<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><xml><records><record><source-app name="HighWire" version="7.x">Drupal-HighWire</source-app><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">McKinnish, Terra</style></author></authors><secondary-authors></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Importing the Poor</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Human Resources</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005-01-01 00:00:00</style></date></pub-dates></dates><pages><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">57-76</style></pages><doi><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10.3368/jhr.40.1.57</style></doi><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">40</style></volume><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue><abstract><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">I test for welfare-induced migration by comparing AFDC participation in border counties to interior counties within states. If migration costs are lower for border-county residents, border counties on the high-benefit side of a state border should have higher welfare participation relative to interior counties of the same state. Border counties on the low-benefit side should have lower welfare participation relative to interior counties of the same state. The results obtained using county-level data from 1970–90 indicate that having a neighbor with benefits that are $100 lower increases AFDC expenditures in border counties by 4.0–6.8 percent relative to interior counties.</style></abstract></record></records></xml>