Why do migrants often choose closer destinations over farther ones?

Migrants often choose closer destinations over farther ones primarily to minimize distance-related friction, which encompasses the costs, difficulties, and barriers related to traveling longer distances. By opting for destinations that are geographically nearer, individuals can reduce travel time and expenses, making the migration process more manageable and less risky. Shorter distances also diminish the emotional and physical strains associated with moving, such as acclimating to a new environment or the potential for cultural shock.

The concept of distance decay also supports this; as distance increases, the likelihood of migration typically decreases due to these frictions. Therefore, the choice of closer destinations aligns with a strategic decision to mitigate challenges and enhance the likelihood of a successful transition to a new location.

In contrast, while economical reasons do play a critical role in migration patterns, they can also encompass a broader range of factors beyond just proximity. The availability of transportation is certainly a factor, but it is usually more about the logistics and feasibility of making the journey than about the inherent preference for closer sites. Family connections can influence migration decisions significantly, but this often leads to choices based on personal networks rather than the distance itself.