Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas: The Migratory Component Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas: The Migratory Component* Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana Abstract: The paper aims to analyse how the different economic phases that Spain has experienced in the fi rst two decades of the 21st century (expansion, recession, and recovery) have infl uenced population stocks and migratory fl ows in the fi ve largest metropolitan areas defi ned as Functional Urban Areas (FUAs) in Spain: Bar- celona, Bilbao, Madrid, Seville and Valencia. Using Padrón Continuo (municipal reg- isters) and Estadística de Variaciones Residenciales (residential change statistics) as data sources, both native and immigrant – i.e. born abroad – stocks, and internal and international migration fl ows are analysed. We study differences between (a) diverse groups of foreigners (by continental origin), also comparing them to na- tives; and (b) different types of residential mobility by migrants’ previous place of residence: “intrametropolitan” movements (between urban cores and peripheries), migration fl ows between the fi ve urban areas and the rest of Spain, and interna- tional migration. Results show that intrametropolitan migration fl ows between the fi ve urban cores and their peripheries were characterised by suburbanisation during the ex- pansion phase. These fl ows were particularly relevant for Spanish-born persons and, among foreign-born migrants, for people born in the Americas (mainly Latin Americans). These fl ows to the suburban periphery decreased during the economic crisis, and in 2013 and 2014 net intrametropolitan migration of most foreign groups was characterised by recentralisation. Spaniards’ intrametropolitan movements almost reached equilibrium during the recession years: Natives decreased their moves from cores to rings, while they were increasingly attracted to urban centres. Owing to the incipient economic recovery, suburbanisation is progressively recov- ering its previous strength. As for other types of residential moves, foreign-born migrants moving from abroad and the rest of Spain to the fi ve FUAs during the economic expansion phase reversed the direction of their fl ows in the economic crisis years, migrating abroad or dispersing throughout Spain in search of jobs. Consequently, their stocks declined in some years. Currently, due to the incipient Comparative Population Studies Vol. 44 (2019): 317-350 (Date of release: 21.04.2020) Federal Institute for Population Research 2020 URL: www.comparativepopulationstudies.de DOI: 10.12765/CPoS-2020-09en URN: urn:nbn:de:bib-cpos-2020-09en5 * This article belongs to a special issue on “Internal Migration as a Driver of Regional Population Change in Europe: Updating Ravenstein”. • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana318 economic recovery, the fi ve FUAs are attracting internal and international foreign- born immigrants once again, so their foreign-born population stocks are increasing in both cores and peripheries. Spaniards show the opposite behaviour regarding fl ows to and from the fi ve areas analysed – they tended to disperse throughout the rest of Spain during the economic expansion phase. This trend continued during the crisis years, but at a slower pace, as natives became increasingly attracted to urban cores. Furthermore, this latter trend has strengthened during the post-crisis years. Finally, considering foreign-born and Spanish populations together, large urban are- as are increasingly attractive. This global tendency is to the detriment of rural areas and of non-metropolitan small and medium size towns, which lose population due to negative net migration. Keywords: Residential mobility · Migration · Population change · Urban areas · Spain 1 Introduction According to Ravenstein’s (1885) infl uential paper The laws of migration, most mi- grations are economically driven. Ravenstein described “a universal shifting or dis- placement of the population, which produces ‘currents of migration’ setting in the direction of the great centres of commerce and industry which absorb the migrants” (fi rst law;1 Ravenstein 1885: 198). Today, large urban areas continue to be main poles of attraction for immigrants. Most 19th century migrants settling in English cities and towns with vibrant econ- omies made short-distance moves (fi rst law; Ravenstein 1885: 198), although oth- ers migrated from further places (second2 and fi fth laws;3 Ravenstein 1885: 199). Currently, metropolises also receive immigrants from nearby municipalities, from the rest of the region or the country, or from abroad. These infl ows make cities 1 This fi rst law continues: “In forming an estimate of this displacement we must take into account the number of natives of each county which furnishes the migrants, as also the population of the towns or districts which absorb them” (Ravenstein 1885: 198). According to Greenwood (2019: 272), this statement, and the previous reference to distance, clearly contains elements of the gravity law of migration. Similarly, Ravenstein’s implicit attribution of rural-to-urban migra- tions to differences in economic opportunities can be interpreted as a reference to "pull" and "push" factors (Greenwood 2019: 272). 2 “The inhabitants of the country immediately surrounding a town of rapid growth, fl ock into it; the gaps thus left in the rural population are fi lled up by migrants from more remote districts, until the attractive force of one of our rapidly growing cities makes its infl uence felt, step by step, to the most remote corner of the kingdom” (Ravenstein 1885: 199). 3 “Migrants proceeding long distances generally go by preference to one of the great centres of commerce or industry” (Ravenstein 1885: 199). Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 319 grow, decreasing the share of natives and increasing that of immigrants.4 At the same time, other migrants leave these large urban areas, some of them returning to their places of origin, creating counter-fl ows as Ravenstein hypothesized in his third5 and fourth laws6 (Ravenstein 1885: 199). These in- and out-fl ows to or from the metropolitan areas fl uctuate, now as in Ravenstein’s times, mainly for economic reasons. This infl uence on residential moves, causing positive or negative net mi- gration, is exerted either directly through the labour market, or indirectly, through the real estate market. Therefore, migrations should be very sensitive to changes in the economic cycle. Taking this hypothesis based on Ravenstein’s thoughts as a starting point, this paper’s aim is twofold. First, it intends to analyse how the different economic phas- es that Spain has undergone in the fi rst two decades of the 21st century (expansion, recession, and recovery) have infl uenced internal and international migrations of both native and immigrant (born abroad) populations in the fi ve largest Spanish metropolitan areas: Barcelona, Bilbao, Madrid, Seville and Valencia (Fig. 1). Second, the paper aims to study the role of migration as a driver of population change in the core cities and the peripheries of these fi ve urban areas. Ravenstein used census data by county of residence and county of birth along with vital statistics records and data on country of birth, to study lifetime place- to-place migration and the net balance of migration (Greenwood 2019: 272). The present paper uses stock and fl ow information from INE (the Spanish National Sta- tistical Institute) to carry out the analysis. First, residential change statistics (Es- tadística de Variaciones Residenciales or EVR) fl ow data between 2005 and 2016 are used to describe migratory fl ows (residential changes) from, to, and within the functional urban areas. In addition, the continuous municipal population register or Padrón continuo7 provides population stocks on January 1 every year from 2005 to 2016, permitting the calculation of annual growth fi gures. All these data are used to analyse differences between: (a) diverse groups of foreigners, by continental origin, comparing them to natives; and (b) different types of residential mobility ac- cording to migrants’ previous place of residence. Residential mobility is classifi ed as intrametropolitan (moves between urban cores and peripheries of the fi ve met- 4 In Ravenstein’s words: “There are towns which, either on account of their size or rapid growth, absorb so considerable a number of migrants, that the resources in men of the country immedi- ately surrounding them are not able to supply their wants. In towns like these the native county element, owing to the infl ow of strangers, sinks below what it is in the surrounding country” (Ravenstein 1885: 205). 5 “The process of dispersion is the inverse of that of the absorption, and exhibits similar features” (Ravenstein 1885: 199). 6 “Each main current of migration produces a compensating counter-current” (Ravenstein 1885: 199). 7 All the residents of a municipality, including foreigners, have the right and the duty to register with the local Padrón, independent of their legal situation. Most illegal immigrants do register, as this gives them access to public health and education systems. Regarding EVR, this database collects changes in the Padrón, that is to say, residential moves between Spanish municipali- ties. As for fl ows between Spanish municipalities and abroad, they are also included, though the quality of these data is lower. • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana320 ropolitan areas), migration fl ows between the fi ve urban areas and the rest of Spain, and international migration. The latter analysis mirrors Ravenstein’s 1885 paper, distinguishing the "native county element" from the "border element" (residents of a county who were born in neighbouring counties), to differentiate between short- distance and long-distance migrants (Greenwood 2019). The fi ve metropolitan areas analysed are delimited following the Functional Ur- ban Area (FUAs) criteria established by Eurostat’s Urban Audit European database (Fig. 1).8 Each FUA consists of a city or core and its commuting zone or periphery.9 Fig. 1: Boundaries of the fi ve analysed Functional Urban Areas Source: Indicadores Urbanos, Spanish National Statistics Institute (INE), based on Euro- stat’s FUA defi nition 8 See defi nitions of spatial units used by Urban Audit at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/cit- ies/spatial-units 9 More specifi cally, Functional Urban Areas consist of a densely inhabited city and a less densely populated commuting zone whose labour market is highly integrated with the city. In other words, a sum of local territorial units (municipalities in the Spanish case) in which a signifi cant part of the resident employed population works in the city that gives name to the FUA. Thus, a municipality belongs to the FUA of a certain city if at least 15 percent of its working population commutes to that city for work. However, municipalities under 2,000 inhabitants may also be in- cluded according to the following criteria. Those with 1,000-2,000 inhabitants are incorporated if 25 percent of those employed commute to the city that gives name to the FUA; for those with 500-1,000 inhabitants, the threshold is 35 percent; for those with100-500 it is 45 percent; and, fi nally, for municipalities under 100 inhabitants, the threshold is 50 percent. The percentage of commuters is the main criterion, but there are also others, such as contiguity (Eurostat 2017). Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 321 According to the defi nition of Functional Urban Area used in the article, the Madrid FUA comprises 137 municipalities, while that of Barcelona is made up of 129. In Madrid, there are 6.5 million people living in the whole FUA, 3.2 million of which re- side in the core city and the rest in the periphery. The Barcelona FUA has 4.9 million inhabitants, 1.6 million of which reside in the core and the rest in ring municipalities. The other three areas analysed are smaller and have fewer residents both in the whole FUA and in the cores: Valencia (1.6 and 0.79 million residents, respectively), Seville (1.4 and 0.69 million), and Bilbao (1.021 and 0.345 million). In total, 15.5 mil- lion people, approximately a third of the Spanish population, live in these fi ve FUAs. Madrid, Barcelona and Valencia are the most dynamic FUAs, and most foreign-born immigrants settled there in the economic boom years. Seville and Bilbao received fewer born-abroad immigrants during that period. However, while Bilbao is situated at the centre of an industrial area which absorbed the impact of the economic crisis somewhat better, Seville has a less dynamic economy and has found it harder to recover from the economic recession. This paper also offers further relevant results by differentiating cores and pe- ripheries. We show how migratory fl ows contribute to population concentration (urbanisation) and deconcentration (suburbanisation, counter-urbanisation) in met- ropolitan areas. We compare intensity and timing differences between native, for- eign-born and total population growth, in the fi ve areas analysed. Finally, we show differences in internal and international migration patterns between native-born and foreign-born migrant groups, and their responses to economic cycles in the fi rst two decades of the 21st century. These analyses build on recent research undertaken by the authors and their research group. Previous results show an increasing population growth and age structure divergence within Spanish urban regions since the end of the 20th cen- tury. This has caused population growth and rejuvenation in some areas and demo- graphic decline and ageing in others (Thiers-Quintana/Gil-Alonso 2019; Gil-Alonso et al. 2018). The paper is organised as follows. After the Introduction, the paper includes a Background section, covering the economic context, the theoretical framework, and a literature review. Then, the main section, Results, describes research outcomes for fl ows and stocks. Finally, the Conclusions highlight the most relevant fi ndings, situating these contributions within the broader contexts of our current research project – the impact of these residential changes on metropolitan spatial diversifi ca- tion – and links our 21st century analysis to Ravenstein’s ideas from the 19th century. 2 Background During the strong economic growth period that Spain underwent from the end of the 1990s to 2008, millions of jobs were created, with annual employment growth rates of around 4 percent until the third quarter of 2007 (Fig. 2). These new jobs, mainly in the construction and services sectors, attracted millions of foreign im- migrants, particularly in the early 21st century. Therefore, the number of foreign • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana322 employed people, totalling less than half a million in the year 2000, was more than 2 million in 2005 and reached a maximum of 3 million in 2008, according to Span- ish Labour Force Survey data (Fig. 3). The annual infl ow of foreigners from abroad increased from about 300,000 in 2000 to more than 900,000 in 2007 (Fig. 4) and the number of foreign-born persons residing in Spain peaked at more than 6.5 million (Fig. 5), that is to say, around 14 percent of Spain’s population, in 2012. The Great Recession, the global economic crisis that began in 2007, originally affecting only the fi nancial sector, reached Spain in 2008, where the "real estate bubble" burst. Its consequences – many housing developments remained unfi n- ished, thousands of workers were laid off – were later felt by other economic sec- tors, such as industry. Therefore, annual employment growth rates quickly became negative (Fig. 2), the number of foreigners with a job decreased by half a million in just two years (Fig. 3), and the number of unemployed foreigners increased from about 400,000 in 2007 to 1.2 million in late 2010. After the Spanish economy slowly recovered from the 2008-2009 global fi nan- cial crisis in 2010 and Quarter 1 of 2011, a monetary debt crisis, lasting from 2011 to 2013, began. It particularly affected Southern European countries and led to the implementation of EU adjustment policies, which had an important impact on con- sumption, the service sector, and public employment (Fig. 2). Consequently, the number of foreigners in employment in Spain fell by nearly 900,000 between Quar- ter 2 in 2011 and Quarter 1 in 2014 (Fig. 3). Hence, since 2008, and because of the fall- Fig. 2: Annual employment growth rates (%), Spain, 2005-2016, quarterly data -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 2 0 0 5 Q 1 2 0 0 5 Q 3 2 0 0 6 Q 1 2 0 0 6 Q 3 2 0 0 7 Q 1 2 0 0 7 Q 3 2 0 0 8 Q 1 2 0 0 8 Q 3 2 0 0 9 Q 1 2 0 0 9 Q 3 2 0 1 0 Q 1 2 0 1 0 Q 3 2 0 1 1 Q 1 2 0 1 1 Q 3 2 0 1 2 Q 1 2 0 1 2 Q 3 2 0 1 3 Q 1 2 0 1 3 Q 3 2 0 1 4 Q 1 2 0 1 4 Q 3 2 0 1 5 Q 1 2 0 1 5 Q 3 2 0 1 6 Q 1 2 0 1 6 Q 3 in percent Source: Spanish Labour Force Survey (EPA), Spanish National Statistics Institute (INE) Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 323 ing employment demand, foreign immigrant entries have been rapidly decreasing (Fig. 4) and exits increasing, either to return to their countries of origin or to move to a third one. Even if foreigners’ emigration fl ows are underreported by Spanish sources (Gil-Alonso 2010), they show that international net migration became nega- tive (Fig. 4) and foreign-born population stocks decreased (Fig. 5) in some years. However, this reduction of foreign-born population stocks has not been as strong as could be expected given the intensity of the economic crisis. Most foreigners re- mained in Spain. In fact, the population of those born in Africa and especially Asia increased. Europeans (Bayona/Gil-Alonso 2016) and Latin Americans (Bayona et al. 2017; Quintero-Lesmes 2016; Prieto/López-Gay 2015) are the only groups of immi- grants that left in large numbers because of the recession (Fig. 6). Moreover, as a result of another change in the economic cycle since 2014 (Fig. 2), international net migration has become positive once more (Fig. 4) and the foreign-born population is currently increasing again – particularly that of Latin American origin (Thiers- Quintana/Gil-Alonso 2019). Why were there no strong return movements, given the intensity of econom- ic recession? This common feature of European and United States fl ows (Castles 2009, 2011; Castles/Miller 2010) could have several causes. These include the fear of not being able to return if they leave due to increasing migratory controls, and poor labour prospects in their countries of origin. Return fl ows could be driven more strongly by economic, political, and social changes in the countries of origin, and Fig. 3: Employed foreigners in the Spanish labour market (in millions), 2002- 2016, quarterly data 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 2 0 0 5 Q 1 2 0 0 5 Q 3 2 0 0 6 Q 1 2 0 0 6 Q 3 2 0 0 7 Q 1 2 0 0 7 Q 3 2 0 0 8 Q 1 2 0 0 8 Q 3 2 0 0 9 Q 1 2 0 0 9 Q 3 2 0 1 0 Q 1 2 0 1 0 Q 3 2 0 1 1 Q 1 2 0 1 1 Q 3 2 0 1 2 Q 1 2 0 1 2 Q 3 2 0 1 3 Q 1 2 0 1 3 Q 3 2 0 1 4 Q 1 2 0 1 4 Q 3 2 0 1 5 Q 1 2 0 1 5 Q 3 2 0 1 6 Q 1 2 0 1 6 Q 3 in millions Source: Spanish Labour Force Survey (EPA), Spanish National Statistics Institute (INE) • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana324 the capacity to circulate between countries, than by the economic situation in the receiving society (Papademetriou/Terrazas 2009).10 Other authors (Fielding 2010; Awad 2009; Fix et al. 2009; Castles 2011) have for- mulated other hypotheses focusing on labour market characteristics in host coun- tries to explain why, in the current phase of post-Fordist capitalism, migrants do not return in large numbers. This research suggests a "new immigration model" (King et al. 1997) that requires migrants to fi ll low wage and unstable jobs. Most migrant workers are "gap fi llers". That is, they do jobs locals cannot or will no longer do Fig. 4: Foreign immigrant annual entries, exits, and net migration growth, Spain, 2005-2016 -200,000 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year Entries Exists Net Growth in units Source: Residential Variation Statistics (EVR), Spanish National Statistics Institute (INE) 10 Therefore, many immigrants prefer to resist the effects of the economic crisis in the receiving country, even if it implies facing strong material deprivation, in the hope that a future economic recovery will generate new jobs. Only when the economic situation has substantially improved in their countries of origin, or when migrants are guaranteed future re-emigration, they return in signifi cant numbers (for example, Poles who migrated to Britain and Ireland). If this is not the case, returning is a less popular option (Ratha et al. 2009). As examples in Spain or the Czech Republic show, incentives for unemployed immigrants to return have generally not achieved this objective. Those who do return are typically immigrants whom host countries would have liked to retain. In other words, they are workers with enough training, skills, prospects, and secure legal status to allow them to once again return to the receiving country when the labour market improves again. Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 325 (Abella/Ducanes 2009). They are overrepresented in less-regulated sectors such as construction, intensive agriculture, low value-added manufacturing, restaurants, tourism and leisure, domestic service, and the care of elderly and dependant peo- ple. However, working in precarious jobs may have allowed foreign immigrants to adjust faster and better than native workers to the novel and changing labour mar- ket conditions introduced by the economic crisis, as they may be more willing to take more precarious jobs and to change residence for work-related reasons (Field- ing 2010).11 Fig. 5: Foreign and foreign-born population stocks (in millions) in Spain on January 1st, 1998-2016 1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 8 2 0 0 9 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6 Year Foreigners Foreign born 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 in millions Source: Padrón continuo (continuous municipal population register), Spanish National Statistics Institute (INE) 11 Fielding (2010) uses this approach to explain why East Asian and Southern European countries (highly dual labour markets, with low and high productivity sectors) received so many foreign immigrants until 2008, and why few migrants returned. According to Fielding, the growing dif- ferences in the type of jobs of local and immigrant workers would play in favour of the lat- ter during economic recession, when jobs become scarce and precarious. Fielding and other authors (Castles 2011; Ghosh 2009; Dobson et al. 2009) claim that this argument contradicts the widely accepted buffer theory. The buffer theory proposes that foreign migrants provide labour to host countries during economic expansion and reduce the impact of labour market crisis, by being the fi rst workers fi red, forcing them to return to their origin counties. Fielding (2010) claims that the buffer theory, in which migrant workers feel the strongest impact of the economic crisis, could have been true in the former Fordist economy, but seems to be less valid in the current neo-liberal capitalist context. • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana326 The large number of migrant entries between 1998 and 2007 not only had a spatial impact on large urban regions and their main settlement areas (Bayona/Gil- Alonso 2012), but also on the rest of the country, including rural areas (Bayona/ Gil-Alonso 2013). Indeed, immigrants usually migrated from municipalities where they fi rst settled to other areas of the country. They either joined “intrametropoli- tan" residential mobility fl ows (changes of residence within the same urban area), "intraprovincial" ones (internal migration12 from the province’s urban area to other municipalities of the same province) or "interprovincial" ones (between different province municipalities). Fig. 6: Foreign-born population stocks by place of birth (in millions). Spain, 1998, 2003, 2008, 2013, and 2016 0.0·106 0.5·106 1.0·106 1.5·106 2.0·106 2.5·106 3.0·106 1998 2003 2008 2013 2016 Year Former European Union (EU 15) Other European African American Asian 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 in millions Source: Padrón continuo (continuous municipal population register), Spanish National Statistics Institute (INE) 12 This paper uses "residential mobility" and "change of residence" as a synonym of "migration" and more specifi cally, of "internal migration" (residential moves within the borders of a country). However, some authors (for example, Palomares-Linares et al. 2017) distinguish between "resi- dential mobility" and "migration": The fi rst concept would refer to changes of residence that do not imply a signifi cant change of living space. This is equivalent to "intrametropolitan migration" – which takes place within a metropolitan/urban area/region (concepts which will also be used here as synonyms and equivalent to Eurostat’s FUA). The second concept, "migration" would imply that migrants do change their living space – in such cases, "migration" can be internal or international. Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 327 These migration fl ows are not random – they follow intensity, direction, and con- centration or dispersion patterns which numerous researchers have intended to conceptualise in recent decades. The literature shows, for instance, that foreign immigrants tend to have high internal migration rates compared to the population as a whole. As observed in Spain (Bayona/Gil-Alonso 2016; Gil-Alonso et al. 2015; Recaño/De Miguel 2012), their sociodemographic characteristics (younger, on aver- age, than natives and living in different family structures than them) and the fact that they tend to change residence more easily than locals, particularly in the period just after their arrival (Bélanger 1993; Newbold 1996; Rogers/Henning 1999; Zorlu/ Latten 2009), create low labour and residential stability. From a geographical point of view, their internal migration patterns are also different from those of the native population, because they change residence more frequently for labour-related rea- sons (Musterd 2005). Researchers agree that internal migration shapes human settlement patterns (Rees et al. 2017). However, there is disagreement on the spatial and social con- sequences of foreign migrant settlement patterns. Concepts such as concentra- tion versus dispersion, and segregation versus assimilation, have generated much theoretical debate in recent decades, and foreign immigrant’s settlement patterns have even been used to measure their level of integration in the host society (Mus- terd 2003).13 For instance, the spatial assimilation theory (Massey/Denton 1985) ar- gues that foreign-born immigrants disperse throughout the receiving country from their initial settlement location – where immigrants of certain nationalities or ethnic groups concentrate – towards other areas in which they are less present. As immi- grants progress socioeconomically and strengthen their ties with the host society, they increasingly avoid living in ethnic concentrations. This theory has been confronted by others. The segmented assimilation theory (Portes/Zhou 1993) sustains that different groups of immigrants can integrate in dif- ferent ways and at different rhythms in the host country. Furthermore, the ethnic enclave theory suggests that certain immigrants – including socioeconomically suc- cessful ones – may prefer to remain in (or migrate to) areas with high proportions of immigrants, where they obtain benefi ts from existing social networks (Damm 2009). In short, the theoretical background, a priori, could justify both dispersion dynam- ics (involving both the suburbanisation of foreign immigrants14 and their internal net migration from metropolitan areas to the rest of the country) and concentration 13 Similarly, some research projects on vulnerable neighbourhoods have considered high per- centages of certain groups of foreigners as an indicator of vulnerability (Nel·lo et al. 2014). 14 Studies by Bayona/López-Gay (2011) and Bayona/Gil-Alonso (2012) on the Metropolitan Region of Barcelona, by Pozo-Rivera/Rodríguez-Moya (2018) on the Community of Madrid, and by Puja- das et al. (2015), which also includes the cases of Valencia and Seville, show that internal migra- tion of foreign immigrants has played a particularly relevant role in deconcentration processes from core cities to peripheries. Analyses focusing on the mobility patterns of certain nationali- ties, such as Romanians and Bulgarians (Viruela 2016), Latin Americans (Gil-Alonso et al. 2012), or Moroccans (Pumares 2005; Capote 2012), show that Asians and Africans have the highest internal mobility rates, while Europeans – especially Western European EU citizens – have low rates similar to those of Spaniards, the least mobile population. • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana328 dynamics (implying urban recentralisation). In addition, the theoretical framework could also explain why different geographical origin groups have opposite trends. Focusing now on large Spanish urban areas, the literature shows that no ghettos (areas where a single ethnic origin group dominates) emerged in Spain during the intense migratory growth years. However, large metropolises do have concentra- tion spaces (Sabater et al. 2013) or areas in which the proportion of immigrants is above the metropolitan average. Given that the tendency to segregation is not uniform (Galeano et al. 2014), certain immigrant groups have created these areas more readily than others have. Asians and Africans, and to a lesser extent Western Europeans, have the greatest tendency towards concentration (Sabater et al. 2012). By contrast, Latin Americans have the greatest tendency towards dispersion and, consequently, the least towards segregation (Gil-Alonso et al. 2012). However, research – especially Spanish – has given less attention to how eco- nomic crises have affected internal migration, particularly that of foreign immigrants. Recaño and Cabré (2003) identifi ed two effects of regressive economic cycles on internal migrations: the reduction of interregional fl ow intensity, which is consistent with what Courgeau (1985) indicated, and the emergence of regional differences depending on the economic cycle. Certain regions that attracted immigrants during the expansion phase subsequently pushed them back in the economic crisis years, and vice versa. Based on the existing literature, our hypothesis for this paper is that migration fl ows of natives and immigrants vary when economic circumstances change (expan- sion, crisis, and recovery phases). This can be observed at different spatial scales, i.e. moves between urban cores and peripheries, between urban areas and the rest of Spain, and between the FUAs and abroad, affecting each of the migrant group’s concentration and dispersion trends. We consider that changes in population stocks and migration fl ows deserve to be analysed in greater depth and in greater spatial detail, because settlement patterns have multiple relevant implications. As the ex- tensive international literature has shown, some of the most important implications are: the creation and consolidation of migratory networks; immigrant labour, social and cultural integration; growing and shrinking cities; changes in household and population structures; spatial segregation and social polarisation dynamics, and the design and implementation of public policies.15 3 Results (I): Migration fl ow changes Data from the Residential Variation Statistics (EVR) are used to describe net migra- tion (the difference between infl ows and outfl ows) by continental origin in the fi ve 15 See, for instance, Bélanger (1993), Frey (1996), Newbold (1996), Rogers/Henning (1999), Borjas (2006), Zorlu/Latten (2009), Kabish/Haase (2011), Randolph/Tice (2014), Rérat (2012), Sharkey (2012), Tyrrell/Kraftl (2015), Bonvalet et al. (2016); Musterd et al. (2016), Bailey/Minton (2018), Hochstenbach/Musterd (2017), Florida (2017), Clark (2017), Vale/Malheiros (2017), Wolff (2018), Wolff/Wiechmann (2018), Smith (2019), or Azpitarte et al. (2019), among others. Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 329 FUAs under study. Net migration is analysed at three different geographical levels, i.e. movements between urban cores and peripheries, those to and from the fi ve FUAs to the rest of Spain, and fi nally, those between the FUAs and abroad. The commonalities and specifi cities of these urban areas will be introduced in the fol- lowing. 3.1 Internal net migration between core cities and periphery municipalities of the fi ve FUAs The fi ve core cities lose Spanish-born inhabitants moving towards their peripheries (Fig. 7). In other words, suburbanisation predominates among Spaniards through- out the analysed period (2005-2016). Nevertheless, suburbanisation starts to de- crease in 2007 because of the economic crisis, reaches its minimum in 2015, and picks up again slightly the following year. Initially, suburbanisation is also dominant among foreign migrants, particularly among those born in the Americas (Fig. 7), who are overwhelmingly Latin Ameri- cans and will be called “(Latin) Americans” in the following. These fl ows towards Fig. 7: Net migration between the fi ve FUA urban cores and their peripheries (intrametropolitan fl ows) by place of birth, 2005-2016 -70,000 -60,000 -50,000 -40,000 -30,000 -20,000 -10,000 0 10,000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year Rest of Europe Africa America Asia, Oceania & Other territories Spain Total Net migration flows in units Note: Negative intrametropolitan net migration growth means that suburbanisation is predominant while positive net migration growth indicates that recentralisation is more signifi cant. Net migration fl ows in units, i.e., -20,000 means that, in 2011, twenty thousand net migrants born in Spain moved from cores to peripheries (same for fi gures 8 to 11). Source: Residential Variation Statistics (INE) • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana330 peripheries slow down, again as a result of the economic crisis. (Latin) Americans even end up initiating a recentralisation process in 2013 and 2014. Nevertheless, from 2015 onwards, as the economy improves, suburbanisation also recovers. 3.2 Internal net migration between each of the fi ve FUAs and the rest of Spain In the following paragraphs, the analysis will focus on internal migration fl ows be- tween these fi ve metropolises and municipalities located in the rest of Spain. Initial- ly, the paper will examine moves from and to the fi ve core cities (Fig. 8, top graph) and then fl ows to and from peripheries (Fig. 8, bottom graph). The economic crisis is also a turning point for internal net migration between the fi ve cities and municipalities outside their metropolitan areas. However, it changes in the opposite sense to intrametropolitan moves. Indeed, in the case of people born abroad, net migration between the fi ve core cities and the rest of Spain is initially positive. In other words, there is an initial concentration phase. Then, from 2012 to 2014, fl ows become slightly negative, beginning a dispersion period. Mi- grants probably move in search of mainly low-skilled jobs in other parts of Spain less affected by the recession. The only immigrant group that is not affected are Asians. Their internal net migration is positive throughout the entire period ana- lysed (Fig. 8, top graph). By contrast, (Latin) American and European fl ows have the strongest fl uctuations caused by economic changes. Finally, since 2015, immigrant fl ows between core cities and the rest of Spain have once again become positive, indicating that foreigners are concentrating once more. In the case of Spaniards, internal net migration between urban cores and the rest of Spain is initially negative. Therefore, natives have a fi rst dispersion phase similar to suburbanisation, but at longer distances. Then, because of the economic crisis, fl ows start to change. In 2009, the internal net migration of the Spanish-born reaches equilibrium and, from 2011 onwards, it becomes increasingly positive. In other words, driven by economic recession, Spaniards, especially high-skilled ones (González-Leonardo et al. 2019), begin to concentrate in large cities, possibly be- cause their labour markets are larger and more diverse, offer more skilled jobs, and have lower unemployment levels than medium- and small-sized towns. Surpris- ingly, the current economic recovery does not seem to affect these fl ows, as natives continue to concentrate in large cities and have not initiated a new dispersion phase. Fig. 8 (bottom graph) shows internal net migration between metropolitan pe- ripheries and the rest of Spain. Immigrants follow similar patterns to those formerly observed in cores. Initially, metropolitan peripheries attract foreign immigrants but then, during the 2012-2014 deepest economic crisis phase, internal net migration becomes negative (dispersion). Once again, Asians are the only exception. More recently, since 2015, foreigners from the rest of Spain are once more being attracted by the suburban municipalities of the fi ve FUAs. Yet, in the case of Spanish people, net migration between these peripheries and the rest of Spain is initially negative. Dispersion then diminishes because of the economic crisis, indicating that metropolitan peripheries become increasingly at- Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 331 Fig. 8: Net migration between the fi ve FUA urban cores and the rest of Spain (top) and between the metropolitan peripheries and the rest of Spain (bottom) by place of birth, 2005-2016 -0,40·105 -0,20·105 0,00·105 0,20·105 0,40·105 0,60·105 0,80·105 1,00·105 1,20·105 1,40·105 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year -0,60·105 -0,40·105 -0,20·105 0,00·105 0,20·105 0,40·105 0,60·105 0,80·105 1,00·105 1,20·105 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year Rest of Europe Africa America Asia, Oceania & Other territories Spain Total -40,000 -20,000 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 -60,000 -40,000 -20,000 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 Net migration flows in units Net migration flows in units Note: Positive internal net migration growth means that population concentration is pre- dominant in large urban areas while negative net migration growth indicates the opposite, that is to say, that population tends to disperse throughout the rest of Spain. Source: Residential Variation Statistics (INE) • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana332 tractive. Nonetheless, unlike for the fi ve core cities, in this occasion, net migration is always negative. 3.3 International net migration between the fi ve FUAs and abroad Figure 9 shows international net migration between the fi ve core cities and other countries (top graph) and between the fi ve rings and abroad (bottom graph). Both patterns are very similar, therefore we analyse them together. Once again, people born in Spain and those born abroad behave differently. Economic expansion at- tracts foreign-born immigrants to large cities, and subsequently their international net migration becomes extremely positive. However, that of natives becomes pro- gressively negative, despite being initially balanced. Not only does the emigration of Spaniards continue during the economic crisis years, but certain foreign-born groups such as (Latin) Americans and Europeans (excluding those born in Spain) also shift to net emigration. Because of the economic crisis, both groups of migrants would be either returning to their countries of origin or moving to third countries. By contrast, international net migration of Africans and Asians is always positive throughout the entire period analysed. In other words, people from these regions of origin are always attracted to the large Spanish urban areas, even during the deep- est recession years, and they do not return in large numbers to their countries of origin. Finally, from 2015 onwards, because of the economic recovery, international net migration of all foreign-born groups has become positive once again. That of natives remains negative, though less. Figure 10 summarises net migration between the fi ve FUAs (urban cores and peripheries together) and other areas, adding up fl ows from and to the rest of Spain and those from and to other countries. At fi rst glance, it can be observed that total net migration of Spanish-born nationals between the fi ve FUAs analysed and other areas (the rest of Spain and abroad) is always negative, though this population loss becomes less pronounced over time. In 2016, it is almost 10 times smaller than in 2006. It should also be recalled that, despite large cities tending to attract native people from the rest of Spain, net fl ows with other countries are still negative. Foreigners’ migrant behaviour is strongly conditioned by economic cycles. In- deed, during the economic expansion phase, total net migration between the fi ve FUAs and other areas outside them is positive – large metropolitan areas tend to attract foreign immigrants. It then becomes negative during the economic crisis (particularly between 2012 and 2014), as foreigners are inclined to leave large urban areas and migrate abroad or to the rest of Spain in search of work. However, from 2015 onwards, because of economic recovery, total net migration turns positive once more. Fluctuations of (Latin) American fl ows are particularly noteworthy as the origin group with the most signifi cant positive total net migration during economic growth phases, and the most relevant negative net-fl ow in recession periods. At the other end of the spectrum, Asians are the only other exception to foreigners’ general mobility patterns as their total net migration remains positive throughout the period analysed. They are permanently attracted to Spain’s large metropolitan areas. Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 333 Fig. 9: Net migration between the fi ve FUA urban cores and abroad (top) and between the fi ve FUA metropolitan peripheries and abroad (bottom), by place of birth, 2005-2016 -0,60·105 -0,40·105 -0,20·105 0,00·105 0,20·105 0,40·105 0,60·105 0,80·105 1,00·105 1,20·105 1,40·105 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year -60,000 -40,000 -20,000 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 -0,40·105 -0,20·105 0,00·105 0,20·105 0,40·105 0,60·105 0,80·105 1,00·105 1,20·105 1,40·105 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year -40,000 -20,000 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 Rest of Europe Africa America Asia, Oceania & Other territories Spain Total Net migration flows in units Net migration flows in units Note: Positive international net migration growth means that there are more infl ows to large urban areas from abroad than outfl ows from large urban areas to abroad. Negative international net migration growth indicates the opposite. Source: Residential Variation Statistics (INE) • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana334 In sum, 2012, 2013, and 2014 are the only years in which total net migration is negative, in the fi ve FUAs. Before 2011 and after 2015, positive migration growth from the rest of Spain and abroad contributes to their population growth. Never- theless, foreigners leaving Spain are underreported (Gil-Alonso 2010). Therefore, positive net migratory growth is probably somewhat lower in economic expansion years, and negative net growth higher during crisis years. 3.4 Specifi c features of each of the fi ve FUAs Figure 11 shows the total net migration between each of the fi ve FUAs and rest of Spain and abroad, allowing for the analysis of each FUA’s particularities. In general, they all show similar mobility patterns, though some differences are worth spelling out: Fig. 10: Net migration between the fi ve FUAs (urban cores and peripheries together) and other areas (the rest of Spain and abroad), by place of birth, 2005-2016 -2·105 -1·105 0·105 1·105 2·105 3·105 4·105 5·105 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year Rest of Europe Africa America Asia, Oceania & Other territories Spain Total -200,000 -100,000 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 Net migration flows in units Note: Positive total net migration growth means that there are more infl ows to large urban areas from the rest of Spain and abroad than outfl ows from large urban areas to the rest of Spain and abroad. Negative net migration growth indicates the opposite. Source: Residential Variation Statistics (INE) Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 335 Fig. 11: Net migration between each of the fi ve FUAs (urban cores and peripheries together) and the rest of Spain and abroad, by place of birth, 2005-2016 -0,40·105 -0,20·105 0,00·105 0,20·105 0,40·105 0,60·105 0,80·105 1,00·105 1,20·105 1,40·105 1,60·105 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year -40,000 -20,000 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 Barcelona FUA Bilbao FUA -6,000 -4,000 -2,000 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year Rest of Europe Africa America Asia, Oceania & Other territories Spain Total Net migration flows in units Net migration flows in units • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana336 Fig. 11: Continuation -1,0·105 -0,5·105 0,0·105 0,5·105 1,0·105 1,5·105 2,0·105 2,5·105 3,0·105 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year -100,000 -50,000 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 Madrid FUA Seville FUA -5,000 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year Rest of Europe Africa America Asia, Oceania & Other territories Spain Total Net migration flows in units Net migration flows in units Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 337 • Barcelona FUA: The foreign groups least affected by the economic crisis are Asians and Europeans. By contrast, (Latin) Americans were the most affect- ed. However, in 2015-2016, (Latin) Americans’ total net migration was again strongly positive. For natives, total net migration is always negative. • Bilbao FUA stands out for its extremely negative total net migration among Spaniards. However, it is slowly approaching equilibrium. Once again, the group most affected by the economic crisis are (Latin) Americans, though it is also true that Bilbao is the city in which the economic recession has had less dramatic effects, as 2013 is the only year in which total net migration of foreigners is clearly negative. • Madrid FUA: As opposed to Bilbao, Madrid is the FUA in which total net mi- gration of Spanish-born nationals is less negative. In fact, it is the only FUA in which total net migration of natives has been positive since 2015. As in Barcelona FUA, the total net migration of foreigners also recovered after the economic crisis, though not as signifi cantly. • Seville FUA seems to show some delay with respect to the other four. Though the effects of the economic crisis are already visible in 2009 and 2010 in Bar- celona, Madrid and Valencia, they do not feature in Seville until 2012. In ad- dition, until 2016 Seville FUA shows little signs of economic recovery. It also stands out for being the only FUA in which total net migration of Spaniards is positive until 2010; then, it becomes clearly negative. Fig. 11: Continuation -2·104 -1·104 0·104 1·104 2·104 3·104 4·104 5·104 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Year Rest of Europe Africa America Asia, Oceania & Other territories Spain Total -20,000 -10,000 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 50,000 60,000 Valencia FUA Net migration flows in units Source: Residential Variation Statistics (INE) • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana338 • Valencia FUA is where the economic crisis lasts longest, affecting fl ows be- tween 2009 and 2013 – Valencia and its region was particularly hit when the "housing bubble" burst. Recovery starts to be visible in 2014; net migration fl ows grow faster than in Seville, but more slowly than in the other three Functional Urban Areas. 4 Results (II): Population stock changes As mentioned above, the continuous municipal population register or Padrón – which indicates each municipality’s offi cial population on January 1st of each year – has been used as a main data source to analyse stock changes during the 2005- 2016 period both for natives and people born abroad. Population stock changes not only incorporate variations due to migration but also those due to natural changes (the balance of births minus deaths). Nevertheless, in recent years, the fi ve urban areas analysed – and their respective core cities16 – show minimal natural in- and decreases. Consequently, population stock changes depend almost exclusively on migratory fl ows – this is particularly true in the case of foreign-born people – and, therefore, growth is very sensitive to economic cycle fl uctuations. Indeed, Padrón data show that the fi ve main Spanish FUAs gained population during the economic boom years, but that the economic recession changed this trend. Initially, all the fi ve FUAs continued to grow, though at a lower rate. In 2012, four started to lose popu- lation. Barcelona and Valencia decreased until 2014, Madrid until 2015, and Bilbao until 2016. Seville is the only exception, as its population remained stable during the years under examination. Population fi gures started to recover in 2015 and 2016, with the exception of Bilbao, which still had slight negative growth in 2016. If only cores are analysed, the fi ve main cities’ populations decreased during the crisis period, losing inhabitants between 2009 and 2014 in Barcelona, until 2015 in Valencia, and until 2016 in Bilbao. The same occurred in Madrid, but from 2010 to 2015, and until 2016 in Seville. In other words, in 2016 the cities of Barcelona, Madrid and Valencia were growing once again, while Bilbao and Seville were not. Peripheral municipalities also show changes throughout the period analysed. In Madrid and Seville FUAs, they have not stopped growing, though their population has increased less rapidly since 2010 due to the economic crisis. Urban fringe areas in Valencia slightly shrank in 2012 and 2013, as did those of Barcelona in 2013 and 2014. The only exception is Bilbao FUA, as its peripheral municipalities lost popula- tion since 2013 and have not recovered it since. 4.1 Total population stocks in the fi ve FUAs In order to capture the impact of economic phases on population growth, we have calculated cumulative annual growth rates for the fi ve FUAs under study (Fig. 12). 16 For instance, in 2016 the cities of Barcelona, Bilbao, Madrid, Seville and Valencia show a natural growth of -1554, -1287, 2353, 428, and -686 inhabitants, respectively. Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 339 Fig. 12: Core city and periphery population changes by place of birth, 2005- 2016: Cumulative Annual Growth Rates (CAGR) Barcelona FUA Core city -5 0 5 10 15 20 CAGR 2005-2010 CAGR 2010-2014 CAGR 2014-2016 -5 0 5 10 15 20 CAGR 2005-2010 CAGR 2010-2014 CAGR 2014-2016 Periphery Bilbao FUA Core city -5 0 5 10 15 20 CAGR 2005-2010 CAGR 2010-2014 CAGR 2014-2016 -5 0 5 10 15 20 CAGR 2005-2010 CAGR 2010-2014 CAGR 2014-2016 Periphery Madrid FUA Core city -5 0 5 10 15 20 CAGR 2005-2010 CAGR 2010-2014 CAGR 2014-2016 -5 0 5 10 15 20 CAGR 2005-2010 CAGR 2010-2014 CAGR 2014-2016 Periphery in percent in percent in percent in percent in percent in percent • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana340 The rates are divided into three periods, that is to say, from 1st January 2005 to 1st January 2010 (the economic boom), from 1st January 2010 to 1st January 2013 (the deep economic crisis) and from 1st January 2013 to 1st January 2016 (the economic recovery). Core cities and peripheries are analysed separately, highlighting the dif- ferences between Spanish and foreign-born populations (Fig. 12). 4.2 The Spanish population in the fi ve FUAs The fi ve core cities lose Spanish-born inhabitants throughout the period analysed, though to a lesser extent during the economic crisis years than in the economic boom years. In other words, recession slowed down Spanish-born population loss in the fi ve FUAs. Furthermore, according to available data, Madrid is the only city Fig. 12: Continuation Seville FUA Core city -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 CAGR 2005-2010 CAGR 2010-2014 CAGR 2014-2016 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 CAGR 2005-2010 CAGR 2010-2014 CAGR 2014-2016 Periphery Valencia FUA Core city -5 0 5 10 15 20 CAGR 2005-2010 CAGR 2010-2014 CAGR 2014-2016 -5 0 5 10 15 20 CAGR 2005-2010 CAGR 2010-2014 CAGR 2014-2016 Periphery in percent in percent in percent in percent Source: Padrón continuo (continuous municipal population register) Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 341 that does not lose Spanish-born population in the last period analysed – as we have explained, it has both positive internal net migration and positive natural growth. The results for peripheral municipalities are different. Four of the fi ve suburban areas gained Spanish-born population throughout all periods under study. How- ever, the economic recession had a deep impact on them, largely reducing their growth. The only exception is the Bilbao FUA, as the Spanish population of its sub- urban municipalities decreased in both the expansion and crisis phases. As a whole (taking cores and rings together), the fi ve FUAs show similarities. Indeed, four of them gained natives throughout the periods analysed, the exception being Bilbao, as its population born in Spain constantly decreases. 4.3 Population born abroad (by continental origin) in the fi ve FUAs During the economic boom years, the foreign-born population increased in both core cities and peripheries in all metropolitan areas examined. Asians were the only foreign group that grew consistently, even during the economic crisis period. The other four immigrant groups were, to a greater or lesser extent, affected by eco- nomic changes. In this sense, (Latin) Americans and Europeans were the hardest hit, as their numbers decreased during the recession phase. Africans in the Bilbao FUA and Europeans in the core cities of Barcelona and Valencia also show a distinctive behaviour. In the fi rst case, they grew during the entire economic crisis period, and in the latter, they increased from 2014 onwards. 5 Discussion and conclusions Research results show that suburbanisation (more people moving from cores to rings than vice versa) was the predominant "intrametropolitan" migration fl ow be- tween the fi ve urban cores and their peripheries during the economic expansion phase. This phenomenon was particularly important for natives and for people born in the Americas (mainly Latin Americans). In general, foreign migrant suburbanisa- tion trends are in line with the spatial assimilation theory (Massey/Denton 1985). However, the fact that suburbanisation intensity is not homogeneous throughout all the groups analysed – Africans even tended to increase their segregation levels over time (Bayona/López-Gay 2011) – would instead validate the segmented assimilation theory (Portes/Zhou 1993). These fl ows to the suburban periphery decreased during the economic crisis, and in 2013 and 2014, net intrametropolitan migration of most foreign groups – Latin Americans in particular – even became positive (i.e. more recentralisation than suburbanisation). Spaniards’ intrametropolitan fl ows were never positive, but they almost reached equilibrium during the recession years – natives decreased their moves from cores to rings, while they were increasingly attracted to urban centres. Several elements might explain why core cities lost less and gained more Spanish-born and foreign-born residents during the economic crisis. Large housing developments in suburban towns stopped being built when the real estate bubble • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana342 burst and banks restricted new mortgages. While access to property ownership be- came increasingly diffi cult, urban cores became more attractive. They have larger rental housing stocks, more and the best-paying jobs, and better public transport networks, which implies that commuting costs are lower in dense cities than in the periphery. All these factors – and not the ethnic enclave theory (Damm 2009) – would in our opinion explain why recentralisation, rather than non-suburbanisation, seems to have been a more logical option for both natives and immigrants during economic recession. Owing to the economic recovery from 2015 onwards, intrametropolitan migra- tion fl ows have become negative once again and suburbanisation is progressively returning to its previous levels. If this trend consolidates (as 2017 and 2018 data seem to confi rm), the relative recentralisation during the deepest economic reces- sion years will have basically been a cyclical (or punctual) event. As for other types of residential moves, foreign-born immigrants moving from abroad and the rest of Spain to the fi ve FUAs during the economic expansion phase inverted the direction of their fl ows in the economic crisis years, migrating abroad or dispersing throughout Spain in search of jobs. Consequently, their stocks re- duced during some years – the only exceptions being Europeans in Barcelona and Asians in all fi ve areas. Finally, due to the incipient economic recovery, the fi ve FUA are now attracting immigrants once again, so their foreign-born population stocks are currently increasing in both cores and peripheries. Spanish-born people show the opposite behaviour regarding fl ows from and to the fi ve areas analysed. They tended to disperse throughout the rest of Spain during the economic expansion phase, therefore showing negative internal net migration rates. This negative trend continued during the crisis years, but at a slower pace, as natives became increasingly attracted to urban cores. Furthermore, this latter trend has strengthened during the post-crisis years. Two cases stand out. First, the city of Madrid is the main destination of young native migrants (González-Leonardo et al. 2019) and is the only area analysed in which internal net migration of Spaniards is currently positive. Second, Seville FUA shows the opposite tendency. In other words, Seville FUA mostly attracted Spanish people during the expansion phase, but Spanish-born internal net growth is clearly negative in the crisis and post-crisis stages. Considering foreign-born and Spanish populations together, large urban areas are increasingly attractive. This global tendency is to the detriment of rural areas and of non-metropolitan small and medium size towns, which lose population be- cause of negative internal net migration. Out-migration of (mainly skilled) young people who move to large cities in search of greater educational and employment opportunities is particularly problematic. Finally, the fi ve FUAs lose Spanish-born inhabitants emigrating abroad during the entire period studied, though in comparison to deepest economic recession years, this negative international net migration is currently receding. Obviously, these general results contain interesting differences between the di- verse geographical origin groups of immigrants, and between the fi ve urban areas analysed. Latin American fl ows and stocks have been affected the most by econom- Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 343 ic changes: large numbers of these migrants move to or leave Spain’s urban areas depending on whether the economic situation is expansive or recessive, respec- tively. Their easy access to Spanish citizenship can probably explain their labour and migratory fl exibility.17 Therefore, Latin American fl ows would, using Massey’s (1988) words, “serve as a buffer” for current economic processes. European im- migrants – many of them EU citizens – show similar, though less marked, patterns. Meanwhile, African fl ows and stocks show the opposite migratory behaviour – they try to remain in Spain’s metropolises and their emigration fl ows are never too large, not even during hard times. Finally, Asian fl ows and stocks are constantly growing, regardless of the period analysed –expansion, crisis or post-crisis – and are the least affected by economic cycles. Despite similarities in the population dynamics of the fi ve FUAs, certain dif- ferences should be pointed out. Madrid FUA stands out for attracting Spaniards while Bilbao’s Spanish-born population has decreased most drastically. Barcelona is particularly attractive for European migrants. The economic crisis started later in Seville, which is the FUA that currently shows the least signs of economic and population recovery. In addition to this late economic cycle, Seville has less foreign population. These specifi cities could probably be explained by Seville’s lower eco- nomic development in comparison to the other four urban areas. Finally, Valencia does not stand out in any respect and presents largely average values regarding migration fl ows. These results confi rm previous and recent fi ndings by our research group, un- derlining the role of migration in shaping present urban population structure and dynamics. Indeed, they confi rm the relevance of both internal and international mi- grations in the rejuvenation of certain neighbourhoods such as the historical cen- tres of the cities analysed (Gil-Alonso et al. 2018). These processes coincide with other phenomena such as gentrifi cation and "touristifi cation" (Judd/Fainstein 1999; Florida 2002), increasing inequality, social polarisation and segregation (Florida 2017), and the concentration of certain foreign groups in some parts of the city and the subsequent replacement of certain nationalities by others – though, as has been explained, there are hardly any ghettos in Spain (Sabater et al. 2013). Interactions between all these phenomena show migration complexity and the diversity of its spatial consequences. Moreover, low fertility and increased life ex- pectancy diminish the relevance of natural growth and emphasise the growing importance of migration in the development of the populations of urban regions across Spain and Europe. However, there are differences according to migrants’ ori- gin. Migration fl ows by Spanish-born people exhibit relatively low intensity and net effects, as most migration fl ows are balanced by counter-fl ows, resulting in limited 17 Latin American immigrations and emigrations are facilitated by the Spanish law, which favours the acquisition of Spanish citizenship by nationals of Spain’s ex-colonies. Indeed, Latin Ameri- cans can acquire Spanish citizenship much more easily (after two years of regular residence in Spain) than other foreigners can. Many Latin Americans have done so, as having Spanish nationality favours their migratory movements, especially when the economic cycle changes. Consequently, they can adapt more easily to economic circumstances. • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana344 population redistribution and dynamic equilibrium. This phenomenon is typically observed in highly-developed countries (Rees et al. 2017). By contrast, foreign-born migrants’ international and internal fl ows are the main factor currently redistribut- ing Spain’s urban population. The higher intensity and effectiveness of their mobil- ity is conditioned by economic phases, which change the direction of the in- and out-fl ows and the (positive or negative) sign of their net migration rates. Indeed, in the dynamic equilibrium context broadly characterising the analysed urban ar- eas, suburbanisation is the dominant process during economic expansion phases, while recentralisation gained more relative importance during the last crisis period – particularly among foreign-born immigrants, whereas suburbanisation of natives decreased in intensity. Therefore, there are multiple causes of migration, but undoubtedly the economic ones are among the most relevant, at least in the case of the fi ve FUAs analysed. Although the emigration (from Spain) of people born in other countries is underreg- istered, the data are solid enough to conclude that there have been strong changes in migrant stocks and fl ows in the fi ve largest Spanish metropolises as a result of economic cycle fl uctuations. This corroborates the paper’s initial hypothesis – that migrations affecting large urban areas are mainly economically driven, either di- rectly through the labour market, or indirectly, through the real estate market – and confi rms the validity of Ravenstein’s ideas at the beginning of the 21st century. More specifi cally, migration changes in the last two decades broadly validate Ra- venstein’s fi rst, second, third and fourth laws. Indeed, large urban areas remains migrants’ main attraction poles, and short-distance fl ows (suburbanisation, recen- tralisation) predominate. In general, migration fl ows still decrease with distance, al- though transport improvements or “facilities of communication” (Ravenstein 1885: 199) can explain, among other factors, the current importance in Spain of Latin American in- and out-fl ows. By contrast, it is currently not true that “the natives of towns are less migratory than those of the rural parts of the country” (sixth law; Ravenstein 1885: 199), as a signifi cant part of migratory moves in developed countries now occurs between urban areas: The decreasing and aged population remaining in rural areas is gener- ally less mobile than urbanites (Greenwood 2019). Finally, the seventh law, that “fe- males are more migratory that males” (Ravenstein 1885: 199), was not tested in this paper. However, literature demonstrates that, presently, women are predominant in the remaining rural-to-urban internal migration – at least in Spain and other devel- oped countries – and in some international fl ows, though not in others. In Spain, for instance, immigration from Latin America is predominantly female, whereas immi- grants from African and most Asian countries are mainly men. However, the present validity of Ravenstein’s laws can be corroborated in general terms, demonstrating the precursory and even visionary character of his ideas. Acknowledgements Research for the present paper was conducted within two R+D projects. The fi rst, Desigualdad social, polarización territorial y formación de espacios vulnerables en Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 345 las grandes áreas metropolitanas españolas (Social inequality, territorial polarisa- tion and formation of vulnerable spaces in the largest Spanish metropolitan areas, ref. CSO2015-65219-C2-1-R), was directed by Dr. Isabel Pujadas and Dr. Fernando Gil-Alonso. The second, Nuevas movilidades y reconfi guración sociorresidencial en la poscrisis: consecuencias socioeconómicas y demográfi cas en las áreas ur- banas españolas (New mobilities and socio-residential reconfi guration in the post- crisis: socioeconomic and demographic consequences in Spanish urban areas, ref. RTI2018-095667-B-I00), is directed by Dr. Fernando Gil-Alonso and Dr. Cristina López. Both projects are funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities, the Spanish Research Agency and the European Regional Develop- ment Fund (AEI/ERDF, EU). A very preliminary version of this research was pre- sented at the XVI Congreso de la Población en España (Alicante, 2018). The authors, Dr. Fernando Gil-Alonso and Dr. Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana, belong to the Territori, Població i Ciutadania (Territory, Population, and Citizenship) research group of the University of Barcelona, offi cially recognised by the Catalan government (ref. GRC_2017SGR1298). The authors are grateful for the comments received from Phil Rees, the language editor and the reviewers contributing to improvements in the text. References Abella, Manolo; Ducanes, Geoffrey 2009: Technical note on the effect of the global eco- nomic crisis on Asian migrant workers and governments’ responses. Bangkok: ILO Regional Offi ce for Asia and the Pacifi c. Awad, Ibrahim 2009: The Global Economic Crisis and Migrant Workers: Impact and Re- sponse. Geneva: International Labour Offi ce. Azpitarte, Francisco; Alonso-Villar, Olga; Hugo-Rojas, Felipe 2019: On the Changing Spatial Distribution of Human Capital and Occupation Groups: An Analysis of Recent Trends in Australia’s Main Capital Cities. In: Working Paper 19/03. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo. Bailey, Nick; Minton, Jon 2018: The suburbanisation of poverty in British cities, 2004-16: extent, processes and nature. In: Urban Geography 39,6: 892-915 [doi: 10.1080/02723638.2017.1405689]. Bayona, Jordi; Gil-Alonso, Fernando 2016: Europeos bajo la crisis: Cambios en sus pa- trones migratorios recientes en España. In: Scripta Nova XX, 549-2. Bayona-i-Carrasco, Jordi; Gil-Alonso, Fernando 2013: Is foreign immigration the solu- tion to rural depopulation? The case of Catalonia (1996-2009). In: Sociologia Ruralis 53,1: 26-51 [doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9523.2012.00577.x]. Bayona-Carrasco, Jordi; Gil-Alonso, Fernando 2012: Suburbanisation and international immigration: The case of the Barcelona Metropolitan Region (1998-2009). In: Tijd- schrift voor economische en sociale geografi e/Journal of Economic and Social Geog- raphy 103,3: 312-329 [doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9663.2011.00687.x]. Bayona-i-Carrasco, Jordi; López-Gay, Antonio 2011: Concentración, segregación y movi- lidad residencial de los extranjeros en Barcelona. In: Documents d’Anàlisi Geogràfi ca 57,3: 381-412. • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana346 Bayona-i-Carrasco, Jordi; Thiers-Quintana, Jenniffer; Ávila-Tàpies, Rosalía 2017: Eco- nomic recession and the reverse of internal migration fl ows of Latin American im- migrants in Spain. In: Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 43,15: 2499-2518 [doi: 10.1080/1369183X.2017.1296354]. Bélanger, Alain 1993: La migration interprovinciale des personnes nées à l’étranger, Ca- nada, 1981-1986. In: Cahiers Québécois de Démographie 22,1: 153-178. Bonvalet, Catherine; Bringé, Arnaud; Imbert, Christophe 2016: Urban dynamics and re- sidential trajectories in Paris. In: Portuguese Journal of Social Science 15,1: 25-46 [doi: 10.1386/pjss.15.1.25_1]. Borjas, George J. 2006: Native internal migration and the labor market impact of immi- gration. In: Journal of Human resources 41,2: 221-258 [doi: 10.3386/w11610]. Capote, Alberto 2012: Inmigración extranjera en la provincia de Córdoba: destino se- cundario de los inmigrados marroquíes en Andalucía. In: Scripta Nova XVI, 419. Castles, Stephen 2009: Migration and the Global Financial Crisis: A Virtual Symposium. Update 1.A: An Overview. Castles, Stephen 2011: Migration, crisis, and the global labour market. In: Globalizations 8,3: 311-324 [doi: 10.1080/14747731.2011.576847]. Castles, Stephen; Miller, Mark J. 2010: Migration and the Global Economic Crisis: One Year On. Update 1.L. Clark, William A.V. 2017: Residential mobility in context: Interpreting behavior in the hous- ing market. In: Papers de Sociologia 102,4: 575-605 [doi: 10.5565/rev/papers.2411]. Courgeau, Daniel 1985: Interaction between Spatial Mobility, Family and Career Life- Cycle: A French Survey. In: European Sociological Review 1,2: 139-162 [doi: 10.1093/ oxfordjournals.esr.a036382]. Damm, Anna. Piil 2009: Ethnic enclaves and immigrant labor market outcomes: Quasi-experimental evidence. In: Journal of Labor Economics 27,2: 281-314 [doi: 10.1086/599336]. Dobson, Janet; Latham, Alan; Salt, John 2009: On the Move? Labour Migration in Times of Recession. In: Policy Network Papers: 1-23. Eurostat 2017: Methodological manual on city statistics. 2017 edition. Luxembourg: Publications Offi ce of the European Union [doi: 10.2785/708009]. Fielding, Tony 2010: Migration in a Time of Crisis: A simple conceptual framework ap- plied to East Asian migrations. Working Paper 63. Sussex Centre for Migration Re- search. Fix, Michael et al. 2009: In: Migration and the Global Recession. Washington DC: Migra- tion Policy Institute. Florida, Richard 2017: The new urban crisis: How our cities are increasing inequality, deepening segregation, and failing the middle class and what we can do about it. New York: Basic Books. Florida, Richard 2002: The rise of the creative class. And how it is transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York: Basic Books. Frey, William H. 1996: Immigration, domestic migration, and demographic balkanization in America: new evidence for the 1990. In: Population and Development Review 22,4: 741-763 [doi: 10.2307/2137808]. Galeano, Juan Martín; Sabater, Albert; Domingo, Andreu 2014: Formació i evolució dels enclavaments ètnics a Catalunya abans i durant la crisi económica. In: Documents d’Anàlisi Geogràfi ca 60,2: 261-288 [doi: 10.5565/rev/dag.111]. Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 347 Ghosh, Jayati 2009: Will the Crisis Reverse Global Migration? In: Yale Global 14. Gil-Alonso, Fernando 2010: Análisis de dos propuestas metodológicas para estimar las salidas de extranjeros de España: las bajas por caducidad padronales y la renovación de las tarjetas de residencia temporales. In: Estadística Española 52,174: 277-309. Gil-Alonso, Fernando; Bayona-i-Carrasco, Jordi; Pujadas, Isabel 2015: Las migraciones internas de los extranjeros en España. Dinámicas espaciales recientes bajo el impacto de la crisis. In: Boletín de la Asociación de Geógrafos Españoles 69: 233-261. Gil-Alonso, Fernando; Bayona-i-Carrasco, Jordi; Vono de Vilhena, Daniela 2012: Las mi- graciones internas de los latinoamericanos en España: del boom a la crisis económi- ca. In: Papeles de Población 18,71: 9-50. Gil-Alonso, Fernando et al. 2018: ¿Hacia unas ciudades segregadas según la edad? Geo- grafía dinámica del envejecimiento y rejuvenecimiento en las grandes metrópolis es- pañolas”. In: XVI Congreso de la Población en España. Respuestas geodemográfi cas a los cambios del modelo socioeconómico. Alicante, 12-14 September. González-Leonardo, Miguel; López-Gay, Antonio; Recaño, Joaquín 2019: Brain drain and the Second Wave of Depopulation. In: Perspectives Demogràfi ques 16: 1-4. Greenwood, Michael J. 2019: The migration legacy of E. G. Ravenstein. In: Migration Studies 7,2: 269-278 [doi: 10.1093/migration/mny043]. Hochstenbach, Cody; Musterd, Sako 2017: Gentrifi cation and the suburbanization of poverty: changing urban geographies through boom and bust periods. In: Urban Ge- ography 39,1: 26-53 [doi: 10.1080/02723638.2016.1276718]. Judd, Dennis R.; Fainstein Susan S. (Eds.) 1999: The tourist city. London: Yale Univ. Press. Kabish, Nadja; Haase, Dagmar 2011: Diversifying European Agglomerations: Evidence of Urban Population Trends for the 21st Century. In: Population, Space and Place 17,3: 236-253 [doi: 10.1002/psp.600]. King, Russell; Fielding, Anthony; Black, Richard 1997: The international migration turna- round in southern Europe. In: King, Russell; Black, Richard (Eds.): Southern Europe and the New Immigrations. Brighton: Sussex Academic Press: 1-25. Massey, Douglas S.; Denton, Nancy. A. 1985: Spatial assimilation as a socioeconomic outcome. In: American Sociological Review 50,1: 94-106 [doi: 10.2307/2095343]. Massey, Douglas. S. 1988: Economic development and international migration in com- parative perspective. In: The Population and Development Review 14,3: 383-413 [doi: 10.2307/1972195]. Musterd, Sako 2003: Segregation and integration: A contested relationship. In: Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 29,4: 623-641 [doi: 10.1080/1369183032000123422]. Musterd, Sako 2005: Social and ethnic segregation in Europe: Levels, causes, and effects. In: Journal of Urban Affairs 27,3: 331-348 [doi: 10.1111/j.0735-2166.2005.00239.x]. Musterd, Sako et al. 2016: Adaptive behaviour in urban space: Residential mo- bility in response to social distance. In: Urban Studies 53,2: 227-246 [doi: 10.1177/0042098014562344]. Nel·lo, Oriol et al. 2014: Evolució de la segregació a Catalunya, 2001-2012. Volum I. Pre- sentació i resultats preliminars. Bellaterra: Institut de Govern i Polítiques Públiques (IGOP), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Newbold, K. Bruce 1996: Internal migration of the foreign-born in Canada. In: Interna- tional Migration Review 30,3: 728-747 [doi: 10.2307/2547634]. • Fernando Gil-Alonso, Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana348 Palomares-Linares, Isabel; Feria, José María; Susino, Joaquín 2017: Medida y evolución de la movilidad residencial en las áreas metropolitanas españolas. In: Revista de So- ciologia 102,4: 545-574. Papademetriou, Demetrios G.; Terrazas, Aaron 2009: Immigrants and the Current Eco- nomic Crisis. Washington DC: Migration Policy Institute. Portes, Alejandro; Zhou, Min 1993: The New Second Generation: Segmented Assimila- tion and Its Variants. In: Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sci- ences 530,1: 74-96 [doi: 10.1177/0002716293530001006]. Pozo-Rivera, Enrique; Rodríguez-Moya, Juana 2018: Impacto de la crisis en los mov- imientos migratorios en la Comunidad de Madrid (2007-2013). In: BAGE 77: 229-255 [doi: 10.21138/bage.2540]. Prieto, Victoria Rosas; López-Gay, Antonio 2015: Push and pull factors of Latin American Migration to Spain. In: Domingo, Andreu; Sabater, Albert; Verdugo, Richard R. (Eds.): Demographic Analysis of Latin American Immigrants in Spain: From boom to bust. Switzerland: Springer International: 1-28 [doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-12361-5_1]. Pujadas, Isabel; Bayona, Jordi; Gil-Alonso, Fernando 2015: Movilidad residencial y cri- sis: Tendencias recientes en las regiones metropolitanas españolas. In: Fregolent, Laura; Guerzoni, Marco; Torri, Rosana (Coord.): Porvera casa. Tricase: Youcanprint: 51-74. Pumares, Pablo 2005: Distribución territorial y movilidad interprovincial de la población marroquí en España. In: Di Comite, Luigi; Rodríguez, Vicente; Girone, Stefania (Eds.): Quaderni 32. Sviluppo demografi co e mobilità territoriale delle popolazioni nell’area del Mediterraneo: Italia e Spagna, due paesi a confronto. Bari: Caccuci Editore: 203- 230. Quintero-Lesmes, Doris Cristina 2016: Transformaciones territoriales de las migra- ciones internas de los latinoamericanos en España en tiempos de crisis económica. In: Scripta Nova XX,549-3. Ratha, Dilip; Mohapatra, Sanket; Silwal, Ani 2009: Migration and Remittance Trends 2009, Migration and Development Brief 11. Washington DC: World Bank. Ravenstein, Ernst Georg 1885: The laws of migration. In: Journal of the Statistical Soci- ety of London 48,2: 167-235 [doi: 10.2307/2979181]. Randolph, Bill; Tice, Andrew 2014: Suburbanizing disadvantage in Australian cities: so- ciospatial change in an era of neoliberalism. In: Journal of Urban Affairs 36,1: 384-399 [doi: 10.1111/juaf.12108]. Recaño, Joaquín; Cabré, Anna 2003: Migraciones Interregionales y ciclos económicos en España (1988-2001). In: Papeles de Geografía 37: 179-197. Recaño, Joaquín; De Miguel, Verónica 2012: The Internal Migration of Foreign-Born Pop- ulation in Southern Europe: Demographic Patterns and Individual Determinants. In: Finney, Nissa; Catney, Gemma (Eds.): Minority Internal Migration in Europe. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing – International Population Studies Series: 239-262. Rees, Philip et al. 2017: The impact of internal migration on population redistribution: An international comparison. In: Population, Space and Place 23,6: e2036 [doi: 10.1002/ psp.2036]. Rérat, Patrick 2012: The new demographic growth of cities: The case of reurbanisation in Switzerland. In: Urban Studies 49,5: 1107-1125 [doi: 10.1177/0042098011408935]. Rogers, Andrei; Henning, Sabine 1999: The internal migration patterns of the foreign- born and native-born populations in the United States: 1975-80 and 1985-90. In: Inter- national Migration Review 33,2: 403-429 [doi: 10.1177/019791839903300205]. Population and Economic Cycles in the Main Spanish Urban Areas • 349 Sabater, Albert; Bayona, Jordi; Domingo, Andreu 2012: Internal migration and residen- tial patterns across Spain after unprecedented international migration. In: Finney, Ni- ssa; Catney, Gemma (Eds.): Minority Internal Migration in Europe. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing – International Population Studies Series: 293-311. Sabater, Albert; Galeano, Juan Martín; Domingo, Andreu 2013: La transformación de las comunidades mayoritarias y la evolución de los enclaves étnicos residenciales en España. In: Migraciones 33: 11-44. Sharkey, Patrick 2012: Residential Mobility and the Reproduction of Unequal Neighbor- hoods. In: Cityscape 14,3: 9-31. Smith, Darren P. 2019: Population geography II: The r/age of migration. In: Progress in Human Geography 43,4: 729-738 [doi: 10.1177/0309132518760098]. Thiers-Quintana, Jenniffer; Gil-Alonso, Fernando 2019: Dinámicas residenciales de la inmigración latinoamericana en las metrópolis de Barcelona y Madrid: cambios de tendencias durante la expansión, la crisis y la poscrisis. In: Documents d’Anàlisi Ge- ogràfi ca [doi: 10.5565/rev/dag.584]. Tyrrell, Naomi; Kraftl, Peter 2015: Lifecourse and Internal Migration. In: Smith, Darren et al. (Eds.): Internal Migration. Geographical Perspectives and Processes. London: Ashgate: 15-30. Vale, Mario; Malheiros, Jorge 2017: Dinámicas urbanas en el área metropolitana de Lis- boa: rehabilitación y segregación socioespacial. Seminario Internacional Las grandes ciudades en transformación. Dinámicas residenciales, segregación y vulnerabilidad. Barcelona. Viruela, Rafael 2016: La movilidad geográfi ca de búlgaros y rumanos durante la Gran Recesión en España. In: Documents d’Anàlisi Geogràfi ca 62,1: 183-206 [doi: 10.5565/ rev/dag.237]. Wolff, Manuel 2018: Understanding the role of centralization processes for cities – Evi- dence from a spatial perspective of urban Europe 1990-2010. In: Cities 75: 20-29 [doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2017.01.009]. Wolff, Manuel; Wiechmann, Thorsten 2018: Urban growth and decline: Europe’s shrink- ing cities in a comparative perspective 1990-2010. In: European Urban and Regional Studies 25,2: 122-139 [doi: 10.1177/0969776417694680]. Zorlu, Aslan; Latten, Jan 2009: Ethnic Sorting in The Netherlands. In: Urban Studies 46,9: 1899-1923 [doi: 10.1177/0042098009106023]. Date of submission: 30.08.2019 Date of acceptance: 10.01.2020 Prof. Dr. Fernando Gil-Alonso (), Jenniffer Thiers-Quintana. Department of Geography, Universitat de Barcelona. Barcelona, Spain. E-mail: fgil@ub.edu, jkthiers@gmail.com URL: http://www.ub.edu/grptc/index.php/ca/component/content/article/8- membres/27-fernando-gil-alonso.html http://www.ub.edu/grptc/index.php/ca/component/content/article/8-membres/34- jenniffer-thiers.html Published by Prof. Dr. Norbert F. Schneider Federal Institute for Population Research D-65180 Wiesbaden / Germany 2019 Managing Editor Prof. Philip Rees Dr. Katrin Schiefer Copy Editor Julia Luther Editorial Assistant Beatriz Feiler-Fuchs Wiebke Hamann Layout Beatriz Feiler-Fuchs E-mail: cpos@bib.bund.de Scientifi c Advisory Board Karsten Hank (Cologne) Michaela Kreyenfeld (Berlin) Marc Luy (Vienna) Natalie Nitsche (Vienna) Peter Preisendörfer (Mainz) Zsolt Spéder (Budapest) Rainer Wehrhahn (Kiel) Comparative Population Studies www.comparativepopulationstudies.de ISSN: 1869-8980 (Print) – 1869-8999 (Internet) Board of Reviewers Martin Abraham (Erlangen) Laura Bernardi (Lausanne) Hansjörg Bucher (Bonn) Claudia Diehl (Konstanz) Andreas Diekmann (Zurich) Gabriele Doblhammer-Reiter (Rostock) Jürgen Dorbritz (Wiesbaden) Anette Eva Fasang (Berlin) E.-Jürgen Flöthmann (Bielefeld) Alexia Fürnkranz-Prskawetz (Vienna) Beat Fux (Salzburg) Joshua Goldstein (Berkeley) Sonja Haug (Regensburg) Hill Kulu (Liverpool) Aart C. Liefbroer (The Hague) Kurt Lüscher (Konstanz) Emma Lundholm (Umeå) Nadja Milewski (Rostock) Dimiter Philipov (Vienna) Roland Rau (Rostock) Tomáš Sobotka (Vienna) Jeroen Spijker (Barcelona) Olivier Thévenon (Paris) Helga de Valk (Brussels) Heike Trappe (Rostock) Michael Wagner (Cologne)