Counting in, counting out: a history of census-making in Shanghai, 1840s-1949,

19世纪50年代中期至40年代初，两个外国“殖民地”（域外管辖飞地）占领了上海北部：英美主导的国际殖民地和法租界。在此期间，大量当地华人选择移民并居住在这两个定居点，忍受着对他们的制度性歧视。反过来，他们的选择塑造了社会经济现实。 本研究探讨了哪些制度和经济因素促使这些移民的选择。保护和稳定、现代法律的框架和司法实践、更好的基础设施和生活水平以及更光明的经济机会等拉动因素本可以超过歧视。具体而言，移民更喜欢《国际定居点》，尽管其体制框架在法律上更具歧视性。这可能是因为国际结算提供了更好的经济机会，或其其他机构特征更具吸引力。 在方法上，我记录和分析人口数据，以显示“发生了什么”，并利用这些数据和其他定性来源来解释“为什么”。虽然这一时期的经济历史学家缺乏地区GDP数据，城市历史学家往往没有充分利用其来源的统计潜力，我使用人口普查数据作为"脚投票"的证据，其中包含显示的偏好，以评估抵消的影响，法律的歧视和经济机会在上海定居点。从1865年开始，两个定居点都定期进行人口普查，通常每五年一次，一直延续到20世纪40年代初。定居点的外国管理机构在其年度报告中公布了详细的结果，这些报告现在可在上海市档案馆查阅。该数据集具有较长的时间跨度，并按性别、年龄、职业和原籍地进行详细分类，因此可以进行宏观层面的定量分析。此外，为了调查为什么某些机构可能更适合特定的社会群体，其他主要来源解释了当地中介，外国居民，特别是黑社会组织和难民的人口流动，这些人在人口普查中代表性不足。 本研究旨在丰富"屈辱的世纪"中国国内移民的文献，增加历史学家对上海外国人定居点的经济理解，并进一步研究特殊制度如何影响经济增长和个人福利。它还有助于更广泛的学术影响欧洲帝国对周边地区的发展，通过寻找当地代理人发挥的积极作用。最后，由于移民仍然是一个有争议的问题，该项目将为决策者提供关于当代全球难民制度改革的见解。

Between the mid-1850s and early-1940s, two foreign "settlements" (extraterritorial jurisdictional enclaves) occupied the north of Shanghai: the Anglo-American dominated International Settlement and the French Concession. Over the period, large amounts of local Chinese chose to migrate to and reside in both settlements, withstanding institutional discrimination held against them. In turn, their choices shaped socioeconomic realities. This study investigates what institutional and economic factors motivated the choices of these migrants. Discrimination could have been outweighed by pulling factors including protection and stability, modern legal frameworks and judicial practices, better infrastructure and living standards, and brighter economic opportunities. Specifically, migrants preferred the International Settlement, even though its institutional framework was more discriminatory de jure. This could be because the International Settlement offered better economic opportunities, or its other institutional characteristics were more attractive. Methodologically, I document and analyse population data to show "what happened" and utilise these data and other qualitative sources to explain "why". While economic historians of the period lack regional GDP data, and urban historians often do not fully utilise the statistical potential of their sources, I use census data as "foot-voting" evidence that contains revealed preferences to assess the countervailing impacts of legal discrimination and economic opportunities in the Shanghai settlements. From 1865, both settlements regularly drew up censuses, usually in every five years, extending to early 1940s. The foreign governing bodies of the settlements published detailed results in their annual reports, which are now available at the Shanghai Municipal Archives. With a long-time horizon and detailed breakdowns by gender, age, occupation, and places of origin, this dataset enables macro-level quantitative analysis. Further, to investigate why certain institutions might be better for specific social groups, other primary sources account for population flows of local intermediaries, foreign residents, and specifically, underworld organisations and refugees that are underrepresented in censuses. This study aims to enrich the literature on Chinese domestic migration during the "century of humiliation", add to historians' economic understanding of the Shanghai foreign settlements, and further investigate how particularised institutions influence economic growth and personal welfare. It also contributes to the broader scholarship on the influence European empires had on the development of its peripheries by looking at the active role played by local agents. Finally, as migration remain a contested issue, this project will unlock insights for policymakers on the reform of contemporary global refugee regimes.