This paper provides a non-technical summary of recent research on why people stay put rather than move, even in the face of adverse local economic shocks. I compare three frameworks for understanding migration: the moving costs model, the spatial frictions model, and a newer approach called the SPACE model. The models differ in their explanations of why individuals stay put. The moving costs model emphasizes financial or psychological barriers to migration, the spatial frictions model emphasizes lack of information or job opportunities, and the SPACE model emphasizes persistent preferences for one’s current location. While the SPACE model best explains observed migration patterns, all three mechanisms operate simultaneously in practice. Therefore, successful regional policies should address all three: reducing barriers, providing information, and building community ties that make locations persistently attractive.