🚨Key Concepts for Migration and Citizenship 🚨
Week 1:
- Myths from De Haas (2005):
- De Haas examines the reciprocal migration through the discussion of seven
myths.
- Myth 1: The idea that we live in an age of unprecedented migration.
- People think migration increased due to globalisation.
- Not true, because there were periods in the late 20th century and early
21st century that had equal or more international migration.
- There is not an increasing trend of displaced refugees, this was
highest after World War II.
- Politicians and media use discourses of ‘aquatic’ metaphors to
exaggerate migration.
- “If we do not do anything, it will get out of hand.”
- Politicians play into fear (crime, drugs, rape, etc.).
- It is not the amount of migration that changed, but the direction.
- Before, people moved North-North and North-South (think of
colonialism and Europeans moving to the US).
- Also, the visibility increased. Many Western societies are
confronted with culturally distinct immigrants.
- We live in a time of great global inequality.
- The amount of international migrants increased, but the worldwide
population increased as well.
- The migration movement within countries is four to five times bigger than
the international movement (due to urbanisation).
- Myth 2: The idea that poverty and misery are the root causes of labour
migration.
- While in fact, it is rarely the poorest in a society who migrate, because
migrating involves costs and risks, knowledge, social networks, and
migrating requires the necessary aspirations.
- Instead of absolute poverty, a certain level of socio-economic
development, combined with relative deprivation in the form of global
inequality of development opportunities, seem to be the most important
causes of (labour) migration.
- Migration paradox: socio-economic development and increasing
mobility tends to be associated with increasing migration.
- The relation between migration and development is not linear of inversely
proportional. (???)
,- Myth 3: The idea that developmental policies, developmental assistance,
and trade liberalisation are an effective remedy against migration.
- The ‘leftist myth’ because it sounds humanitarian and positive,
HOWEVER, it still perceives migration as a problem.
- The idea of migrants as misery, reinforced by images of illegal
immigrants on boats.
- This is wrong because socio-economic development enables more
people to migrate and tends to increase their aspirations.
- See myth 2.
- ‘Stay-at-home’ aid and trade policies seem to be ‘right for the wrong
reasons’.
- Trade liberalisation and migration can become long-term complements if
non-tariff trade barriers, subsidies, higher productivity, technological
advantages, and economics of scale in the North harm the
competitiveness of the South.
- Thereby leading to the shift of economic activities to the North,
along with more immigration to support them.
- The migration paradox: “growing wealth, growing emigration”.
- GDP per capita increases BECAUSE migration increases.
- The migration development nexus (week 2).
- Myth 4: The idea that migration as a potential source for development
provokes a brain drain.
- First of all, not all migrants are highly skilled.
- Second, the brain drain seems to be only truly massive in a minority of
countries.
- Third, a brain drain can be accompanied by a brain gain.
- Beneficial in the medium to long run due to the counterflow of
remittances, investments, trade relations, and new knowledge /
information.
- Some evidence argues that students who move abroad stimulate
the incentive to study among stay-behinds.
- Fourth, labour tends to be more productive in wealthy, industrialised
countries.
- In an increasing number of developing countries there is mass
unemployment among the more highly educated, in these
cases individual and collective gain seem to outweigh the costs of
migration.
- And many governments consider skilled labourers to be an export
product, and thus educated them with the explicit purpose of
generating remittances from abroad.
- Highly skilled migrants often play an important and positive role in:
- The societal and political debate.
- The development of a civil society in the country of origin.
- The emancipation of women and minority groups.
, - (Besides their economic role).
- One of the main reasons for this is that they tend to have more
freedom and opportunities to organise themselves and express
their opinion than that is often the case in sending countries.
- HOWEVER, this does not means that the impact of migration is always
positive and that no brain drain can occur. BUT, we should
acknowledge that it is impossible to stop the migration of the higher and
lower skilled.
- Stay-at-home policies pursued by emigration countries have proven to be
both ineffective and counterproductive by alienating migrants.
- It is important to recognise that technological advances increased the
possibilities for migrants and their families to live transnationally.
- Myth 5: The idea that the money migrants remit to sending countries is
mainly spent on conspicuous consumption and non-productive
investments.
- In other words, the idea that there is a dangerous dependency on
remittances.
- The idea that the departure of young (supposedly successful /
entrepreneurial) men causes a decline in local economic activities,
which is blamed for the de-intensification of agriculture and the decline of
land under cultivation.
- ‘The lost labour effect.’
- In other words, migration undermines the potential for
development.
- Recent research shows that remittances potentially enable migrants and
their families to invest in agriculture and enterprises in their countries of
origin.
- International migrant households often tend to have a higher
propensity to invest than non-migrant households.
- And we should criticise the inclination to spend money on housing,
sanitation, healthcare, food, and schooling as unproductive and non-
developmental.
- Improvements in human capital tend to increase productivity,
freedom of choice, and the capacity to participate in public debate.
- Myth 6: The idea that the orientation of migrants towards their countries of
origin is an indication of the lack of socio-economic integration in the
receiving countries’ societies.
- This myth is particularly visible in Northwest European countries.
- Remittances are then negatively seen as a ‘disappearance’ of income
earned in the receiving country.
- It is important to recognise that migrants increasingly live in a
transnational world, in which they work and participate in public debate in
two or more countries.
Week 1:
- Myths from De Haas (2005):
- De Haas examines the reciprocal migration through the discussion of seven
myths.
- Myth 1: The idea that we live in an age of unprecedented migration.
- People think migration increased due to globalisation.
- Not true, because there were periods in the late 20th century and early
21st century that had equal or more international migration.
- There is not an increasing trend of displaced refugees, this was
highest after World War II.
- Politicians and media use discourses of ‘aquatic’ metaphors to
exaggerate migration.
- “If we do not do anything, it will get out of hand.”
- Politicians play into fear (crime, drugs, rape, etc.).
- It is not the amount of migration that changed, but the direction.
- Before, people moved North-North and North-South (think of
colonialism and Europeans moving to the US).
- Also, the visibility increased. Many Western societies are
confronted with culturally distinct immigrants.
- We live in a time of great global inequality.
- The amount of international migrants increased, but the worldwide
population increased as well.
- The migration movement within countries is four to five times bigger than
the international movement (due to urbanisation).
- Myth 2: The idea that poverty and misery are the root causes of labour
migration.
- While in fact, it is rarely the poorest in a society who migrate, because
migrating involves costs and risks, knowledge, social networks, and
migrating requires the necessary aspirations.
- Instead of absolute poverty, a certain level of socio-economic
development, combined with relative deprivation in the form of global
inequality of development opportunities, seem to be the most important
causes of (labour) migration.
- Migration paradox: socio-economic development and increasing
mobility tends to be associated with increasing migration.
- The relation between migration and development is not linear of inversely
proportional. (???)
,- Myth 3: The idea that developmental policies, developmental assistance,
and trade liberalisation are an effective remedy against migration.
- The ‘leftist myth’ because it sounds humanitarian and positive,
HOWEVER, it still perceives migration as a problem.
- The idea of migrants as misery, reinforced by images of illegal
immigrants on boats.
- This is wrong because socio-economic development enables more
people to migrate and tends to increase their aspirations.
- See myth 2.
- ‘Stay-at-home’ aid and trade policies seem to be ‘right for the wrong
reasons’.
- Trade liberalisation and migration can become long-term complements if
non-tariff trade barriers, subsidies, higher productivity, technological
advantages, and economics of scale in the North harm the
competitiveness of the South.
- Thereby leading to the shift of economic activities to the North,
along with more immigration to support them.
- The migration paradox: “growing wealth, growing emigration”.
- GDP per capita increases BECAUSE migration increases.
- The migration development nexus (week 2).
- Myth 4: The idea that migration as a potential source for development
provokes a brain drain.
- First of all, not all migrants are highly skilled.
- Second, the brain drain seems to be only truly massive in a minority of
countries.
- Third, a brain drain can be accompanied by a brain gain.
- Beneficial in the medium to long run due to the counterflow of
remittances, investments, trade relations, and new knowledge /
information.
- Some evidence argues that students who move abroad stimulate
the incentive to study among stay-behinds.
- Fourth, labour tends to be more productive in wealthy, industrialised
countries.
- In an increasing number of developing countries there is mass
unemployment among the more highly educated, in these
cases individual and collective gain seem to outweigh the costs of
migration.
- And many governments consider skilled labourers to be an export
product, and thus educated them with the explicit purpose of
generating remittances from abroad.
- Highly skilled migrants often play an important and positive role in:
- The societal and political debate.
- The development of a civil society in the country of origin.
- The emancipation of women and minority groups.
, - (Besides their economic role).
- One of the main reasons for this is that they tend to have more
freedom and opportunities to organise themselves and express
their opinion than that is often the case in sending countries.
- HOWEVER, this does not means that the impact of migration is always
positive and that no brain drain can occur. BUT, we should
acknowledge that it is impossible to stop the migration of the higher and
lower skilled.
- Stay-at-home policies pursued by emigration countries have proven to be
both ineffective and counterproductive by alienating migrants.
- It is important to recognise that technological advances increased the
possibilities for migrants and their families to live transnationally.
- Myth 5: The idea that the money migrants remit to sending countries is
mainly spent on conspicuous consumption and non-productive
investments.
- In other words, the idea that there is a dangerous dependency on
remittances.
- The idea that the departure of young (supposedly successful /
entrepreneurial) men causes a decline in local economic activities,
which is blamed for the de-intensification of agriculture and the decline of
land under cultivation.
- ‘The lost labour effect.’
- In other words, migration undermines the potential for
development.
- Recent research shows that remittances potentially enable migrants and
their families to invest in agriculture and enterprises in their countries of
origin.
- International migrant households often tend to have a higher
propensity to invest than non-migrant households.
- And we should criticise the inclination to spend money on housing,
sanitation, healthcare, food, and schooling as unproductive and non-
developmental.
- Improvements in human capital tend to increase productivity,
freedom of choice, and the capacity to participate in public debate.
- Myth 6: The idea that the orientation of migrants towards their countries of
origin is an indication of the lack of socio-economic integration in the
receiving countries’ societies.
- This myth is particularly visible in Northwest European countries.
- Remittances are then negatively seen as a ‘disappearance’ of income
earned in the receiving country.
- It is important to recognise that migrants increasingly live in a
transnational world, in which they work and participate in public debate in
two or more countries.
