Movement of people from one location

to another at any geographic scale

affects both the origin and the destination locations. When the rate of natural

increase is low, an increasing share of

population change may be attributed to

migration, whether domestic or international. Domestic (or internal) migration

is the movement of people within national boundaries, whereas international

migration refers to movement across

those boundaries. In the United States,

according to Census 2000, over 22 million people were domestic migrants who

changed their state of residence between

1995 and 2000. Of these domestic

migrants, approximately half relocated to

a state in a different region. This movement did not affect all states equally,

however. Inmigration and outmigration

levels varied widely, with markedly

uneven results across the country.

This report, the first of several addressing Census 2000 migration topics, discusses migration between regions, divisions, and states between 1995 and

2000. It provides an overview of migration patterns at the three geographic levels and shows which parts of the country

gained and lost most from the movement of people within the United States.

Although movement from abroad represents an important component of the

country’s migration experience, this

report concentrates solely on internal, or

domestic, migration. Net migration rates

complement migration flow numbers,

and together the two measures summarize the effects of migration on regional,

division, and state populations in the

United States between 1995 and 2000. 

The South had the highest

inmigration and outmigration

levels of the four regions.

Details of in- and outmigration flows

from 1995 to 2000 for all regions,

U S C E N S U S B U R E A U

Helping You Make Informed Decisions

U.S.Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Issued August 2003

CENSR-7

Domestic Migration Across Regions,

Divisions, and States: 1995 to 2000

Census 2000 Special Reports

By 

Rachel S. Franklin

Common Migration Terms 

Migration: Commonly defined as

moves that cross jurisdictional

boundaries. This report includes

those moves that crossed state,

division, or region boundaries

within the United States.

Inmigration: Migration into an area

during a given period. 

Outmigration: Migration out of an

area during a given period. 

Gross Migration: The sum of inmigration and outmigration for an

area for a given period. This

measure shows, in other words,

the total amount of movement in

and out of an area.

Net Migration: The difference

between inmigration and outmigration during a given period. A

positive net, or net inmigration,

indicates that more migrants

entered the area than left it during that period. A negative net,

or net outmigration, means that

more migrants left the area than

entered it.
2 U.S. Census Bureau

divisions, and states are shown in

Table 1.1 The highest levels of

both in- and outmigration of all

four census regions occurred in the

South.2 Just over 5 million people

moved from the Northeast, the

Midwest, and the West to the South

between 1995 and 2000.3 During

the same period, 3.2 million individuals left the South for one of

the other regions. The resulting

net inmigration rate was 20.2,

meaning that the South gained

20.2 people through migration for

every 1,000 individuals living there

in 1995.4

The Northeast, the Midwest, and

the West displayed different

migration patterns from the South.

Between 1995 and 2000, net outmigration in the Northeast reached

25.5 for each 1,000 residents in

1995. In the Midwest, the net outmigration rate during the same

period was much lower, at 9.1.

Although the second-highest level

of inmigration was in the West, at

2.7 million people, this figure was

balanced by an almost equivalent

number of outmigrants, creating a

net inmigration rate for the West of

just 0.2.

The South Atlantic division

drew most of the migrants

who moved to the South.

When census regions are separated

into their divisions, greater variation in migration patterns appears.5

Although the South as a whole

experienced substantial net inmigration, the main driver of migration growth in the region was the

South Atlantic division, where the

net migration rate was 31.6. Net

inmigration rates in the remaining

two southern divisions, East South

Central and West South Central,

were 15.1 and 4.7, respectively. 

Similarly, net outmigration in the

Northeast and the Midwest regions

was concentrated in specific

divisions. The net outmigration

rate for the Middle Atlantic division

of the Northeast was 32.0, but its

companion division in the region,

New England, had a net outmigration rate of 6.4. In the Midwest,

the net migration rate for the East

North Central division indicates

that 12.5 individuals outmigrated

during this period for every 1,000

residents in 1995. In contrast, net

outmigration from the West North

Central division resulted in a net

outmigration rate of 1.1, a much

smaller net rate. 

Although the West as a whole experienced negligible net inmigration

between 1995 and 2000, its two

divisions displayed noticeably different migration trends. The Pacific

division, in spite of receiving 

1.9 million domestic inmigrants,

had an even greater number of outmigrants, resulting in a net outmigration rate of 17.4. In net terms,

the Mountain division gained about

the same number of migrants as

the Pacific division lost (an approximate 724,000 net gain in the

Mountain division compared with

an approximate 712,000 net loss in

the Pacific). The impact of net

migration appears to be much larger in the Mountain division, where

the net inmigration rate was 46.5. 

Nevada and New York were

among the states with the

most active internal

migration.

Net migration rates indicate onesided migration flows — that is,

flows dominated by either in- or

outmigration — when they are

either strongly negative, in the

case of net outmigration, or

strongly positive, in the case of net

inmigration (see Figure 1 and 

Table 1). Nevada had the highest

net inmigration rate of all the

states, with a gain of 151.5 people

for every 1,000 residents in 1995.

Among all states, the highest net

outmigration rate was in Hawaii

1 All decennial census migration data

refer to the population 5 years old and over

in 2000. Movers are defined as those who

did not live in their residence 5 years previously. Thus previous residence is measured

5 years prior to the census and does not

track any other moves made within that 

5-year period. Similarly, the census question

on residence 5 years ago did not capture

those who moved away from a place of residence and later returned to that same residence during that 5-year period.

The estimates in this report are based on

responses from a sample of the population.

As with all surveys, estimates may vary from

the actual values because of sampling variation or other factors. All comparisons made

in this report have undergone statistical testing and are significant at the 90-percent confidence level unless otherwise noted. 2 The Northeast region includes

Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New

Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,

Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

The Midwest includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,

Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,

Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South

Dakota, and Wisconsin. The South includes

Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, the District of

Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky,

Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North

Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina,

Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West

Virginia. The West includes Alaska, Arizona,

California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho,

Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon,

Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. 3 Figures appearing in the text have been

rounded. See Table 1 for complete numbers. 4 The net migration rate in this report is

based on an approximated 1995 population,

which is the sum of people who reported living in the area in both 1995 and 2000, and

those who reported living in that area in

1995 but lived elsewhere in 2000. The net

migration rate is the 1995-to-2000 net

migration, divided by the approximated

1995 population and multiplied by 1,000.

5 The New England division includes

Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont,

Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and

Connecticut. The Middle Atlantic division

states are New York, New Jersey, and

Pennsylvania. The East North Central division includes Ohio, Indiana, Illinois,

Michigan, and Wisconsin. The West North

Central division includes Minnesota, Iowa,

Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota,

Nebraska, and Kansas. The South Atlantic

division comprises Delaware, Maryland,

District of Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia,

North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and

Florida. The East South Central division

states are Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama,

and Mississippi. The West South Central

division includes Arkansas, Louisiana,

Oklahoma, and Texas. The Mountain division states are Montana, Idaho, Wyoming,

Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, and

Nevada. The Pacific division includes

Washington, Oregon, California, Alaska, and

Hawaii.
U.S. Census Bureau 3

Table 1.

Domestic Migration for Regions, Divisions, and States: 1995 to 2000

(Data based on a sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see

www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/doc/sf3.pdf)

Area

Number Rate (per 1,000 population)1

Inmigrants Outmigrants Gross migration Net migration Inmigration Outmigration Gross migration Net migration

Region

Total2 ................... 11,655,373 11,655,373 * - 45.7 45.7 * -

Northeast ................... 1,537,293 2,807,951 4,345,244 –1,270,658 30.8 56.2 87.0 –25.5

Midwest .................... 2,409,578 2,950,767 5,360,345 –541,189 40.5 49.6 90.0 –9.1

South ...................... 5,042,453 3,242,654 8,285,107 1,799,799 56.6 36.4 93.1 20.2

West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,666,049 2,654,001 5,320,050 12,048 47.3 47.1 94.3 0.2

Division

Total3 ................... 16,060,203 16,060,203 * - 63.0 63.0 * -

New England ................. 778,937 861,222 1,640,159 –82,285 61.0 67.4 128.4 –6.4

Middle Atlantic ................ 1,247,180 2,435,553 3,682,733 –1,188,373 33.6 65.6 99.1 –32.0

East North Central ............. 1,809,824 2,332,403 4,142,227 –522,579 43.3 55.7 99.0 –12.5

West North Central ............. 1,177,807 1,196,417 2,374,224 –18,610 66.6 67.6 134.2 –1.1

South Atlantic ................. 3,998,646 2,563,525 6,562,171 1,435,121 88.0 56.4 144.4 31.6

East South Central ............. 1,216,613 983,419 2,200,032 233,194 78.7 63.6 142.4 15.1

West South Central ............. 1,737,468 1,605,984 3,343,452 131,484 61.8 57.1 118.9 4.7

Mountain .................... 2,192,156 1,467,936 3,660,092 724,220 140.7 94.2 234.9 46.5

Pacific ..................... 1,901,572 2,613,744 4,515,316 –712,172 46.6 64.0 110.6 –17.4

State

Total4 ................... 22,089,460 22,089,460 * - 86.7 86.7 * -

Alabama .................... 326,212 300,389 626,601 25,823 80.0 73.7 153.7 6.3

Alaska ..................... 95,562 126,060 221,622 –30,498 159.9 210.9 370.8 –51.0

Arizona ..................... 796,420 480,272 1,276,692 316,148 187.2 112.9 300.1 74.3

Arkansas .................... 252,100 209,984 462,084 42,116 104.3 86.9 191.2 17.4

California .................... 1,448,964 2,204,500 3,653,464 –755,536 47.1 71.7 118.8 –24.6

Colorado .................... 643,820 481,187 1,125,007 162,633 173.6 129.7 303.3 43.8

Connecticut .................. 260,823 325,433 586,256 –64,610 82.9 103.5 186.4 –20.5

Delaware .................... 101,461 84,078 185,539 17,383 145.4 120.5 265.9 24.9

District of Columbia ............. 113,029 158,360 271,389 –45,331 203.8 285.5 489.4 –81.7

Florida ..................... 1,860,772 1,253,749 3,114,521 607,023 135.0 91.0 226.0 44.0

Georgia ..................... 965,558 624,853 1,590,411 340,705 137.7 89.1 226.9 48.6

Hawaii ..................... 125,160 201,293 326,453 –76,133 107.6 173.0 280.5 –65.4

Idaho ...................... 182,929 149,082 332,011 33,847 160.2 130.5 290.7 29.6

Illinois ...................... 665,122 1,007,738 1,672,860 –342,616 57.7 87.4 145.0 –29.7

Indiana ..................... 451,397 429,772 881,169 21,625 81.2 77.3 158.5 3.9

Iowa ....................... 214,841 247,853 462,694 –33,012 78.6 90.7 169.3 –12.1

Kansas ..................... 276,786 284,578 561,364 –7,792 112.7 115.8 228.5 –3.2

Kentucky .................... 318,579 284,452 603,031 34,127 86.2 77.0 163.2 9.2

Louisiana ................... 253,520 329,279 582,799 –75,759 60.5 78.6 139.2 –18.1

Maine ...................... 107,999 104,359 212,358 3,640 90.8 87.7 178.5 3.1

Maryland .................... 495,152 514,875 1,010,027 –19,723 102.8 106.9 209.7 –4.1

Massachusetts ................ 446,849 501,557 948,406 –54,708 77.0 86.4 163.4 –9.4

Michigan .................... 467,638 559,568 1,027,206 –91,930 50.8 60.8 111.6 –10.0

Minnesota ................... 355,250 326,081 681,331 29,169 79.3 72.8 152.2 6.5

Mississippi ................... 226,788 199,858 426,646 26,930 87.6 77.2 164.8 10.4

Missouri .................... 473,369 427,316 900,685 46,053 92.6 83.6 176.2 9.0

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111,530 116,696 228,226 –5,166 131.9 138.0 269.9 –6.1

Nebraska ................... 154,025 169,378 323,403 –15,353 97.4 107.1 204.5 –9.7

Nevada ..................... 466,123 232,189 698,312 233,934 301.8 150.3 452.1 151.5

New Hampshire ............... 162,250 134,347 296,597 27,903 145.4 120.4 265.8 25.0

New Jersey .................. 534,578 717,407 1,251,985 –182,829 69.2 92.8 162.0 –23.7

New Mexico .................. 205,267 235,212 440,479 –29,945 122.1 139.9 262.0 –17.8

New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 726,477 1,600,725 2,327,202 –874,248 40.6 89.4 130.0 –48.8

North Carolina ................ 919,336 581,453 1,500,789 337,883 131.7 83.3 215.0 48.4

North Dakota ................. 60,252 85,459 145,711 –25,207 97.0 137.6 234.6 –40.6

Ohio ....................... 588,650 705,590 1,294,240 –116,940 55.6 66.6 122.1 –11.0

Oklahoma ................... 322,500 305,613 628,113 16,887 102.6 97.2 199.8 5.4

Oregon ..................... 399,328 324,663 723,991 74,665 131.3 106.8 238.1 24.6

Pennsylvania ................. 668,753 800,049 1,468,802 –131,296 58.0 69.4 127.5 –11.4

Rhode Island ................. 96,980 93,744 190,724 3,236 101.4 98.0 199.4 3.4

South Carolina ................ 442,449 310,244 752,693 132,205 124.4 87.2 211.6 37.2

South Dakota ................. 72,548 85,016 157,564 –12,468 102.3 119.9 222.2 –17.6

Tennessee ................... 567,966 421,652 989,618 146,314 111.5 82.8 194.4 28.7

Texas ...................... 1,362,849 1,214,609 2,577,458 148,240 74.2 66.1 140.3 8.1

Utah ....................... 242,189 216,893 459,082 25,296 125.2 112.2 237.4 13.1

Vermont .................... 69,748 67,494 137,242 2,254 123.4 119.4 242.8 4.0

Virginia ..................... 821,738 746,008 1,567,746 75,730 129.7 117.7 247.4 11.9

Washington .................. 618,395 543,065 1,161,460 75,330 117.8 103.4 221.2 14.3

West Virginia ................. 138,487 149,241 287,728 –10,754 81.0 87.3 168.3 –6.3

Wisconsin ................... 338,108 330,826 668,934 7,282 68.3 66.8 135.1 1.5

Wyoming .................... 72,834 85,361 158,195 –12,527 154.9 181.6 336.5 –26.6

- Net migration and the net migration rate for domestic migration for the United States are zero by definition.

* Gross migration and the gross migration rate for region, division, and state totals are not computed.

1The net migration rate is based on an approximated 1995 population, which is the sum of people who reported living in the area in both 1995 and 2000, and those who reported living in that area in 1995, but lived elsewhere in 2000. The net migration rate is the 1995-to-2000 net migration, divided by the approximated 1995 population and multiplied by 1000. 2Interregional migration.

3Interdivisional migration.

4Interstate migration.

Note: A negative value for net migration or the net migration rate is indicative of net outmigration, meaning that more migrants left an area than entered it, between 1995 and 2000.

Positive values reflect net inmigration to an area.

Note: Census 2000 migration data include Puerto Rico among all movers from abroad. Because this report focuses solely on domestic migration, Puerto Rico has been excluded from

this table. Puerto Rico migration data are available on the Census Bureau’s Web site: www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/migration.html.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
4 U.S. Census Bureau

(65.4). Washington, DC, had a net

outmigration rate of 81.7. 

Figure 1 illustrates that migration

in a few states differed markedly

from trends in nearby states. Net

outmigration from Illinois, for

example, contrasted with net inmigration to four of its five adjacent

states. Louisiana and New Mexico

also experienced net outmigration,

but were surrounded by states

with net inmigration. Perhaps the

most startling case is California,

whose moderate net outmigration

rate contrasted with high rates of

net inmigration in the neighboring

states of Nevada and Arizona.

The highest gross migration

between 1995 and 2000, indicating the total movement in and out

of an area during a particular period, was seen in California, Florida,

Texas, New York, and Illinois. In

California’s case, gross migration

exceeded 3.6 million people.

Outmigration exceeded inmigration, however, resulting in a net

loss of approximately 756,000

people. Outmigration greatly

exceeded inmigration in New York

and Illinois, as well. Florida, in

comparison, had net inmigration of

approximately 607,000, or a net

inmigration rate of 44.0, with total

migration of 3.1 million. Texas

also experienced net inmigration,

although to a smaller extent 

(8.1 net migration rate). 

In summary, many of the

highest state migration levels

were in the South, largely in

the South Atlantic division;

Nevada’s net inmigration rate

was the highest in the

country.

Many of the highest levels of

migration were in the South. That

region’s South Atlantic division

includes states that were among

the top destination states in the

country during the 1995 to 2000

period, especially Florida, Georgia,

and North Carolina. Of the states,

Nevada’s net inmigration rate was

the highest in the country. 

The region with the lowest levels

of inmigration, gross migration,

and net migration was the

Northeast. The high net outmigration rate reflects that the Northeast

lost more population through outmigration than any other region,

with most of the loss in the Middle

Atlantic division and particularly

the state of New York. 

This report shows that, at each

geographic level, internal migration was not uniformly balanced

across the country; some locations

gained population through inmigration, while others experienced a

net loss. In still other locations,

migration was characterized by a

high degree of movement in and

out of the area. 

ACCURACY OF THE

ESTIMATES

The data contained in this report

are based on the sample of households who responded to the

Census 2000 long form.

Nationally, approximately 1 out of

every 6 housing units was included

in this sample. As a result, the

sample estimates may differ somewhat from the 100-percent figures

that would have been obtained if

all housing units, people within

those housing units, and people

living in group quarters had been

enumerated using the same questionnaires, instructions, enumerators, and so forth. The sample

estimates also differ from the values that would have been obtained

from different samples of housing

units, people within those housing

units, and people living in group

quarters. The deviation of a sample estimate from the average of

all possible samples is called the

sampling error. 

In addition to the variability that

arises from the sampling procedures, both sample data and 

100-percent data are subject to

nonsampling error. Nonsampling

error may be introduced during any

of the various complex operations

used to collect and process data.

Such errors may include: not enumerating every household or every

person in the population, failing to

obtain all required information from

the respondents, obtaining incorrect

or inconsistent information, and

recording information incorrectly.

In addition, errors can occur during

the field review of the enumerators’

work, during clerical handling of

the census questionnaires, or during the electronic processing of the

questionnaires.

Nonsampling error may affect the

data in two ways: (1) errors that are

introduced randomly will increase

the variability of the data and,

therefore, should be reflected in the

standard errors; and (2) errors that

tend to be consistent in one direction will bias both sample and 

100-percent data in that direction.

For example, if respondents consistently tend to underreport their

incomes, then the resulting estimates of households or families by

income category will tend to be

understated for the higher income

categories and overstated for the

lower income categories. Such

biases are not reflected in the

standard errors.

While it is impossible to completely

eliminate error from an operation

as large and complex as the decennial census, the Census Bureau

attempts to control the sources of

such error during the data collection and processing operations.

The primary sources of error and

the programs instituted to control

error in Census 2000 are described

in detail in Summary File 3

Technical Documentation under
U.S. Census Bureau

5

Net Domestic Migration Rates by State: 1995 

0 100 Miles 0 100 Miles

0 100 Miles

* The net migration rate is based on an approximated 1995 population, which is the sum of people who reported living in the area in both 1995 and 2000, and those who reported living inthat area in 1995 but lived elsewhere in 2000. The net migration rate is the 1995 to 2000 net migration, divided by the approximated1995 population and multiplied by 1000.Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.

(Data based on a sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonand definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/doc/sf3.pdf) 

Figure 1.

MT

AK

NM

OR MN

KS

SD

ND

MO

WA

FL

IL IN

WI NY

PA

MI

OH

IA

ME

MA 

CT 

AZ

HI

NV

TX

CO

CA

WY

UT

ID

NE

OK

GA

AR

AL

NC

MS

LA

TN

KY

VA

SC

WV

DE 

MD 

DC

NJ 

VT

NH
6 U.S. Census Bureau

Chapter 8, “Accuracy of the Data,”

located at www.census.gov

/prod/cen2000/doc/sf3.pdf. 

All statements in this Census 2000

report have undergone statistical

testing and all comparisons are

significant at the 90-percent confidence level, unless otherwise

noted. The estimates in tables,

maps, and other figures may vary

from actual values due to sampling

and nonsampling errors. As a

result, estimates in one category

may not be significantly different

from estimates assigned to a different category. Further information on the accuracy of the data is

located at www.census.gov/prod

/cen2000/doc/sf3.pdf. For further

information on the computation

and use of standard errors, contact

the Decennial Statistical Studies

Division at 301-763-4242. 

FOR MORE INFORMATION 

More detailed information on decennial migration products, including

additional tables and other product

announcements, is available on the

Internet and can be accessed via

the Census Bureau’s decennial census migration Web page at

www.census.gov/population

/www/cen2000/migration.html.

The decennial migration Web page

contains additional detailed migration tables not included in this

report, a schedule of upcoming

migration data releases, and migration-related Census 2000 Special

Reports.

For more information on decennial

migration products, please contact:

Population Distribution Branch

Population Division

U.S. Census Bureau

301-763-2419

or send e-mail to pop@census.gov.

Information on other population

and housing topics is presented in

the Census 2000 Brief and Special

Reports Series, located on the U.S.

Census Bureau’s Web site at

www.census/gov/population/www

/cen2000/briefs.html. These

series present information about

race, Hispanic origin, age, sex,

household type, housing tenure,

and other social, economic, and

housing characteristics.

Census 2000 information and data

can also be accessed via the

Census 2000 Gateway Web page at

www.census.gov/main/www

/cen2000.html.

For more information about

Census 2000, including data products, call our Customer Services

Center at 301-763-INFO (4636) or

e-mail webmaster@census.gov.