Skip to main content

The FRED® Blog

Net migration: The people in (and out of) your neighborhood


People move. From house to house, region to region, and country to country. This GeoFRED map colors the big picture with 2008-2012 data on how the world’s population has moved.

Specifically, these numbers reflect national net migration. Green represents positive net migration, with more immigrants than emigrants—that is, more people moved into the country to live than left the country to live elsewhere. Orange represents the opposite, negative net migration, with more emigrants than immigrants. These data, which are 5-year estimates, include both citizens and noncitizens.

Some not-so-surprising observations: The U.S. attracted a net inflow of over 5 million. The people of North Korea stayed put, with a net migration of effectively zero. Syria, in part due to the civil unrest since early 2011, had a net outflow of over 4 million people. And we have no migration data at all for Greenland, which has only about 50,000 residents.

How this map was created: After clicking the “Build New Map” button in the top right, use the “Tools” menu in the top left to do the following: (1) Under “Choose Data,” search for “Net migration.” (2) Under “Edit Legend” / “Number of Color Classes,” select 3 classes and insert the following values in the three user-defined intervals below: -0.1, 0, and any value above the U.S. value of 5.01 million, the highest in the world. (3) Under “Choose Colors,” choose the color scheme you prefer, including the one used here, which is second to last under “Divergent.”

Suggested by Chris Russell.

GDP recovery after 1933, 1982, and 2009

Sure, FRED has data related to several economic downturns and recovery periods. But it can be tough to accurately and clearly compare these different periods unless we do a little extra work. This graph uses a relatively more complicated FRED feature—integer periods—to uncomplicate the comparison of GDP growth after three economic downturns.

The graph shows GDP growth in the first 10 years after the Great Depression (blue line), in the first 10 years after the early 80’s recession (red line), and in the first 6 years since the Great Recession (green line). GDP is indexed to 100 in the year each downturn ended, shown on the x-axis as period 0, where all the lines begin. This makes the comparison more accurate and easier to follow.

As the graph clearly shows, GDP bounced back with gusto after the Great Depression and also ramped up moderately after the early 80’s recession. So far, we have only 6 years of GDP data since the previous recession, so we don’t know yet if the current recovery will catch up with past recoveries.

How this graph was created: For all three data series, search FRED for “annual real gross domestic product,” select the series with the ID “GDPCA,” change the units to “Index,” and use the expanded menu to select the date to index each series to. From the recession trough menu, select dates for the three series: March 1, 1933; November 1, 1982; and June 1, 2009, which are the end dates of the Great Depression, early 80’s recession, and Great Recession (according to the NBER), respectively.

For each series, check the “Display integer periods” box. The x-axis will show integers as time periods instead of dates. The base period is shown as 0: Negative numbers represent periods (years, in this case) before the base period, and positive numbers represent periods after the base period. Change the start integer to 0, so the graph begins at the end of each recession. Change the end integer to 10, so the graph ends 10 years after each recession.

Finally, to use the same graph style shown here, select the circle option under “Mark Type” and width 3 under “Mark Width.”


Suggested by Keith Taylor.

View on FRED, series used in this post: GDPCA

Two shades of coffee

Your coffee—be it morning, afternoon, or after dinner—can take a wide variety of forms: regular coffee, single- or double-shot espresso, and ice cold latte, to name just a few. And even a regular coffee can be prepared using many different methods and equipment, from the old-school percolator, the more-modern coffee maker, or the trendier vacuum pot and the Chemex. International variations, of course, include the use of the French press and the Italian or moka pot, as well as styles such as Turkish coffee, café cubano, and, a personal favorite, the Costa Rican café de chorreador.

A lesser known fact is that the coffee beans needed for any of the above can come from two different species of coffee: robusta (coffea canephora) and arabica (coffea arabica). The former is a sturdy tree with a high yield of beans with high acidity and bitterness and low aroma. The latter is a shrub less resistant to disease with a lower yield of beans with lower acidity and bitterness and stronger aroma.

Arabica coffee is generally considered much higher quality than robusta. This can be confirmed by looking at their market prices, which can be found in FRED. The graph above shows the global monthly bulk prices (US$ per 100 lb.) of the two types of coffee beans: the red line for arabica and the blue line for robusta.

The graph suggests some interesting patterns. First, except for 2 of the past 430 months, the price of arabica has always been above the price of robusta. Second, the gap between the two prices seems to be widening since 1986, suggesting that consumers are increasingly appreciating quality. Third, there are fluctuations in both prices but those fluctuations are more remarkable for arabica. Indeed, arabica coffee prices are quite spiky. In the past three of those spikes, arabica coffee prices reached more than double the price of robusta coffee. This blog post does not have the grounds to determine whether those spikes have been driven by supply disruptions or other factors.

How this graph was created: Use FRED’s keyword search method to find the two series: “coffee robusta” leads you to the series ID PCOFFROBUSDM and “coffee arabica” leads you to the series ID PCOFFOTMUSDM. Each series is the monthly price of the coffee in US$ per 100 lbs.

Suggested by Alexander Monge-Naranjo.

View on FRED, series used in this post: PCOFFOTMUSDM, PCOFFROBUSDM

Subscribe to the FRED newsletter

Follow us

Twitter logo Google Plus logo Facebook logo YouTube logo LinkedIn logo
Back to Top