Yesterday morning I awoke at 7:30 to find out Broadway stage-hands had gone on strike at midnight. That event would rarely register in my consciousness, except that in twelve hours I was supposed to meet a friend at Spring Awakening. (Aside: if its soundtrack is supposed to be so good, where are its fans among indie music partisans? Sorry, but based on the snippets I've heard, musicals are still forced to pander to late majority innovation adapters, keeping it staid and irrelevant. Still, I was curious about the hubbub.)
With plans with my theater-crazy friend in doubt and still pre-caffeine, I scrambled to beat the tourists to alternative plans. Eventually I found myself to nytheater.com's review of "A Glance At New York," a revival of an 1848 vaudeville hit first performed at this years Edinburgh Fringe Festival. (The reviewer, Martin Denton, says "I'm not sure that I've ever seen any work of theatre this Brechtian and this postmodernly deconstructionist accomplish its artistic goals so effectively.") It's just 50 minutes long; if you're in New York with an hour to kill and $20 to spare, I promise you an interesting theater experience.
Today, wanting to learn more about the play, I googled "A Glance at New York." And that's where my worlds collided. The characters in the play comprise different New York stereotypes, including the poorest of Irish immigrants. My internet search led me away from mid-nineteenth century immigration to the current problem of migration in upstate New York.
In August, The New York Federal Reserve Bank in Buffalo published this report about brain drain in upstate New York. The standard narrative is that the rust belt, the high plains, and other economically depressed areas suffer a net out-migration as its most educated and ambitions residents look to greener pastures. The report questions this narrative. Among its findings:
Compared with U.S. states, upstate New York’s net outflow of college-educated workers reflects a lack of a “brain gain” rather than an unusually large “brain drain.” College-educated adults are not moving to the region fast enough to stem natural out-migration flows.
Research suggests that job opportunities and local amenities influence choice of location. While regional amenities such as a favorable climate, cultural offerings, and family and social networks are attractive forces, they may not be enough to attract college-educated workers if good job opportunities do not exist. Similarly, job prospects may not be sufficient to sway a relocation decision if a region is not perceived to be a desirable place to live. Both factors are important policy considerations.
The report cites some interesting statistics:
- Out-migration from upstate is on par with the median of the United States (13.4% in upstate vs. 13.5% nationwide. California is lowest, Alaska highest). The correlation between out-migration and economic growth was called into into question in general. By contrast, economic growth does seem to correlate with in-migration.
- States with the strongest net inflows of the educated population are mainly in the South and West, including Nevada, Arizona, and Florida. While out-migration rates for these states tend to be about average, in-migration rates are at least three times as great.
- If upstate New York were a state, it would have the nation’s lowest in-migration rate, 9.3 percent. (Louisiana is lowest, Nevada highest.)
Policy makers may draw various conclusions from this report. Most obviously, upstate suffers from low rates of in-migration. Some of the causes of this cannot be controlled, such as the weather, and will be a constant handicap. However, policy makers can make upstate a more desirable place to do business.
In addition policy makers may decide that upstate needs to lower out-migration as a stopgap before business conditions improve and economic growth recovers. Given the handicap of upstate's weather, a joint focus on in- and out-migration solutions is warranted.


