cover
Article Menu

Journal Browser
Vol. 4 (2025)
Vol. 3 (2024)
Vol. 2 (2023)
Vol. 1 (2022)
Journal Insights

Frequency: Quarterly

Time to first decision: 2.1 Weeks

Submission to publication: 4 Weeks

Acceptance rate: 31 %

E-ISSN: 2972-3272

Announcement more >>
Blog more >>
1 January 2024 EAL's New Year Blessing
Recommend Papers
article figure Psychopathy, prospect theory, and the Madoff Curve: a dual behavioral neuroscience and behavioral economic framework for understanding White Collar Crime
article figure Regime Change Operation in Pakistan: Examining Yield as a Behavioral Pattern of Microblogging rumors during the Political-Obsessed Period
article figure COVID-19 and non-communicable diseases: GMM/IV Panel VAR evidence from US states
article figure Microblogging Perceptive and Pricing Liquidity: Exploring Asymmetric Information as a Risk Determinant of Liquidity in the Pandemic Environments
Related Journal

Journal of Economic Analysis

Digital Technologies Asset’s value Synthetic Control GDP per capita Singapore Strategic Economic Plan Yields Liquidity Risk Trading Economic Sanctions Multimarket contact Financing constraint Market position Trade credit financing Corporate financialization Market Timing Japanese Stock Markets Performance ETFs Synthetic Difference-in-Differences
Open Access Journal Article

Beyond Their Borders – Economic Freedom: Uncovering One of the Motivations of Unauthorized Migration to the U.S.A.

by Rafael Acevedo a, b, c, d,*  and  Juan Bogado b
a
Menard Family Center for Economic Inquiry, Creighton University, Omaha, NE, USA
b
Econintech, Miami, FL, USA
c
Department of Accounting, Economics, and Finance, University of Illinois Springfield, Springfield, IL, USA
d
School of Business, Western New Mexico University, Silver City, NM, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
EAL  2025 4(1):72; https://doi.org/10.58567/eal04010001
Received: 11 October 2024 / Accepted: 8 December 2024 / Published Online: 27 December 2024
View Full-Text
Download PDF

Abstract

This study documents the relationship between economic freedom and unauthorized immigration to the U.S.A. and tries to answer a still-in-debate question, what motivates people to unauthorizedly migrate? Using the generated instrument variables methodology, and a data panel of 15 countries and 16 years, the endogenous variable is the gap in economic freedom between the country of origin and the U.S., and the dependent variable is the unauthorized immigrant’s growth rate. The results show that for each 10% improvement in economic freedom in the country-of-origin unauthorized immigration decreases around 7%. Estimations are robust even after using other covariates and external instruments. The main conclusion is that economic and social factors play a significant role in shaping migration patterns and that the difference in economic freedom between the country of origin and the U.S. plays a fundamental role in deciding to unauthorizedly migrate

Keywords: unauthorized immigration, economic freedom, United States, institutions, social factors.;
Copyright: © 2024 by Acevedo and Bogado. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

Share and Cite

ACS Style
Acevedo, R.; Bogado, J. Beyond Their Borders – Economic Freedom: Uncovering One of the Motivations of Unauthorized Migration to the U.S.A.. Economic Analysis Letters, 2025, 4, 72. https://doi.org/10.58567/eal04010001
AMA Style
Acevedo R, Bogado J. Beyond Their Borders – Economic Freedom: Uncovering One of the Motivations of Unauthorized Migration to the U.S.A.. Economic Analysis Letters; 2025, 4(1):72. https://doi.org/10.58567/eal04010001
Chicago/Turabian Style
Acevedo, Rafael; Bogado, Juan 2025. "Beyond Their Borders – Economic Freedom: Uncovering One of the Motivations of Unauthorized Migration to the U.S.A." Economic Analysis Letters 4, no.1:72. https://doi.org/10.58567/eal04010001
APA style
Acevedo, R., & Bogado, J. (2025). Beyond Their Borders – Economic Freedom: Uncovering One of the Motivations of Unauthorized Migration to the U.S.A.. Economic Analysis Letters, 4(1), 72. https://doi.org/10.58567/eal04010001

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

References

  1. Angrist, J., and Kugler, A. (2003). Protective or counter‐productive? labour market institutions and the effect of Immigration on EU Natives. The Economic Journal, 113(488), F302–F331, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00136
  2. Ashby, N. (2007). Economic freedom and migration flows between U.S. states. Southern Economic Journal, 73, 677–697.
  3. Ashby, N. (2010). Freedom and International Migration. Southern Economic Journal, 77(1), 49-62.
  4. Baez, J., Caruso, G., Mueller, V., and Niu, C. (2017). Droughts augment youth migration in Northern Latin America and the Caribbean. Climatic Change, 140, 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1863-2
  5. Baum, C., and Lewbel, A. (2018). Advice on using heteroscedasticity based identification. Boston College Working Papers in Economics, 975, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 17 Jun 2019.
  6. Bologna, J., Lujan, E., and Powell, B. (2019). Cultural Baggage: Do Immigrants Import Corruption? Southern Economic Journal. 85(4), 1243-1261. https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12339
  7. Borjas, G. (1987). Self-selection and the earnings of immigrants. American Economic Review, 77(4), 531–553.
  8. Breusch, T., and Pagan, A. (1979). A simple test for heteroskedasticity and random coefficient variation. Econometrica, 47, 1287-1294.
  9. Bygnes, S., and Flipo, A. (2017). Political motivations for intra-European migration. Acta Sociologica, 60(3), 199–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699316659909
  10. Card, D. (1990). The Impact of the Mariel boatlift on the Miami labor market. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 43, 2.
  11. Carrasco, R., Jimeno, J., and Ortega, C. (2008). The effect of immigration on the labor market performance of native-born workers: some evidence for Spain. Journal of Population Economics, 21, 627–648. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-006-0112-9
  12. Cigagna, C., and Sulis, G. (2015). On the Potential Interaction between Labour Market Institutions and Immigration Policies. IZA Discussion Paper No. 9016. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2604379
  13. Clark, J. R., Lawson, R., Nowrasteh, A., Powell, B., and Murphy, R. (2015). Does immigration impact institutions? Public Choice, 163, 321–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-015-0254-y
  14. Docquier, F., Lodigiani, E., Rapoport, H., and Schiff, M. (2011). Emigration and Democracy. The World Bank policy research working paper WPS5557.
  15. Jandová, M., and Paleta, T. (2015). Gravity Models of Internal Migration – the Czech Case Study. Review of economic perspectives – Národohospodárský Obzor, 15(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1515/revecp-2015-0008
  16. Karemera, D., Oguledo, V., and Davis, B. (2000). A gravity model analysis of international migration to North America. Applied Economics, 32, 1745-1755.
  17. Lawson, R., Murphy, R., and Powell, B. (2020). The Determinants of economic freedom: A survey. Contemporary Economic Policy. https://doi.org/10.1111/coep.12471
  18. Lewbel, A. (2012). Using heteroscedasticity to identify and estimate mismeasured and endogenous regressor models. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 30, 67-80.
  19. March, R., Lyford, C., and Powell, B. (2017). Causes and barriers to increases in economic freedom. International Review of Economics, 64, 87–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12232-016-0263-2
  20. Nejad, M., and Young, A. (2016). Want freedom, will travel: Emigrant, self-selection according institutional quality. European Journal of Political Economy, 45, 71–84.
  21. Ousey, G. and Kubrin, C. (2018). Immigration and Crime: Assessing a Contentious Issue. Annual Review of Criminology, 1, 63-84. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-032317-092026
  22. Padilla, A., and Cachanosky, N. (2018). The Grecian horse: does immigration lead to the deterioration of American institutions? Public Choice, 174, 351–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-018-0509-5
  23. Pagan, A., and Hall, A. (1983). Diagnostic tests as residual analysis. Econometric Reviews, 2(2), 159-218.
  24. Passel, J. (2019). Measuring unauthorized immigration: How Pew Research Center counts unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. From the PEW Research Center Webpage, Factank. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/12/how-pew-research-center-counts-unauthorized-immigrants-in-us/
  25. Poprawe, M. (2015). On the relationship between corruption and migration: empirical evidence from a gravity model of migration. Public Choice, 163, 337–354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-015-0255-x
  26. Powell, B., Clark, J. R., and Nowrasteh, A. (2017). Does mass immigration destroy institutions? 1990s Israel as a natural experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 141, 83-95.
  27. Ramos, R. (2016). Gravity models: A tool for migration analysis. IZA World of Labor, 239. https://doi.org/10.15185/izawol.239
  28. Ramos, R., and Suriñach, J. (2017). A gravity model of migration between the ENC and the UE. Tijdschrift Voor Economische en Sociale Geografie – 2017, 108(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/tesg.12195
  29. Schon, J. (2019). Motivation and opportunity for conflict-induced migration: An analysis of Syrian migration timing. Journal of Peace Research, 56(1), 12–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343318806044