This paper examines the proposition that retirement migration is Grant's revenge on the South. A careful
summary and analysis of recent research on elderly migration shows, however, that except for Florida
and two border states, most older migrants into Southern states come from other states in the region;
furthermore, the return migration rate is higher in the South than in other regions. Most Southern
in-migrants, thus, are present or former Southerners. Seen in this way, retirement migration to the
non-Florida South does not justify the fear that Northern in-migrants will over-burden local aging services.
Charles F. Longino, Jr., PhD2 and Jeanne C. Biggar, PhD3
There is a growing impression that retirement
migration is Grant's revenge on the South. One
suspects that many Southerners view it with the
equanimity of a farmer sighting a cloud of locusts
on the horizon at harvest time. One senses the
low grade anxiety in statements decrying the
burden placed on local social services by all
those poor old people moving down from up
North. There is more than a hint of Southern
localism in this sentiment and perhaps an undertone of xenophobia as well; after all, if all those
old Yankees move down here, there won't be
enough help to go around for our own old folks
at home.
In the pages that follow, these fears will be
examined in the light of social science research.
What is known about aged migration in the
United States will be reviewed first, abstracting
the most recent findings on the subject. Then
elderly Sunbelt migration, which includes migration into the Southern states will be assessed.
Finally, one particular type of migration, which
involves returning to one's state of birth, will
be discussed in relation to Southern retirement
migration.
Aged Migration in the United States
The common wisdom about elderly migration
is that old people usually do not move — but
when they do, they go South or at least to rural
'Supported by NIA, grant #1486029925D1. Based on a paper presented
at the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Southern Sociological Society.
'Associate Professor of Sociology, Univ. of Miami, Coral Cables, FL 33124.
'Associate Professor of Sociology, Univ. of Virginia, Charlottesville,
VA 22903.
Vol.21, No. 3, 1981
locations. These general assertions should be
analyzed separately.
Are old people really less likely to move? —
At this point the most current available national
census data were collected in 1970 when over
one-half (53%) of the population over age 5
reported living at the same address 5 years
earlier, but for those aged 65 or more the figure
was 72%. The fact that over one-quarter of
these older people had moved in this 5 year
period strikes many as surprisingly high, however. Occupational opportunities, the major
migration motivator for the general population,
are fewer for the older population. In addition,
as there are more households per thousand
older migrants there is a smaller differential
in mobility between older and younger mobility
units or households than is apparent (Longino,
1980c). Indeed, old people are less likely to
move than is the general United States population, although the common wisdom exaggerates
this fact.
Not only does the absolute amount of residential movement differ for older people, but
they are more likely to move shorter distances
(Golant, 1977). In 1970, over one-fifth (21%)
of movers of all ages were interstate migrants
as compared with one-sixth (16%) of older
movers. While a majority (58%) of all movers
are relocating within the same county, the
percentage of older people approaches twothirds (65%). In this regard, it is instructive to
treat age as a continuous, rather than as a categorical, variable and to compare mobility rates
283
Downloaded from http://gerontologist.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on May 17, 2016
The Impact of Retirement Migration
on the South1
for successive age cohorts (Wiseman & Roseman, 1979). Seen in this way, there is a middle
age plateau at which the rates of residential
relocation are low and decline slightly from
one decade to the next. In the age 65 to 70
cohort, there is a jump in the interstate migration
rate, especially for men. This is the time when
older people are most inclined to make long
distance moves. On the other hand, local moves
gradually decline during the middle and later
years, increasing (especially for women) only
after age 75.
284
The Gerontologist
Downloaded from http://gerontologist.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on May 17, 2016
recruitment areas were different. It is as though
a Great Divide stretching in a line southward
from Lake Michigan created two drainage systems of aged interstate migration, eastward to
Florida and westward to Arizona and California
(Flynn, 1980).
Several regional migration centers also were
identified, attracting older migrants disproportionately from surrounding states. There were
the Ozarks area in Missouri and Arkansas, and
the southern coastal counties of New Jersey
(Flynn et al., 1979; Fuguitt & Tordella, 1980).
All three have strong tourist industries, although
Patterns and profiles: Who moves where? — only the Ozarks can be properly considered
What can be learned from the Census about a part of the South (Allis, 1980).
the distributional patterns of older people in
Environmental exchanges: Are older people
the United States? To and from where do they
move? What kinds of people are moving the mostly moving to the country? — Part of the
farthest, and how are they different from local public image of aged migration is that older
movers and nonmovers? In 1970,. for the first people are more likely to move to rural areas,
time, the Census Bureau made available on or at least to small towns, than they are likely
its data tapes the origins of interstate migrants. to move to large cities. Put more generally, the
A recent study stripped from these (1-in-100 image sees older migrants as changing environPublic Use Sample) tapes the records of all mental types, perhaps in a nostalgic search
persons 60 years and older and anlayzed their for a rural or small town childhood setting.
migration behavior (Flynn et al., 1979). It found This issue was examined as part of the study
that migrants, those moving across state or cited above, but limited to migration between
county lines, were selected from higher edu- and within metropolitan and nonmetropolitan
cational and income ranks, but local movers, settings, admittedly broad environmental catethose relocating within their county, were gories (Longino, 1980a). A Standard Metroselected from the more economically dependent politan Statistical Area (SMSA) includes a central
strata (Biggar, 1980b). This is an important city of 50,000 or more, the county in which
finding when considering the impact of inter- it is located, and any surrounding heavily substate migration on Southern receiving states.
urban counties. Most local moves, of course,
In addition, the study showed that interstate take place in such environments since a majority
flows were highly channelized (Wiseman, of the U.S. population (including its older popu1978). That is, one-half of the interstate migrants, lation) lives in metropolitan settings (Longino,
regardless of their origin, were flowing into 1980b). When only those older people who
only seven of the 50 states. Of all the people had moved across county or state lines were
who were 60 years or older in April, 1970, and examined, apart from local movers, over onewho lived in another state 5 years earlier, nearly half were SMSA residents who had moved from
one-fourth (23.5%) of them filled out their another SMSA. Most older people do not change
census form in Florida. California attracted their types of environments by migrating. When
another tenth (9.5%). After those two states, people moving from one place to another in
the percentages plummeted. Arizona and New nonmetropolitan locations are included, 70%
Jersey each drew a fraction over 4% from the of the intrastate and 62% of the interstate mimigrant pool. Other states drew even fewer grants were moving within, not between, en(Flynn, 1980). Florida, indeed, has no serious vironmental types. This is clearly the dominant
rival in this competition for older migrants.
pattern.
This study, of course, examined the origins
Of inter-type exchanges, however, more
of the migrants as well, making it possible to people were moving away from SMSA settings
describe the state-to-state streams of these long (18.4%) than into them (11.7%). The difference
distance movers. While only Florida, California amounts to only about six points, hardly a major
and Arizona attracted several unusually large outpouring. The greater flow to non-SMSA
flows from noncontiguous states, the major settings was destined for towns ranging in size
Summary. — To sum up, what can be said
in general about the residential mobility of
older people in the United States? As a start,
the observation of French geographer, Franpoise
Cribier (1980) applies equally well to the United
States as to France, that
"(1) the mobility of the employed diminishes
continuously with age;
(2) in a given age group, the retired are
more mobile than the employed, and
(3) the most mobile among the retired are
the youngest because
(a) migration- tends to follow closely
after retirement,
(b) early retirement increases the likelihood of migration, and
(c) the younger generations are progressively more mobile than the
older ones."
A note could be added that in the U.S. there
is an increase in local mobility among the very
old, which may indicate increasing dependency
moves in that age group. As a general pattern for
all ages, then, the young are more mobile than
the old, and they also move longer distances.
Where do those younger retired migrants
tend to move in the United States? Their tendency is to gravitate toward warmer climates
and coastal states, although deserts and mountains also attract some interstate migrants. Contrary to migration in the general population,
these highly channelized flows are from diffuse
origins to specific receiving states, thus greatly
increasing the impact of aged migration on
these popular destinations. So, although it painfully distorts the complexity of aged migration,
Vol.21, No. 3, 1981
there is a kernel of truth in the common wisdom
that old people mostly don't move but when
they do, they go South.
Finally, the vast majority of older movers
relocate within the same general environments.
This pattern is certainly not unique to older
people but holds for the general population
as well (Longino, 1981). Nonetheless, among
the minority who yearn for the excitement of
city life or the tranquility of the village, migrants
to nonmetropolitan America lead by six percentage points.
In the next section, Sunbelt migration, so
apparent in the preceding paragraphs, will be
examined. The South is a major part of the Sunbelt, and culturally it is a bulwark of nonmetropolitan America. The Sunbelt, thus, provides
a context for understanding Southern elderly
migration.
Elderly Sunbelt Migration Reconsidered
Westward movement is the oldest migration
trend in America. By 1970, however, the tide
of U.S. migration had turned to the South as
well as to the West. Between 1965 and 1970,
nearly a fourth of all interstate migrants moved
into California, Texas and Florida. In its wake,
elderly migrants moved to the retirement states
in these two regions as well. In 1970, for
example, one-fifth of Florida's and Arizona's
entire population 60 years and older had moved
into those states over the previous 5 years. The
majority (58%) of older interstate migrants
settled in 15 Sunbelt states located on the eastern, southern and western rim of this country
(Biggar, 1979, 1980b).
As a concept, Sunbejt captures the mild
climate and the leisurely life style which has
typified the South and Southwest. At the same
time, since World War II, the Sunbelt states
have enjoyed rapid industrial expansion, particularly in service industries, so that they also
represent favorable job opportunities, along
with well developed recreation industries. In
this analysis the Sunbelt is composed of all
the states on the boundary of the nation from
Virginia south and west through California,
plus the three states in which parts of the Ozark
mountains are found (Arkansas, Missouri and
Oklahoma). The remaining 33 states will be
referred to as the Snowbelt. The designation
is not intended to differentiate between climatic
zones so much as to separate those states which
have experienced the most rapid growth since
1970. These Sunbelt states appear to be the
285
Downloaded from http://gerontologist.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on May 17, 2016
from 2,500 to 50,000 people. Rural areas attract
less than one-half as many SMSA residents
among intrastate migrants (5.5%) as do these
urban settings (12.8%). The rural areas do better
among interstate migrants but even so attract
less than one-half (9.6 to 21.7) of all interstate
SMSA out-migrants. Net migration studies have
also picked up this small metropolitan to nonmetropolitan shift and reported it with great
gusto(Beale, 1975,1977,1978; Beale & Fuguitt,
1978; Fuguitt & Tordella, 1980). The fact that
the South, even today, can be characterized
by its small town and rural cultural features
make the urban-rural turnaround, though small
in volume, of particular interest to students
of Southern in-migration.
To what parts of the sunbelt are they going
and from where are they coming? — When
Sunbelt states are ranked by the volume of
migrants received, the two established national
destination states held first and second place.
Together, Florida and California attracted more
than one-third of the interstate migrants. The
Snowbelt was a major contributor to those
migrant streams. More than two-thirds of the
migrants to each state came from Snowbelt
origins. Next in rank were Arizona and Texas,
emerging retirement states, which attracted
less than one-half of California's share. Approx-
Table 1. Sunbelt State Ranks by Share of Nation's Interstate
Elderly Migrants, and by Relative Share from
Snowbelt States, 1965-70.
Share of Nation's
Share From
Interstate Elderly Migrants Snowbelt States
Sunbelt State
Florida
California
Arizona
Texas
Missouri
Virginia
Arkansas
North Carolina
Georgia
Oklahoma
Alabama
New Mexico
South Carolina
Louisiana
Mississippi
Total
Rank
%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
24.7
10.0
4.6
3.7
2.4
12
13
14
15
2.0
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.1
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.8
58.2
Rank
%
1
72.2
67.6
60.6
44.1
64.1
62.9
37.6
47.9
40.6
40.6
41.7
2
5
8
3
4
14
6
12.5
12.5
9
7
10
15
11
imately six in 10 of Arizona's migrants came
from Snowbelt states. Less than one-half of
the migrants to Texas came from the Snowbelt,
however. The other Sunbelt states accounted
for smaller shares of the nation's total of inmigrants, and except for Missouri and Virginia,
both border states, the majority of their migrants
came from other Sunbelt states. Except for
Florida and the border states of Virginia and
Missouri, most of the older in-migrants to the
South come already speaking Southern accents.
How do in-migrants compare with the resident older sunbelt population? — Comparisons
of Sunbelt interstate migrants with others their
age living in the area suggest that the Sunbelt
benefited from the addition of this population.
The newcomers were, in general, more independent. As seen in Table 2, almost three-fourths
of the migrants (73%) as compared with less
than two-thirds (63%) of the nonmigrants were
living in independent households. Such households include spouses, of course, for the married.
They are self-supporting units. The impressive
differences show up in these comparisons when
attention turns to socioeconomic status. Sunbelt
migrants, on the average, had more going for
them economically than did Sunbelt nonmigrants. More of the migrants had retired from
the work force. This meant that they had a
smaller impact on the job market than did the
local older residents. Migrants also had significantly higher income from sources other
than jobs, business and welfare than did the
resident population. This income gap may be
due to the educational differences between
the two groups. Migrants averaged almost two
more years of school completed, probably
because of higher preretirement social status.
No doubt, persons in the migrant group had
occupations with higher income levels, thus
allowing for investments and savings, and many
held jobs which provided more favorable retirement pension plans. As a reflection of these
socioeconomic differences, migrants had newer
and better quality housing than other older
people in the Sunbelt.
46.8
41.2
32.3
40.8
70.0
Source: A 5% random sample of all elderly on 1970
Public Use Sample.
286
Summary. — Silver haired migrants into
the Sunbelt states seem less perilous than is
generally thought. In the first place, except for
Florida and a couple of border states, most older
migrants into Southern states came from other
states in the region. Those channelized national
migration flows discussed above take the Yan-
The Gerontologist
Downloaded from http://gerontologist.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on May 17, 2016
new frontier for both the younger and the older
migrants in the last decades of the 20th Century.
The probable impact of the migration of more
than two-thirds of a million older people in
the Sunbelt raises several questions. To what
parts of the Sunbelt are they moving? Where
are they coming from? How do Sunbelt migrants
compare with the resident older population
in the Sunbelt? What are the implications of
this population redistribution for social policy?
Answers to these questions were provided by
the study from which we drew the national
patterns discussed above.
Table 2. Comparisons of Sunbelt Elderly Nonmigrant
and Migrant Demographic, Socioeconomic and Housing
Characteristics, 1970.
Characteristics
Socioeconomic:
% Labor Force
Hours
Worked/Week
Job Income
Other Income
Total
Family Income
Persons
Total Income
Welfare Income
Education
Housing Quality:
Year Built
% Complete
Plumbing
% Central Air
Conditioning
% No Air
Conditioning
% Own Home
Migrants
X
69.8
56.9
58.2
30.0
69.3
59.6
60.4
27.9
62.8
72.5
3.04*
3.8
5.0
.88
2.5
85.0
14.0
3.8
94.2
5.0
.23
3.95*
-3.97*
28.3
17.9
-3.51*
18.0
1400
859
18.7
1419
1863
.32
.07
5.06*
6608
9031
4.91*
3262
880
8.8
4135
300
10.4
2.57*
-3.03*
5.43*
1952
1963
-15.70*
88.7
97.1
4.07*
10.9
37.5
12.43*
59.8
43.1
38.3
55.4
-6.22*
5.97*
"t"
-.88
.83
.68
-.67
Source: A 5% random sample of all elderly on 1970
Public Use Sample.
*Significant at p < .01.
kees to Florida, California and Arizona, but
much less frequently to Mississippi, Alabama,
Georgia and other former Confederate states.
Furthermore, the continuing flow of the more
affluent migrants into Sunbelt states will, no
doubt, foster the economic development which
has characterized the rim states since World
War II. The demographic and socioeconomic
qualities of these migrants are particularly beneficial to the Sunbelt states. The more privileged
income and educational levels have contributed
to the closing gap between the South (as well
as the rural West) and the nation as a whole.
These newcomers are important consumers
Vol. 21, No. 3, 1981
Aged Return Migration and the South
Return migration is an important feature of
the long distance moves of older people. While
most are not returning to their state of birth,
exactly one-third of the national interstate migrating older population residing outside their
state of birth in 1965 returned by 1970. We
will call the measure of a state's ability to attract
back a share of its potential return migrants a
"return migration quotient" (RMQ). We may,
therefore, take one-third as the break point
between a high and a low RMQ. States with
a high RMQ do well in attracting back their
native-born who are on the move, and states
with a low RMQ do not (Longino, 1979).
Do return migrants make up a very large
share of the older migrants entering a state?
This is quite another question. A state may
gather home all of its migrating older natives,
but if the state is a popular destination for retirement migration, it may be a relatively insignificant part of the whole. Since all older inmigrants returning to their state of birth make
up 20% of the total of in-migrants nationally,
one-fifth is taken as the cutting point between
high and low proportions of natives among a
state's older in-migrants. We will call this measure "return migration divided by total migration," RM/TM for short. Older migrants, of
course, will seem more like an invading hoard
if the RM/TM is low. If it is high, they will not
seem like migrants so much as relatives coming
back to their roots — where they belonged in
the first place. So, in an interesting way, RM/TM
is an indicator of potential negative reaction
to aged migration, at least in those places where
in-migration is substantial.
By combining the RMQ and RM/TM for each
state, it is possible to place every state into one
287
Downloaded from http://gerontologist.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on May 17, 2016
Demographic:
Age
%Male
% Married
% Widowed
% Independent
Household
% Living
with Child
% Living
with Sibling
% White
% Black
Nonmigrants
X
of retail, and of medical and recreational services (Lee, 1980). Because they tend to be
homeowners, they broaden the tax base. At
the same time, because the majority have retired
from the labor force, they place little pressure
on the job market. Further, at least in the short
run, they place little pressure on local public
service institutions such as schools and welfare
offices.
As we focus specifically on the Southeastern
region of the United States, there is one type
of migration which characterizes the South
and sets it apart from the rest of the Sunbelt.
This type is generally referred to as "return
migration," migration to one's state of birth.
unattractive states to elderly migrants, starred
on the map, tend to be found in a broad band
below the Canadian border from the eastern
seaboard across the Great Plains to Montana.
Beyond the attraction of popular destinations,
return migrants flow more freely into those
states which once flew the Stars and Bars above
their statehouses. The South Atlantic, East and
West South Central sections (from Virginia to
Florida and from the Carolinas to Texas), in
combination welcomed almost 44% (83,800)
of the return migrants in the 1965 to 1970
study period. As demonstrated above, some
states strongly attract only return migrants.
Among those states, the ones witnessing the
return of more than one-half their migratory
native born were Delaware, North and South
Carolina, on the Atlantic, and Louisiana and
Texas on the Gulf of Mexico. The inland states
of Tennessee, West Virginia, Oklahoma and
Arkansas, while above the national average
of 33% returning, were the least able of the
group to attract return migrants.
STATES STRONGLY ATTRACTING:
•
BOTH TYPES
ONLY NON-RETURN MIGRANTS
ONLY RETURN MIGRANTS
NEITHER TYPE
Fig. 1. State variation in attraction of older return and non-return migrants, 1965-1970.
288
The Gerontologist
Downloaded from http://gerontologist.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on May 17, 2016
of four categories of relative attraction of return
and non-return migrants. Fig. 1 geographically
displays the combinations of the measures.
Some states strongly attract both return and
non-return migrants, reflected in a high RMQ
and a low RM/TM. Shaded darkly on the map,
these tend to be coastal states and popular
destinations for retirement migration. Some
states are attractive to older migrants, but
attract relatively few native sons and daughters,
as indicated by low percentages on both measures. Shaded lightly, these states tend to follow
the Rocky Mountain chain. Some states strongly
attract only return migrants, reflected in high
percentages on both measures. Dotted on the
figure, these states are found almost entirely
in the Southeast. Finally, some states attract
fewer return migrants than one would expect,
but those who do come comprise a higher percentage of all in-migrants, indicating that these
states are even less effective in attracting nonreturn migrants. This is inferred from a low
RMQ and a high RM/TM. These relatively
little political support to social welfare institutions, over time, they become primary consumers of medical, income maintenance and
social services offered by these agencies. Therefore, despite the fact that migrants initially
contribute to the economic welfare of the South,
as those migrants age into their later years,
they will probably increase the local demand
for public health, public welfare and aging
services in general. The question is whether
or not Southern states will be prepared to meet
these demands for social services at some future
point in time.
The best guess is that they will, and that the
states will receive the encouragement to do
so not from the older in-migrants themselves,
but from their relatives who are younger and
who bear the familial obligation of seeing to
the needs of their elders.
The anxiety over retirement in-migration is
no straw man, erected only for the intellectual
fun of tearing it down. One hears it loudly in
the Southern state most impacted by retirement
migration. The Dade County (Florida) Comprehensive Development Master Plan (1975)
has a section on possible ways to control that
county's growth rate. One alternative suggestion
was to discourage retirement settlement. It
reads as follows:
"Restricting the flow of retirees can be accomplished
by making the area relatively unattractive to them.
Higher costs, more urban problems and reduction
of amenities specifically attractive to retirees would
all work in this direction. These things would also
tend to reduce the flow of any other type of migrant.
Unfortunately, they would also fall upon the existing
residents. So, actions have to be designed to affect
only retirees" (1975:133).
This form of gerontophobia makes far less
empirical sense in all the rest of the Southern
states, where the numerical flows of older inmigrants are much smaller and where these
flows are so saturated with return migrants and
other Southerners. The South can surely survive
retirement migration which, like the Wizard
Conclusion
of Oz, is not so frightening once the curtain
The foregoing is not intended to debunk the of mystery is drawn to reveal a harmless older
"gray peril" myth foolheartedly. Up to this person, in this case, with a lingering Southern
time, the political consequences of retirement accent.
Sunbelt migration are not clearly understood.
In general, however, retired people tend to
support conservative fiscal policies (Glenn, References
Allis, S. Retirees reject clogged centers, settle for resettling
1974). Broad public support for liberal social
in the hills. The Wall Street Journal, July, 1980.
welfare provisions is seldom found among Beale, C. L. The revival of population growth in nonmetroretired constituents. Ironically, while they gave
politan America. ERS Report No. 605. Economic Re-
Vol. 21, No. 3, 1981
289
Downloaded from http://gerontologist.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on May 17, 2016
The presence of land-locked Utah, receiving
over one-half of its potential return migrants,
contradicts the observed pattern. We offer a
theoretically provocative, though untested explanation for this observation. Utah, like the
states of the Old South, has a rural cultural base
and a religious homogeneity that older return
migrants may find attractive. Some have argued
that young out-migrants from the southeastern
region may move back later because the cost
of living tends to lag in their home states and
offers a short-term relative economic advantage
to returnees from other sections. Additionally,
for them, the psychic costs associated with
being a Southerner outside the South may outweigh the potential economic gain (Kiker &
Traynham, 1977). These arguments, originally
advanced for young people, could be offered
just as appropriately for the observed pattern
of relatively high proportions of older native
born Southerners returning to their home states.
While the cost of living differential is attractive
in the short run, there are no doubt other hidden
advantages. Returning to a state which has
maintained a relatively strong regional identity
and rural cultural base may be an emotionally
comfortable experience for many of those born
in the South before World War I.
In addition to these considerations, the great
South to North migration of Blacks during this
century assures that an overwhelming proportion of return migration for older Blacks will
be southbound.
The South has no monopoly on return migration, of course, but it is a feature so strong
among older Southern in-migrants as to dominate the pattern. One of the songs embedded
in Southern folklore begins with the words
"Carry me back to old Virginny . . ." and ends
with the words " . . . the state where I was born."
Southern return migration, thus, is certainly
not a new phenomenon, and it should be quite
salient in quieting the anxiety aroused by Southbound retirement migration.
new trend of nonmetropolitan population change.
Research on Aging, 1980,2, 191-204.
Glenn, N. Aging and conservatism. Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 1974, 415,
176-186.
Golant, S. M. Spatial context of residential moves by elderly
persons, journal of Aging and Human Development,
1977,8, 279-289.
Kiker, B. F., & Traynham, E. C. Earnings differentials among
nonmigrants, return and nonreturn migrants. Growth
and Change, 1977,8, 2-7.
Lee, E. S. Migration of the aged. Research on Aging, 1980,
2, 131-135.
Longino, Jr., C. F. Aged return migration in the United
States, 1965-1970. journal of Gerontology, 1979,
34, 736-745.
Longino, Jr., C. F. Residential relocation of older people:
Metropolitan and nonmetropolitan. Research on Aging,
1980,2, 205-216. (a)
Longino, Jr., C. F. The retirement community. In F. J.
Berghorn & D. E. Schafer (Eds.), The dynamics of
aging: Original essays on the experience and process
of growing old, Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1980. (b)
Longino, Jr., C. F. American retirement communities and
residential rebcation. In A. M. Warnes (Ed.), Geographical aspects of an ageing population, John Wiley &
Sons, Ltd., London, 1981.
Wiseman, R. F. Spatial aspects of aging, Resource Paper
78-4, Assn. of American Geographers, Washington,
DC, 1978.
Wiseman, R. F., & Roseman, C. C. A typology of elderly
migration based on the decision-making process.
Economic Geography, 1979,55, 324-337.
ERRATUM
The article by Miller, Arthur, et al., "Age Consciousness and Political Mobilization of Older
Americans," The Gerontologist, 20:6 (December, 1980), reproduced eight paragraphs from
Robert S. Castor, A Comparison of Demographic, Social and Political Characteristics Between
Old Age Group Identifiers and Nonidentifiers, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The
University of Michigan, 1977. These comprise six paragraphs on pages 691 and 692, as well
as the two paragraphs prior to Table 3 on page 694. These regrettable inclusions without proper
citation were the entire responsibility of the lead author, and not authors Patricia or Gerald
Gurin.
290
The Gerontologist
Downloaded from http://gerontologist.oxfordjournals.org/ at Penn State University (Paterno Lib) on May 17, 2016
search Service, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Washington,
DC, 1975.
Beale, C. L. Current status of the shift of U.S. population
to smaller communities. Paper presented at the Population Association of America Annual Meetings, St.
Louis, MO, 1977.
Beale, C. L. People on the land. In T. R. Ford (Ed.), Rural
USA: Persistence and change, Iowa State Univ. Press,
Ames, 1978.
Beale, C. L, & Fuguitt, G. V. The new pattern of nonmetropolitan population change. In K. E. Taeuber, L. L.
Bumpass, & J. A. Sweet (Eds.), Social demography,
Academic Press, New York, 1978.
Biggar, J. C. The sunning of America: Migration to the
sunbelt. Population Reference Bureau, Vol. 34, Washington, DC, 1979.
Biggar, J. C. Who moved among the elderly, 1965-1970:
A comparison of types of older movers. Research on
Aging, 1980,2, 73-91. (a)
Biggar, J. C. Reassessing elderly sunbelt migration. Research
on Aging, 1980, 2, 177-190. (b)
Comprehensive Development Master Plan for Metropolitan
Dade County Florida. Dade County Planning Dept.,
1975.
Cribier, F. A European assessment of aged migration. Research on Aging, 1980, 2, 255-270.
Flynn, C. B. General versus aged interstate migration,
1975-1980. Research on Aging, 1980, 2, 165-176.
Flynn, C. B., Biggar, J. C , Longino, Jr., C. F., & Wiseman,
R. F. Aged migration in the United States, 1965-1970:
Final report. National Institute on Aging, Washington,
DC, 1979.
Fuguitt, G. V., & Tordella, S. J. Elderly net migration: The