphasizes that the interaction between economic activity and mobility are processes that demonstrate the complementarity between migration and

• commuting. People can migrate from residence to the metropolitan surroundings and

become commuter to the central city. Other arrangements can be also observed in several studies and researches, but it should be noted that the spatial configuration of the population is closely linked with the spatial distribution and urban configuration of large metropolises and large cities. Renkow and Hoover (2000) focus on the relationship between migration and commuting under the prism of regional restructuring and deconcentration, their analysis also centers on the choice of work place and residence place. The results show that there is a complementarity of net commuting flows and net migration, which indicates that residential deconcentration is more significant than the hypothesis of regional restructuring of economic activities. It should be considered that this trend is greater among metropolitan areas. Whatever the reason, the unifying theme among proponents of the regional restructuring hypothesis is that the evolution of rural-urban population dynamics is

fundamentally due to changes in the spatial distribution of employment opportunities. On the other hand, the defenders of the deconcentration hypothesis pay special attention to the residential choices made by workers and consumers. They argue that the decreasing cost of distance and the increase of negative externalities in urban areas, such as congestion, can lead to a greater role of locational amenities as a determinant of where people will live and where employers will find themselves (Renkow and Hoover, 2000). In addition to the amenities, a more plausible argument with the reality of the Brazilian urban agglomerates, is the residential deconcentration for reasons of higher housing costs and service structure, besides having the possibility of a transport system that assures conditions of commute. Renkow and Hoover (2000), however, make it clear that the complementarity of net commuting flows and net migration indicates that the forces leading to residential deconcentration have dominated the driving forces of the regional restructuring of economic activity. Cunha (1995) argues that there is a relationship between intrametropolitan migration and commuting mobility, which in turn are associated with the territorial expansion of MRs. There is a significant population spreading that occurs at a greater speed and with more expressive effects than the redistribution of activities. Thus, the commuting becomes a process of greater interest and has as its main origin the areas of expansion of the MRs or the metropolitan margins. In this way, it would be a counterpart to the regional urban expansion, observed mainly through the intrametropolitan migration. Part of the theoretical analytical framework considers both the labor market and urban structure as conditioning factors for the choice between migrating or commuting. Within the constraints related to urban structure are transportation costs, travel time, displacement distance, land costs, cost of housing, and provision of public and private

• services. These would be the most significant determinants to analyze the choice between

types of movement within metropolitan regions.

• 3. DATA AND RESEARCH METHODS

An important point for the work is the definition of migration and commuting that will be used throughout the research. Migration is a permanent change in the usual place

• f residence, where you have lived continuously for the past 12 months or intend to live

for at least 12 months (United Nations 2008). According to Standing (1984), commuters are people who move to occupy a specific activity, usually an economic activity, but who keep their residence elsewhere. In addition, the commuting for work is considered as an analysis factor for this research. The analysis intra-metropolitan migration and commuting flows microdata from the IBGE Demographic Census of 2000 and 2010 were used. It was identified changes in migration and commuting for Curitiba and its Metropolitan Region (CMR), as well as between the central municipality and the surrounding area. The intra-metropolitan migration data refers to the fixed date migration for the periods of 1995-2000 and 2005-

• 2010. We considered the place of residence on July 31st of 1995 and July 31st of 2005.

Based on this information, matrixes of origin and destination are built for the 29 municipalities of the CMR where it is possible to obtain the migratory balance and the migratory flow among all municipalities. For commuting flows, we used information regarded workplace. Specifically for this research, the information used refers only to the labor purpose commuting flows, leaving out studies regarding purpose commuting. The data were also obtained through the microdata of the censuses of 2000 and 2010 and organized in the origin-destination

• matrices. From the matrices, the data are organized and selected in the form of tables and

graphs, presenting an exploratory and quantitative analysis of migration and commuting. Information about the labor market is collected through the employment data of 2000 and 2010 of the Annual Social Information Relation (RAIS) of the Ministry of Labor and Social Security of Brazil. The data were organized through tables for a better understanding and characterization of the migration and commuting process evolution. To better understand the location of activities and employment, and if the changes

• ccurring are characterized as a restructuring or redistribution of the activities in the

MRC, calculations of Redistribution Coefficient and Restructuring Coefficient will be

• made. To the calculation of these coefficients, employment data from RAIS for the years

2000 and 2010 are also used. The Redistributing Coefficient (RCi) is localization measure that shows if there has been any change in the spatial distribution of activity sectors between the analyzed

• regions. This coefficient varies between zero and one, and aims to examine, for each

sector, the existence of a pattern of concentration or spatial dispersion over time. As much closer to zero, there are no changes in the spatial distribution of the sector, and if the coefficient come near to one, the spatial changes are expressive (Alves 2012). The RCi is the sum of the relative participation of sector i of region j over the reference region, in year 0, minus the relative participation of the same sector i of region j over the reference region, in year 1, divided by two. The RCi presents the following formula: 𝑆𝐷𝑗 = ∑ (|𝑘𝑓𝑗(𝑈0) − 𝑘𝑓𝑗(𝑈1)|) 2

𝑘

(1) The Restructuring Coefficient (CReest) is a specialization measure and shows if there was a change in the productive structure of a certain region (municipality) during a giving period of time. The coefficient varies between zero and one: (i) if it is close to zero, there are no changes in the sectoral composition of the region; (ii) if it is closer to

• ne, the changes are significant, it means, that the productive structure of the region was

changed (Alves 2012). The RCeest is the sum for all sectors of the percentage participation of sector i in region j in year 0, minus the percentage participation of sector i in the same region in year 1, divided by two: 𝑆𝐷𝑓𝑓𝑡𝑢 = ∑ (|𝑗𝑓𝑘(𝑈0) − 𝑗𝑓𝑘(𝑈1)|) 2

𝑗

(2)

• 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

In order to better understand the relationship between migration, commuting and the labor market, the data and the evolution of the intrametropolitan migration of Curitiba and the Metropolitan Region are presented, as well as the information on the commuting and the evolution of employment. Table 1 presented data on intra-metropolitan migration. The data suggests a reduction of 15.91% in the flow of migrants between the municipalities of the metropolitan region between 2000 and 2010. Among the municipalities with important

relative participation for the total immigration in the region are highlighted: Colombo, Curitiba, Fazenda Rio Grande, Piraquara and São José dos Pinhais. Among these the municipalities of Colombo and São José dos Pinhais increased their participation in the total number of immigrants from the CMR. The central city of Curitiba had a reduction of its participation, going from 10.29% to 8.80% of the total of the immigration in the region, i. e., it is receiving less immigrants. Regarding the variation

• f the total number of immigrants from one period to the other, it is observed that most
• f the municipalities present a negative variation, that is, the number of immigrants to the

municipalities decreases. Only the municipalities of Fazenda Rio Grande, Lapa and Rio Branco do Sul had a positive variation. However, these municipalities have a relatively small participation in relation to the total number of immigrants, which means that this increase did not bring significant impacts to the migratory balance. When analyzing the emigration, it is observed that the central city, the municipality of Curitiba, is the one that presents the greatest emigration, but also presents a reduction in the absolute value from one period to another. However, it has maintained almost unchanged its relative participation of the total emigration in the CMR. As it is reported Curitiba is responsible for more than 60 percent of total intra-metropolitan

• emigration. The other municipalities presented a much lower relative participation,

especially Colombo, Pinhais and São José dos Pinhais, with a participation of 5.14%, 5.13% and 4.67%, respectively, in 2010. Only the municipalities of Fazenda Rio Grande, Lapa and Rio Branco do Sul show an absolute positive variation in the total number of emigrants in the region. The municipalities that highlight with a greater absolute reduction in the number of emigrants are: Almirante Tamandaré, Cerro Azul, Curitiba and Pinhais. Regarding the relative participation of each municipality of the total number of emigrants, there were no significant changes and the distribution remains without bigger changes.

Table 1: Intrametropolitan fixed date migration of the Curitiba Metropolitan Region between 2000 and 2010

Municipality Immigration Out-migration 2000 Relative participatio n 2010 Relative participati

• n

Variatio n 2000 Relative participatio n 2010 Relative participatio n Variatio n Almirante Tamandaré 9,080 7.57% 6,614 6.56%

• 27.16%

2,894 2.41% 2,353 2.33%

• 18.69%

Araucária 6,728 5.61% 6,529 6.47%

• 2.96%

2,894 2.41% 2,649 2.63%

• 8.47%

Campina Grande do Sul 3,656 3.05% 2,526 2.50%

• 30.91%

1,667 1.39% 1,659 1.64%

• 0.48%

Campo Largo 4,606 3.84% 4,579 4.54%

• 0.59%

2,747 2.29% 2,524 2.50%

• 8.12%

Cerro Azul 342 0.29% 494 0.49% 44.44% 2,021 1.68% 1,283 1.27%

• 36.52%

Colombo 16,175 13.49% 14,134 14.01%

• 12.62%

5,842 4.87% 5,188 5.14%

• 11.19%

Curitiba 12,339 10.29% 8,873 8.80%

• 28.09%

74,187 61.85% 61,043 60.52%

• 17.72%

Fazenda Rio Grande 12,037 10.04% 7,127 7.07%

• 40.79%

1,426 1.19% 1,583 1.57% 11.01% Lapa 1,029 0.86% 992 0.98%

• 3.60%

1,664 1.39% 1,835 1.82% 10.28% Pinhais 9,806 8.18% 8,009 7.94%

• 18.33%

7,307 6.09% 5,175 5.13%

• 29.18%

Piraquara 13,858 11.55% 10,647 10.56%

• 23.17%

1,885 1.57% 1,817 1.80%

• 3.61%

Rio Branco do Sul 892 0.74% 827 0.82%

• 7.29%

1,181 0.98% 1,265 1.25% 7.11% São José dos Pinhais 15,214 12.68% 15,707 15.57% 3.24% 5,422 4.52% 4,715 4.67%

• 13.04%

Other municipalities 14,183 11.82% 13,805 13.69%

• 2.67%

8,808 7.34% 7,774 7.71%

• 11.74%

Total 119,945 100.00% 100,863 100.00%

• 15.91% 119,945

100.00% 100,863 100.00%

• 15.91%

Source: Elaborated from Census of 2000 and 2010.

With the data of emigrants and immigrants, it is possible to observe the migratory balance for the municipalities of the CMR. It can be seen from Table 2 that the municipalities of Cerro Azul, Curitiba, Lapa and Rio Branco do Sul presented negative migratory balances in both periods. In addition, Curitiba has a significant highlight with its migratory balance passing from -61,848 people in 2000 to -52,170 people in 2010, with a positive variation of 15.65% from one period to another. As previously highlighted, Curitiba is the municipality with the largest number of emigrants from the whole of the CMR, but it managed to recover relatively between 2000 and 2010, making its migratory balance less negative. This occur mainly due to its significant reduction in emigration between the periods analyzed. The main municipalities net receiving are: Almirante Tamandaré, Colombo, Fazenda Rio Grande, Piraquara and São José dos Pinhais. Of these, only São José dos Pinhais improved its migratory balance, going from 9,792 to 10,992 people, with a variation of 12.25%. Almirante Tamandaré, Fazenda Rio Grande and Piraquara presented a significant reduction of their migratory balance, with a reduction of 31.12%,

47.75% and 25.25%, respectively. This is mainly due to a significant reduction in immigration to these municipalities.

Table 2: Migratory balance of the municipalities of Curitiba Metropolitan Region between 2000 and 2010. Municipality Balance Migratory 2000 2010 Variation Almirante Tamandaré 6,186 4,261

• 31.12%

Araucária 3,834 3,880

• 1.20%

Campina Grande do Sul 1,989 867

• 56.41%

Campo Largo 1,859 2,055 10.54% Cerro Azul

• 1,679
• 789

53.01% Colombo 10,333 8,946

• 13.42%

Curitiba

• 61,848
• 52,170

15.65% Fazenda Rio Grande 10,611 5,544

• 47.75%

Lapa

• 635
• 843
• 32.76%

Pinhais 2,499 2,834 13.41% Piraquara 11,973 8,830

• 26.25%

Rio Branco do Sul

• 289
• 438
• 51.56%

São José dos Pinhais 9,792 10,992 12.25% Other Municipalities 5,375 6,031 12.20% Source: Elaborated from Census of 2000 and 2010.

In order to understand the evolution and the transformations in the intrametropolitan migration, one must recognize the changes that occur in the flows regarding to the exchanges between the central city and surrounding area, as well as between the surrounding municipalities. The results already presented show that there was a reduction of intrametropolitan migration between 2000 and 2010. Table 3 reinforces these data and shows the evolution of the migration from the surrounding area to the central city (Curitiba) and from the central city to the surrounding area. It is presented a reduction in the number of migrants from the central city to the surrounding

• f 17.72% between 2000 and 2010. The number of migrants leaving the surrounding

towards the central city also shows a decrease of 28.09% in the analyzed period. Figure 1 shows that the migration from the central city to the surrounding area is preponderant in relation to the total migration in the intrametropolitan region. However, its participation in relation to the total decreased in the analyzed period, going from 61.85% to 60.52% between 2000 and 2010. The migration from the surrounding area to

the central city accounted for 10.29% of the total intra-metropolitan migration in 2000, and decreased its participation to 8.80% in 2010. The migration between the surrounding municipalities, in absolute numbers, also presents a decreases. However, if we consider its relative importance for total migration, it is observed that there was an increase from 27.86% of the total in 2000 to 30.68% of the total in 2010. These results point to a greater importance of migratory flows to the surrounding area. It was evidenced by the great flow of the central city to surroundings and the increase of migration between surrounding municipalities, which could be the result of changes in the urban structure and the labor market for the CMR.

Figure 1: Relative share of migration between the central city and sorrounding municipalities from the total intra-metropolitan migration – 2000 and 2010. Source: Elaborated from Census Microdata, 2000 and 2010 (2017).

Table 3 also reinforces the results that the intrametropolitan migration decreased in the analyzed period. It is observed that the migration from the surrounding area to the central city shows a reduction of 28.09% between 2000 and 2010. From the central city to the surrounding area the reduction was of 17.72%. Even though the percent reduction

• f migration from the central city to the surrounding area has been lower, the absolute

flow is much larger, which leads to a relatively higher loss for surrounding municipalities. It is observed that all the surrounding municipalities present a decrease in the total number of immigrants coming from the central city. The municipalities of Almirante Tamadare, Colombo, Fazenda Rio Grande, Pinhais, Piraquara and São José dos Pinhais are the ones that receive the most migrants from Curitiba. The municipalities of Almirante Tamandaré, Colombo, Fazenda Rio Grande, Pinhais and Piraquara lost relative participation in relation to total number of migrants received from Curitiba, with a more

10.29% 61.85% 27.86% 8.80% 60.52% 30.68% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% from the surrounding area to center from the center to surrounding area from the surrounding area to surrounding area 2000 2010

significant reduction for Fazenda Rio Grande. Besides, the municipalities of Colombo and São José dos Pinhais had a significant increase in their relative participation.

Table 3: Evolution of the intrametropolitan migration considering the flows from the surrounding area to central city and from the central city to surrounding area, between 2000 and 2010.

Municipality

From the central city to surrounding area From the surrounding area to central city

2000 Relative participation 2010 Relative participation Variatio n 2000 Relative participation 2010 Relative participation Variatio n Almirante Tamandaré 6,812 9.18% 4,925 8.07%

• 27.70%

891 7.22% 314 3.54%

• 64.76%

Araucária 5,150 6.94% 4,419 7.24%

• 14.19%

1,289 10.45% 917 10.33%

• 28.86%

Campina Grande do Sul 2,033 2.74% 875 1.43%

• 56.96%

272 2.20% 194 2.19%

• 28.68%

Campo Largo 3,539 4.77% 3,181 5.21%

• 10.12%

1,088 8.82% 563 6.35%

• 48.25%

Cerro Azul 178 0.24% 139 0.23%

• 21.91%

134 1.09% 213 2.40% 58.96% Colombo 11,073 14.93% 10,369 16.99%

• 6.36%

1,698 13.76% 1,196 13.48%

• 29.56%

Fazenda Rio Grande 10,270 13.84% 5,922 9.70%

• 42.34%

601 4.87% 406 4.58%

• 32.45%

Lapa 574 0.77% 403 0.66%

• 29.79%

575 4.66% 611 6.89% 6.26% Pinhais 7,760 10.46% 6,111 10.01%

• 21.25%

1,086 8.80% 746 8.41%

• 31.31%

Piraquara 7,498 10.11% 5,873 9.62%

• 21.67%

297 2.41% 275 3.10%

• 7.41%

Rio Branco do Sul 231 0.31% 167 0.27%

• 27.71%

174 1.41% 257 2.90% 47.70% São José dos Pinhais 12,443 16.77% 12,289 20.13%

• 1.24%

1,972 15.98% 1,604 18.08%

• 18.66%

Other municipalities 6,626 8.93% 6,370 10.44%

• 3.86%

2,262 18.33% 1,577 17.77%

• 30.28%

Total 74,187 100.00% 61,043 100.00%

• 17.72%

12,339 100.00% 8,873 100.00%

• 28.09%

Source: Elaborated from Census Microdata, 2000 and 2010 (2017).

In the case of the migration from the surroundings to the central city, only the municipalities of Cerro Azul and Lapa had an increase in the number of migrants that went to Curitiba, but their participation is not significant toe total. The municipalities that highlight in sending migrants to Curitiba are: Araucária, Campo Largo, Colombo, Pinhais and São José dos Pinhais. From these, São José dos Pinhais is the most representative and sends more migrants to Curitiba, it is also the only one that increased its relative participation (from 15.98% to 18.08% of the total of the immigrants received by Curitiba). The municipalities that lost most were Almirante Tamandaré, from 7.22% to 3.54% of the total, and Campo Largo, that reduced its participation from 8.82% of the total to 6.35% in the period. In contrast to intra-metropolitan migration, the intra-metropolitan commuting for work shows a significant increase between 2000 and 2010. The volume of the flow

increased from 170,903 people in 2000 to 301,720 people in 2010, with an increase of 76.54%, as shown in Table 4. Table 4 suggests that the entry of commuters is dominated by the central city (Curitiba) and that there has been an increase in the number of people making the job movements towards Curitiba. However, it is also observed that there was a reduction of the participation of the commuters to Curitiba in relation to the total commuting between the analyzed periods. In 2000, the commuting for Curitiba corresponded to 79.49% of the total of the region and in 2010 it was 69.78% of the total, with a reduction of almost 10%. All other municipalities increased their participation in relation to the entrance of commuters, especially Araucária and São José dos Pinhais.

Table 4: Intrametropolitan commuting for the work of Curitiba Metropolitan Region between 2000 and 2010

Municipality In-commuting Out-commuting 2000 Relative participati

• n

2010 Relative participat ion Variati

• n

2000 Relative participati

• n

2010 Relative participati

• n

Variatio n Almirante Tamandaré 982 0.57% 2,744 0.91% 179.43 % 19,577 11.46% 30,602 10.14% 56.32% Araucária 4,031 2.36% 15,885 5.26% 294.07 % 8,359 4.89% 13,599 4.51% 62.69% Campina Grande do Sul 999 0.58% 2,275 0.75% 127.73 % 4,489 2.63% 7,481 2.48% 66.65% Campo Largo 1,725 1.01% 3,118 1.03% 80.75% 7,288 4.26% 14,777 4.90% 102.76% Colombo 3,647 2.13% 8,832 2.93% 142.17 % 34,896 20.42% 56,172 18.62% 60.97% Curitiba 135,858 79.49% 210,532 69.78% 54.96% 17,542 10.26% 48,997 16.24% 179.31 % Fazenda Rio Grande 961 0.56% 2,091 0.69% 117.59 % 11,334 6.63% 19,136 6.34% 68.84% Pinhais 7,468 4.37% 16,824 5.58% 125.28 % 19,418 11.36% 26,615 8.82% 37.06% Piraquara 1,472 0.86% 2,646 0.88% 79.76% 14,213 8.32% 23,016 7.63% 61.94% Quatro Barras 1,745 1.02% 4,452 1.48% 155.13 % 2,131 1.25% 3,594 1.19% 68.65% Rio Branco do Sul 757 0.44% 1,169 0.39% 54.43% 1,570 0.92% 3,907 1.29% 148.85% São José dos Pinhais 8,996 5.26% 24,799 8.22% 175.67 % 19,850 11.61% 30,480 10.10% 53.55% Other municipalities 2,262 1.32% 6,353 2.11% 180.86 % 10,236 5.99% 23,344 7.74% 128.06% Total 170,903 100.00% 301,720 100.00% 76.54% 170,903 100.00% 301,720 100.00% 76.54%

Source: Elaborated from Census Microdata, 2000 and 2010 (2017).

As for the out-commuting of the municipalities of the CMR, the municipalities that are most important in the outflow movement of commuters are Almirante Tamandaré, Colombo, Curitiba, Pinhais and São José dos Pinhais. It is observed that there was an increase of 179.31% in the out-commuters in the city of Curitiba between the analyzed periods and that their participation in the total out-commuters increased from 10.26% in

2000 to 16.24% in 2010. The municipality of Colombo presents greater representativeness in the out-commuters in the region, but reduced its participation between 2000 and 2010. These changes can be verified in Table 5, where it is shown that the net commuting

• f Curitiba is positive and very significant in relation to the total of the region. The other

municipalities have a negative balance, with the exception of Araucária and Quatro Barras, which went from a negative net value in 2000 to a positive one in 2010. The municipalities of Almirante Tamandaré, Campina Grande do Sul, Campo Largo, Colombo, Fazenda Rio Grande, Piraquara, Rio Branco do Sul and other municipalities have a more negative commuting balance, i. e., increased the difference between the in- and out-commuters in these municipalities between 2000 and 2010.

Table 5: Net commuting of the municipalities of Curitiba Metropolitan Region between 2000 and 2010. Municipality Net commuting 2000 2010 Variation Almirante Tamandaré

• 18,595
• 27,858
• 49.81%

Araucária

• 4,328

2,286 152.82% Campina Grande do Sul

• 3,490
• 5,206
• 49.17%

Campo Largo

• 5,563
• 11,659
• 109.58%

Colombo

• 31,249
• 47,340
• 51.49%

Curitiba 118,316 161,535 36.53% Fazenda Rio Grande

• 10,373
• 17,045
• 64.32%

Pinhais

• 11,950
• 9,791

18.07% Piraquara

• 12,741
• 20,370
• 59.88%

Quatro Barras

• 386

858 322.28% Rio Branco do Sul

• 813
• 2,738
• 236.78%

São José dos Pinhais

• 10,854
• 5,681

47.66% Other municipalities

• 7,974
• 16,991
• 113.08%

Source: Elaborated from Census Microdata, 2000 and 2010 (2017).

The data show that there was a significant increase in commuting within the CMR, but Figure 2 shows that there was an increase in the participation of the commuting from the central city to the surrounding area, going from 10.26% of the total commuting in 2000 to 16.24 % in 2010. The commuting among the surrounding municipalities also increased its participation from 10.24% in 2000 to 13.98% in 2010. The commuting of the surroundings for the central city shows a reduction in its participation in relation to

the total, from 79.49% in 2000 to 69.78% in 2010. It should be noted that Curitiba continues to be the main receiver of commuting, but with changes in the intensity of this flow and its participation in the outflow of commuters incresed. In addition, the growth in the participation of the commuting among the surrounding municipalities indicates a multidirectionality of the flows.

Figure 2: Relative share of commuting movement between the central city and sorrounding municipalities from the total – 2000 and 2010. Source: Elaborated from Census Microdata, 2000 and 2010 (2017).

As for the commuting fluxes between the central city and the surroundings, it can be seen from Table 6 that there was a significant increase in the number of commuters from the surroundings to the central city and from the central city to the surroundings. The increase in the commuting of the central city to the surroundings showed a more significant increase between 2000 and 2010: at a percentage of 179.31%, while the commuting of the surroundings to the central city increased by 54.96% for the same period. The municipalities that have the greatest importance in the participation on the total commuting of the surroundings to Curitiba are Almirante Tamandaré, Colombo, Pinhais and São José dos Pinhais and Colombo. They presented the highest percentage, 23,78% of the total commutinga to Curitiba in 2000 and 23.43% in 2010. This structure did not suffer major changes in the periods analyzed. When it comes to commuting flow from Curitiba to the surrounding municipalities, the municipality of São José dos Pinhais is responsible for receiving more than 37% of commuters in Curitiba. Other cities also receive a significant flow, such as

10.26% 79.49% 10.24% 16.24% 69.78% 13.98% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% from the center to the surrounding area from the surrounding area to the center from the surrounding area to the surrounding area 2000 2010

Araucária that went from 15.40% to 22.09% in 2000 and 2010, respectively. Besides, Pinhais and Colombo also have important participation in the total.

Table 6: Evolution of the intrametropolitan commuting considering the flows from the surrounding area to central city and from the central city to surrounding area, between 2000 e 2010.

Municipality From the central city to surrounding area From the surrounding area to central city 2000 Relative participation 2010 Relative participatio n Variatio n 2000 Relative participation 2010 Relative participati

• n

Variation Almirante Tamandaré 18,624 13.71% 28,416 13.50% 52.58% 564 3.22% 1,444 2.95% 156.03% Araucária 7,768 5.72% 12,638 6.00% 62.69% 2,701 15.40% 10,825 22.09% 300.78% Campina Grande do Sul 3,117 2.29% 3,978 1.89% 27.62% 188 1.07% 576 1.18% 206.38% Campo Largo 6,921 5.09% 13,292 6.31% 92.05% 684 3.90% 1,366 2.79% 99.71% Colombo 32,313 23.78% 49,326 23.43% 52.65% 1,579 9.00% 4,172 8.51% 164.22% Fazenda Rio Grande 10,628 7.82% 17,002 8.08% 59.97% 525 2.99% 1,238 2.53% 135.81% Pinhais 17,563 12.93% 22,660 10.76% 29.02% 2,780 15.85% 6,970 14.23% 150.72% Piraquara 10,716 7.89% 15,445 7.34% 44.13% 535 3.05% 1,205 2.46% 125.23% Quatro Barras 1,239 0.91% 1,751 0.83% 41.32% 459 2.62% 1,037 2.12% 125.93% Rio Branco do Sul 1,326 0.98% 3,119 1.48% 135.22% 132 0.75% 95 0.19%

• 28.03%

São José dos Pinhais 18,594 13.69% 27,889 13.25% 49.99% 6,653 37.93% 18,180 37.10% 173.26% Other municipalities 7,049 5.19% 15,016 7.13% 113.02% 742 4.23% 1,889 3.86% 154.58% Total 135,858 100.00% 210,532 100,00% 54.96% 17,542 100,00% 48,997 100.00% 179.31%

Source: Elaborated from Census Microdata, 2000 and 2010 (2017).

The data allow us to observe that there is a relation between migration and commuting in the CMR. One way of identifying this is the counterpart between the two types of mobility. An example is the central city of the CMR, the city of Curitiba, which presents the largest flows of emigration towards the surroundings and also receives the highest flows of commuters to work. These results point to a complementarity relation between types of movement, in which individuals can migrate from the central city to surroundings and maintain employment in the central city, characterizing the separation between workplace of residence place. In terms of the labor market and the distribution of employment in the CMR (presented in Table 7) the data show that Curitiba's participation in the total number of CMR employments decreased from 5.3% between 2000 and 2010. It means that in 2000, Curitiba held 73.45% of the total number of jobs in the CMR and now holds 68.17% in

• 2010. In addition, there was a positive evolution for employment in all municipalities

analyzed, but Curitiba was the one that obtained the smallest increase. The main municipalities in the surrounding area, such as São José dos Pinhais, Araucária, Colombo, Pinhais and Campo Largo, highlights in the increase of participation as well as in the positive variation in the number of employments.

Table 7: Evolution of employment and relative participation of employments of each municipality for total of CMR in 2000 and 2010. Municipality Number of employment % variation on number of employments Relative participation of employments of each municipality for the total of CMR 2000 2010 2000 2010 Almirante Tamandaré 5,747 11,272 96.14% 0.74% 0.91% Araucária 19,831 51,802 161.22% 2.56% 4.16% Campo Largo 14,608 25,275 73.02% 1.89% 2.03% Colombo 20,305 37,529 84.83% 2.62% 3.01% Curitiba 568,581 848,850 49.29% 73.45% 68.17% Fazenda Rio Grande 4,255 9,671 127.29% 0.55% 0.78% Pinhais 19,222 41,461 115.70% 2.48% 3.33% Piraquara 3,021 7,664 153.69% 0.40% 0.61% São José dos Pinhais 38,322 90,277 135.57% 4.95% 7.25% Other municipalities 80,223 121,434 51.37% 10.36% 9.75% Total 774,115 1,245,235 60.86% 100% 100% Source: Elaborated from RAIS (2017).

It is observed that the municipalities that had an increase in the participation of total employment also highlight with an increase in the entrance of commuters and in intra-metropolitan immigration. In the case of intrametropolitan immigration, the municipalities of Almirante Tamandaré, Araucária, Colombo, Fazenda Rio Grande, Pinhais, Piraquara and São José dos Pinhais are the most important having a a great relative participation for the total of the immigration in the region. These same municipalities also highlights in the total number of employments in the region. However,a more in-depth analysis is needed, since the municipality of Curitiba is the one that has the largest absolute and relative participation in the number of employments and it is the municipality that has the most emigrants, i. e. , more people leaving the city towards the surrounding municipalities. This means that even the surrounding municipalities show an increase in the number of jobs and an increase in the participation

• f total employment in the region, it is not enough to explain the total number of

immigrants received and the out-commuting.

When the in-cummuting is observed, the municipalities that highlights are Araucária, Colombo, Curitiba, Pinhais and São José dos Pinhais. These are also the municipalities with the largest number of employments in the region and Curitiba is the biggest one in the composition of the labor market and in receiving commuters. In order to better understand if the relationship between migration and commuting is influenced by the labor market and if there was a regional restructuring of the activities and changes in the productive structure, the data referring to the restructuring coefficients for the municipalities of the CMR is presented.

Table 8: Restructuring Coefficients of the municipalities of CMR, between 2000 and 2010. Municipality Restructuring Coefficient – RCeest Adrianópolis 0.253 Agudos do Sul 0.359 Almirante Tamandaré 0.119 Araucária 0.162 Balsa Nova 0.172 Bocaiúva do Sul 0.581 Campina Grande do Sul 0.840 Campo do Tenente 0.392 Campo Largo 0.197 Campo Magro 0.201 Cerro Azul 0.543 Colombo 0.157 Contenda 0.085 Curitiba 0.048 Doutor Ulysses 0.604 Fazenda Rio Grande 0.066 Itaperuçu 0.230 Lapa 0.130 Mandirituba 0.335 Piên 0.173 Pinhais 0.078 Piraquara 0.106 Quatro Barras 0.407 Quitandinha 0.134 Rio Branco do Sul 0.061 Rio Negro 0.076 São José dos Pinhais 0.032 Tijucas do Sul 0.162 Tunas do Paraná 0.157 Source: Elaborated from RAIS (2017).

The restructuring coefficient (CReest) is a measure of specialization and presents values between zero and one. The more the values approximate zero, means that there were no changes in the sectoral composition of the municipality. The data in Table 8

shows that most of the municipalities of the CMR have a restructuring coefficient closer to zero, which means that there was no change in the productive structure between 2000 and 2010. This shows that in the period analyzed, there is no indication of restructuring

• f economic activities.

Another coefficient that can help in the analysis of the conditioning factors of the migration and commuting is the redistribution coefficient. It is a measure of location that shows if there has been any change in the spatial distribution of activity sectors in the analyzed region.

Table 9: Redistribution Coefficients of the municipalities of CMR, by activities sector, between 2000 and 2010. Activity Sector Redistribution Coefficient – RCi Industry 0.091 Construction 0.182 Commerce 0.067 Services 0.047 Public administration 0.046 Farming 0.334 Source: Elaborated from RAIS (2017).

Similarly to the redistribution coefficient, this coefficient presents values between zero and one, and the data in Table 9 shows that in all sectors, the values are very close to 0. This indicates that there were no significant changes in the productive structure of the CMR for all sectors of activity. Thus, it is considered that there is an association between labor market and migration and commuting, being one of the conditioning of this relationship. However, data shows that the hypothesis of residential deconcentration will prevail over regional restructuring of activities and employments to explain mobility within the CMR.

• 5. CONCLUSION

The aim of this article is to identify the relationship and interaction between migration and commuting in the CMR with evolution of the labor market and the

distribution of economic activities between the years 2000 and 2010. Besides, it is

• bserved if the spatial reconfiguration of activities and jobs would be the main

determinants of intrametropolitan mobility. The data and literature review indicate that there is a relationship between migration, commuting and the labor market, especially when the differentiation between the two types of movement leads to separation between workplace and residence place. Migration and commuting can be complementary or substituting processes and this choice depends on several factors, among them the location of employment and the conditions of the urban structure are relevants. The metropolitan migratory flows presented show that there was a reduction in the total value of intrametropolitan migration, the same being observed in the migration from surrounding to central city and from central city to surrounding. The surrounding receives a significant amount of immigrants from Curitiba and there was also a reduction in the departure of migrants from the surrounding area to Curitiba. In addition, there is an increase in the relative participation of migration among surrounding municipalities. These results emphasize the greater importance of migration to sourrounding and between surrounding municipalities, but it must be emphasized that Curitiba is responsible for approximately 60% of the metropolitan emigration. Regarding intrametropolitan commuting flows, there is a significant increase and it is perceived that Curitiba lost a little of its relative importance in relation to the total

• commuting. The surrounding municipalities are receiving more commuters from central

city and there are also more significant exchanges between them, characterizing a multidirectionality of flows. However, the central city of Curitiba accounts for 79.49% of the in-commuting in 2000 and 69.78% in 2010, which demonstrates its predominance in this issue throughout the CMR. It is observed that there has been an increase in the relative importance of employments in surrounding area and this may influence the decision to migrate or commute, transforming the flows and slightly reducing central city hegemony. However, the redistribution and restructuring coefficients show that there was no change in the productive structure between 2000 and 2010, weakening the hypothesis of regional restructuring of economic activities.

Curitiba is still the main municipality of the state of Paraná and also within the CMR, which has greater importance in migratory flows, commuting at different scales, but its participation has diminished over time. While at the same time it has increased the relation between the other municipalities of surrounding and their participation, indicating a greater integration among them, also determined by the transformations that

• ccurred with the urban agglomerates. At the same time that Curitiba is the largest

receiver of commuters, it is the municipality that has greater emigration to surrounding municipalities, and this suggests a relation of complementarity between the movements. Therefore, it is observed a relation between migration and commuting, and labor market would be one of the conditioners of this relation. However, the labor market does not present itself as the main conditioning factor of the relation. There are other factors related to urban structure that also determines the choice between migration and commuting, and that could better explain this relation. REFERENCES Alves, L. R. 2012. Indicadores de localização, especialização e estruturação regional, in Piacenti, C. A. and Ferrera de Lima, J. (eds). Análise regional: metodologia e indicadores. Curitiba: LedZe. Brito, F. 2007. Urbanização, metropolização e mobilidade espacial da população: um breve ensaio além dos números. Paper presented in 5º Encontro Nacional Sobre Migrações, Campinas. Clark, W. A.V. and Huang, Y. and Witherse, S. 2003. Does commuting distance matter? Commuting tolerance and residential change. Regional Science and Urban Economics. V.33, p. 199–221. Congdon, P. 1983. A Model for the Interaction of Migration and Commuting. Urban Studies 20(2): 1985-1995. Cunha, J. M. P. Mobilidade populacional e expansão urbana: o caso da Região Metropolitana de São Paulo. Tese (Doutorado). Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas, Unicamp: Campinas, 1994. 311 f. Eliasson, K. and Lindgren, U. et al. 2003. Geographical Labour Mobility: Migration or Commuting? Regional Studies 37(8): 827-837. Gutiérrez-i-Puigarnau, E and Van Ommeren, J. N. 2014. Commuting and labour supply

• revisited. Urban Studies.

Haas, A and Osland, L. 2014. Commuting, migration, housing and labour markets: complex interactions. Urban Studies 51(3), 463-476, february, 2014. Lukic, V. 2009. Correlation between commuting and migration in daily urban system of Pancevo (Vojvodina, Serbia). Geographica Pannonica. V. 13, issue 1, pp. 17-21. Pereira, R. H. M. 2008. Processos socioespaciais, reestruturação urbana e deslocamentos na Região Metropolitana de Campinas. Dissertação de mestrado. Unicamp: Campinas. Reitsma, R. F and Vergossen, D. 1988. A Causal Typology of Migration: the Role of

• Commuting. Regional Studies 22: 331-340.

Renkow, M. and Hoover, D. 2000. Commuting, Migration, and Rural-Urban Population

• Dynamics. Journal of Regional Science 40(2): 261-287.

Ribeiro, L.C.Q. 2007. Metrópoles, reforma urbana e desenvolvimento nacional, in Ribeiro, L. C. Q; Santos Junior, O. A. (Orgs). As metrópoles e a questão social brasileira. Rio de Janeiro: Revan, Fase. Sheldon, H. and Hoermann, S. 1964. Metropolitan structure and commutation. Demography 1(1): 186-193. Shuai, X. 2012. Does Commuting Lead to Migration? Journal of Regional Analysis &

• Policy. 42(3).

Silva, E. T. 2012. Estrutura urbana e mobilidade especial nas metrópoles. Rio de Janeiro: Letra Capital, 2012. SINGER, P. 1980. Economia Política da Urbanização. Migrações Internas: considerações teóricas sobre o seu estudo. São Paulo, Brasiliense. p. 29-60. United Nations. Principles and Recommendations for Population and Housing Censuses (Revision 2). Department of Economic and Social Affairs. United Nations, NewYork, 2008.