Types of Migration Defined

Introduction

“Migration is as natural as breathing, like eating, as sleeping. It is part of life, part of nature. So, we have to find a way of establishing a proper kind of scenario for modern migration to existing. And when I say 'we,' I mean the world. We need to find ways of making that migration not forced. “

Indeed, migration is something very indigenous and natural to not only human beings but all living species. Neither is it a new happening. According to Angrawal et al (2011), it has been taking place for thousands of years from and to every single point of the planet.

This essay will be divided in sections. The first section will define and discuss two types of migration i.e. forced and voluntary migration. The second section will evaluate the theoretical perspective of migration i.e. the push/pull factors theory. Next, there will be a detailed discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of migration to the sending country – using Bulgaria as a case study. The last section will discuss how the refugee crisis is changing ideas about development i.e. how different countries have reacted to the refugee crisis and the way the refugee crisis has shaped development in some of the receiving countries. In doing so, it will compare responses to the migration crisis of three countries with the highest numbers of asylum seekers and refugees in the Middle East – Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan. It will stress on the importance of politics and interests in the decision-making of development goals. Secondly, it will briefly discuss two international examples of Uganda and Germany and their similar development approaches in accommodating refugees and asylum seekers. Thirdly, more attention will be paid to the financial side of migration and development by focusing on Official Development Assistance.

Voluntary Migration

Migration can be divided into two sections – voluntary and forced. Voluntary migration can be described as a movement based on the migrant’s free will and initiative (Anniste et al, 2017). Wang (2015) asserts that the reasons behind voluntary migration are usually of economic and social nature. The security and sovereignty of life of a voluntary migrant may not be in danger at the time of migration (Arrehag et al, 2015). Nonetheless, there are some of the factors a migrant faces while deciding whether to begin a new life abroad or stay in their home country. They are called push and pull factors.

Forced Migration

Firstly, forced migration refers to the involuntary movement of people (Wang, 2015). It could be due to both human-induced reasons such as wars, conflicts, prosecution and natural disasters such as earthquakes, famine or nuclear threats. Anderson (2016) supports that people who are forced to migrate have their lives in danger or their human rights violated. Importantly though, forced migrants are protected under the 1951 Refugee Convention, which defines the word “refugee”, grants them protection and assures them of no return to their home countries as long as they will still face threats to their lives or freedom (UNHCR, 1951).

The push/pull Theory of Migration

The push/pull theory of migration holds that people migrate as a result of various factors that either attracts them to a foreign country (pull) or sends them away from their home countries (push) (Bredl, 2011). In regards to push or pull factors, when the ratio of push-pull factors in the receiving country is more favourable than the ratio in the sending country, a person is more likely to migrate (Tubadji & Nikamp, 2015). In other words, when the receiving country offers more advantages than disadvantages; and the sending country offers more disadvantages than advantages, it is more likely that a person will migrate. Broadly, according to Barrell et al (2010), pull factors can include improved living conditions through more employment opportunities, access to better education and health care, or reunion with family etc. Other factors such as discriminations based on racial, ethnical or religious background can also be considered strong push factors.

According to Eigmuller (2017), these factors influence the decision of a potential migrant and shape their lives. Importantly though, an emigrant’s decision to leave a country highly shapes that country’s economic, political and social life. The country that loses a citizen to another country, or in other words the sending country, experiences a huge impact on its wellbeing and stability. These impacts can be in the form of both advantages and disadvantages that ensue.

Disadvantages of Migration

Loss of skilled labour

According to Lissag (2017), the sending country loses its workforce because in most cases, the energetic and highly skilled laborious choose to migrate in search for better opportunities. Anderson (2016) asserts that when this happens, the burden remains on the domestic workforce as they struggle to fill the labour shortage gaps. This phenomenon also usually termed as “brain drain”, which deprives the sending country of its skilled workers.

Wang (2015) observes that in most cases, the people who migrate are the ones with good skills, better education and the relevant expertise that are material in easily accessing jobs abroad. They may include professionals such as doctors, engineers, or IT specialists. when these professionals migrate, the sending country faces a significant loss in terms its development and productivity because the migration leads to labour force shortage (Anniste et al, 2017). Anderson (2016) asserts that the lack of skilled workers means that the sending country’s economy will have difficulties moving beyond the primary and secondary sectors of economic production. Ultimately, the economy of the sending country will focus on extraction of raw materials and manufacturing, which are two sectors which keep the development in a slow pace and hinder the advancement of other sectors such as information technology or human resources (Bredl, 2011).

Markets and Population

Migration also affects business development in sending countries. According to Lissag (2017), a sudden reduction in population as a result of increased migration, accompanied by decreased birth rates, ultimately reduces the manpower required in the business and private sectors of those economies. Likewise, when there is a sudden reduction of population within a locality, the businesses are affected in the sense that they experience a sudden reduction in the target market, and the market demand for some goods fall (Castles, 2011).

Family/Social

Besides, when adults migrate, the sending country remains with a younger population which has to shift to economic production to seek personal livelihood (Tubadji & Nikamp, 2015). However, Anderson (2016) says that with the absence of a guardian who pays close care and attention to a child’s healthy development, the future and potential performance of the children remains insecure.

Advantages of Migration

Better Prospects of Job Opportunities

On the flip side, existing literature reveals that the sending country also reaps several benefits from immigration. For instance, Lissag (2017) acknowledge that when people migrate, the sending country is left with low competition for the job market. Consequently, more employment opportunities are created back at home.

Remittances

Another prominent advantage to the sending country, which emerges from migration, is remittances. As hinted earlier, most people migrate but their children, parents, family, and friends stay (Anniste et al, 2017). Emigrants support their loved ones by sending funds which contribute to the sending country’s economic development. Hence, as noted by Wang (2015), these remittances contribute to massive foreign exchange flows around the world. In fact, Anderson (2016) observes many economies worldwide are highly dependent on them.

Skills and Knowledge Flow

Moreover, perhaps not as frequent but still in action is the gain of knowledge by emigrants. According to Anderson (2016), those who have stayed in the foreign country for a short period of time or the ones who decide to eventually return to their home countries, bring vital knowledge and skills which helps in developing the sending country’s human resource capacity. Through the skills and knowledge they have obtained in a more developed country, they venture into entrepreneurship and use their foreign networks to spur economic development (Tubadji & Nikamp, 2015).

Case study – Bulgaria

A typical example that can be used to explain the above-mentioned scenarios is the case of Bulgaria. Bulgaria is located in Eastern Europe with a current population of around 7 million and declining. It joined the EU together with Romania. It is considered it the poorest country in the EU due to its low GDP – at $19.2 thousand (OEC, 2016).

But migration has become a significant part of the life of Bulgarians ever since the EU allowed them to move freely within the borders of the European Union countries. In 2016, an estimation of 12.5% of the overall population of the country was reported to have emigrated (Capital, 2018). Hope (2018) notes further that between 1989 when Bulgaria transitioned from a communistic to a democratic republic, and 2007; an average of 60 000 people migrated annually. Although there is not certain or much data, it is considered that around 30,000 people still migrated from Bulgaria every year from 2007 onwards (Hope, 2018).

According to Lissag (2017), this prevalence level of migration has a huge impact on the development of Bulgaria. The development is also constrained by the low birth rates and highest death rates in the EU. Hence, scholars (e.g. Hope, 2018) contend that if the Bulgarian government does not manage to influence people to have more children and attract back its citizens from abroad, it risks losing another 2 million of its already massively decreasing population.

Clearly, if some of the above-mentioned advantages and disadvantages of migration are anything to go by, then it is not surprising that Bulgaria is currently undergoing the same problems, or facing some opportunities presented by migration. For example, the unemployment rates have decreased due to a decreased competition in the job market. In fact, existing statistics indicate that a total of 193 thousand people are unemployed in 2017 which is the lowest number in a decade (Grigorova, 2017). However, due to the lack of highly skilled professionals e.g. medics, many pensioners are still working (Tubadji & Nikamp, 2015). Anderson (2016) argues that this is also due to the low pension amounts they receive.

Ideally, the increased number of pensioners still working can be explained by the availability of an increased pressure on the working class who struggle to provide for the unemployed members of their households (Anderson, 2016). It is a vicious circle which drains the economy and restrains any development.

Small and middle size businesses also struggle to keep up with the changes. According to Chowdhurry & Rabbi (2014), the demand for their goods and services decreases and many face bankruptcy. However, existing literature reveals other reasons why only 1% of the new small businesses survive after their 10th year of operation (Docquier et al, 2014). For instance, Anderson (2016) cites reasons such poor economic development, which hinders the growth of businesses. They lack professionals and skilled workers to bring in ideas and attract new customers (Vasilev, 2016).

On the flipside, a noticeable positive development that emanates from migration is remittances. According to “Trading Economics”:

“Remittances in Bulgaria averaged 77.02 EUR Million from 2004 until 2018, reaching an all-time high of 116.90 EUR Million in May of 2018 and a record low of 50.80 EUR Million in November of 2010.” (Economics, 2018).

Worryingly though, Drbohlav (2011) contend that there is a paucity of literature and empirical evidence to oppose or support the fact that migrants who have returned back home in Bulgaria have done so with better skills and knowledge to improve their country’s economic productivity. But, Angrawal et al (2011) strongly insists that those who go back have greater chances in finding better jobs and have an advantage over the rest. More importantly, it is hard to tell whether they make a huge impact over the overall development of the country.

Now, the following section will focus on forced migration. We will try to evaluate how the refugee crisis is changing ideas about development and the distinct approaches taken by different countries in tackling the crisis.

Responses to Refugee Crisis and How It Has Changed Development Ideas in Some Countries

Three Middle Eastern States’ Responses

In order to discuss and evaluate different approaches to the refugee crisis, precisely the Syrian one, we need to understand the politics and interests of the major hosting countries. It is neither surprising nor a secret that there are a few states which accommodate a significant number of refugees and asylum seekers – numbers much greater than other hosting countries (Arrehag et al, 2015). All in all, a close evaluation of Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan reveals a similar response in each of them towards the refugee crisis.

In 2011 as the Arab Spring emerged, all the three states opened their borders and welcomed every immigrant in need of protection and security (Wang, 2015). However, due to the massive wave of people and the increased threat of terroristic organizations such as ISIS spreading within their borders, in 2014 the states decided to pose restrictions on who is allowed in and who is not. Accounts by Drbohlav (2011) reveal that as the crisis grew bigger than predicted; and as there were no signs of improvement, the three states needed international aid and support. Therefore in 2016, they agreed to major bilateral economic deals with the EU which reassured on-going hosting (Betts, Ali and Memişoğlu, 2017).

Regardless of the common approaches towards the crisis, each of the three states varies in their local responses to the refugees and asylum seekers. Therefore, it is important to not only pay attention to national but also local politics. It seems though that the differences in local approaches are highly impacted by the interests and personalities of the individuals who oversee the areas (Betts, Ali and Memişoğlu, 2017). In addition, religious and political views play a big role. As most Syrian refugees tend to be Sunni Muslims, according to Bredl (2011), areas with predominantly Sunni population are more welcoming than those of Shia Muslims. Moreover, those in support of Assad’s regime tend to be less welcoming than those opposing it.

All the above give a hint to how nations respond to crisis and their solutions as well as how the approaches to development are highly political and based on interests. International law and values are surely significant shapers of views to the development and tackling crisis but so are power and interests (Betts, Ali and Memişoğlu, 2017). According to Angrawal et al (2011), the host and donor states’ willingness to respond and involve themselves into a conflict is highly dependent on the positives or negatives in relation to security and development outcomes they have from doing so. However, Bredl (2011) argues that interests can restrain people and countries from taking the right decisions. The refugee crisis should not only be looked at through the interesting perspective nor as a humanitarian crisis but as a development issue too. Besides, Angrawal et al (2011) suggest that states should not only look at refugees as a threat and burden but as a potential investment which could lead to a win-win situation. It is important to create innovative and sustainable goal models (Betts, 2015).

Further Responses to the Refugee Crisis

Some example countries outside Europe reveal interesting insights into the development approaches adopted by countries towards the refugee crisis. In Uganda, for example, refugees have received the right to work and to a high extent, freedom of movement (Betts, 2015). In this way, they have contributed greatly to local and the national economy until they get the chance to return to their home countries (Arrehag et al, 2015). In fact, there are a few European countries which had worked towards adopting similar development goals. For instance, Germany, a country that is highly dependent on migrant workers (Angrawal et al, 2011), is trying to set development goals in relation to the refugee wave in order to improve its economy. Indeed, Germany has demonstrated that responding to the refugee crisis from a labour and workforce perspective may have a win-win effect. However, it is important to note that Germany is still experiencing some immigration challenges due to the huge number of refugees, and this has put the immigrants’ future lives in Germany are under threat (Arrehag et al, 2015).

Countries like Sweden have opened their borders and given many development opportunities to refugees so that they have normal lives and integrate into society (Angrawal et al, 2011). However, according to (dd), many European states are still having doubts and are unwilling to accommodate refugees; therefore, their views of development remain slightly untouched by the refugee crisis. That as it may be, many Eastern European countries refuse to accept any refugees on their lands due to differences in culture, religion, or views etc.

Understanding the Refugee Crisis through Official Developmental Assistance (ODA)

Next, we will look at the refugee crisis in more financial terms and how the distribution of funds from donors to those in need happen. We will consider the ODA, which helps to better understand development goals and approaches toward the crisis.

Funds which are sent from developed countries to developing countries in order to help and economically support them in moments of crisis are referred to as Official Development Assistance (ODA) (Drbohlav, 2011). With the increased migration of asylum seekers and refugees to developed countries, ODA has slightly changed its definition. Nowadays, according to Bredl (2011), an increased amount of ODA is used and absorbed in developed countries with high numbers of refugees which try to promote protection and security.

As described by Shriwise and colleague, after a doubling of refugees and asylum seekers in developed countries, ODA spending in donor developed countries has increased with almost 30% between 2015 and 2016 (Shriwise and Bruzelius, 2018). On the contrary, during the same period, ODA in developing countries decreased by nearly 4%. Shriwise & Bruzelius (2018) also argue that due to the geographic shift of these refugees and asylum seekers, new approaches to development have emerged.

The two main approaches to understanding development are geographic orientated and people-centred, which have opposing natures (Shriwise and Bruzelius, 2018). Therefore, according to Bredl (2011), the change of ODA flow from developing to developed countries does not change the transnational social aid since the funds are invested in the security of the refugees and asylum seekers. Furthermore, Shriwise discusses that when it comes to the geographic orientation of development assistance, the huge focus on directing ODA through public institutions proposes little evidence of a change in development institutions. This could be due to the fact the receiving countries are already economically stable and well developed with no need for re-orientation of their existing institutions. Overall, the existing literature claims that development has become much more people-centred and focused on transnational social protection (Shriwise and Bruzelius, 2018).

Similarly, based on Germany as an example, we see that developed states try to pay higher attention to the people’s wellbeing – both economically and socially (Arrehag et al, 2015). However, institutionally, there haven’t been big changes made because developed states are stable in that aspect. Moreover, in the example of Germany, this hasn’t taken place since there is still uncertainty and disagreements on the acceptance of refugees.

Conclusion

All in all, this essay has defined both voluntarily and forced migration. In the case of voluntary migration we looked at the shortcomings it brings to sending countries; such as brain drain, business bankruptcy, and increased pressure on the economically active people and issues with psychological upbringing on children whose guardians have migrated. In respect to strengths on state development we mentioned remittances, gained knowledge and skills of returning workers, and decreased unemployment rates. In the example of Bulgaria, one of the poorest countries in the EU, we saw how these advantages and disadvantages indeed play a role in its development.

When explaining forced migration, we looked at how different states respond to the crisis. Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan all adopted very admissive approaches by opening their borders to refugees. However, on local level areas with shared interests such as common religion – Sunni Muslim areas were more welcoming than Shia Muslim areas for instance. Also, areas whose leaders were in support of the Syrian president Bashar al Assad were not so welcoming to Syrian refugees. We have also discussed how countries like Uganda and Germany, very different in geographical location but similar in development goals, try to establish institutions or continue with already existing ones to integrate refugees in their societies. Finally, we have talked about Official Development Assistance and how the refugee crisis did not really change development institutions in developed countries due to their stable financial status. Moreover, we have established that states have adopted more people-centred approaches when dealing with refugees and asylum seekers. To conclude, this essay looked at two different perspectives of migration and tried to explain the effects, changes, reasons, and approaches to development in cases of both voluntary and forced movement of people.

References

Anniste, K., Pukkonen, L. and Paas, T. (2017) ‘Towards Incomplete Migration: Estonian Migration to Finland’, TRAMES: A Journal of the Humanities & Social Sciences, 21(2), pp. 97–114.

Agrawal, A., D. Kapur, J. McHale, & A. Oettl. (2011). Brain drain or brain bank? The impact of skilled emigration on poor-country innovation. Journal of Urban Economics, 69(1), pp. 43-55.

Arrehag, L., Sjöberg, Ö., & Sjöblom, M. (2015). Cross-border migration and remittances in a post-communist society: return flows of money and goods in the Korçë district, Albania. South-Eastern Europe Journal of Economics, 3(1), pp. 9-40.

Andersson, R. (2016) ‘Europe’s failed “fight” against irregular migration: ethnographic notes on a counterproductive industry’, Journal of Ethnic & Migration Studies, 42(7), pp. 1055–1075.

Betts, A., Ali, A. and Memişoğlu, F. (2017). Exploring Responses in Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan. Local Politics and the Syrian Refugee Crisis, pp.2-28.

Barrell, R., FitzGerald, J., & Riley, R. (2010). EU enlargement and migration: Assessing the macroeconomic impacts. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 48(2), pp. 373-395.

Bell, S., Alves, S., de Oliveira, E. S., & Zuin, A. (2010). Migration and Land Use Change in Europe: A Review. Living Reviews in Landscape Research, 4.

Bredl, S. (2011). Migration, remittances and educational outcomes: The case of Haiti. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(2), pp. 162-168.

Castles, S. (2011). Migration, crisis, and the global labour market. Globalizations, 8(3), pp. 311-324.

Chowdhury, M. B., & Rabbi, F. (2014). Workers’ remittances and Dutch disease in Bangladesh. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 23(4), pp. 455-475.

Docquier, F., Ozden, Ç., & Peri, G. (2014). The labour market effects of immigration and emigration in OECD countries. The Economic Journal, 124(579), pp. 1106-1145.

Drbohlav, D. (2011). Migration Theories, Realities and Myths. Migration Studies, 36(10), pp. 1565-1586.

Eigmüller, M. (2017) ‘Beyond the crisis: The societal effects of the European transformation’, European Law Journal, 23(5), pp. 350–360.

Grigorova, V. (2017). КРИЗА НА КАДРИТЕ: ДЕФИЦИТ НА РАБОТНА РЪКА ИЛИ НА ДОСТОЙНО ЗАПЛАЩАНЕ?. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, pp.1-50.

Lässig, S. (2017) ‘Strategies and Mechanisms of Scholar Rescue: The Intellectual Migration of the 1930s Reconsidered’, Social Research, 84(4), pp. 769–807.

Shriwise, A. and Bruzelius, C. (2018). The European ‘migrant crisis’ and shifting geographies of Official Development Assistance. Shifting geographies of Official Development Assistance, 17(02), pp.3-44.

Tubadji, A. and Nijkamp, P. (2015) ‘Cultural Gravity Effects among Migrants: A Comparative Analysis of the EU15’, Economic Geography, 91(3), pp. 343–380.

Wang, D. (2015) ‘Activating Cross-border Brokerage: Interorganizational Knowledge Transfer through Skilled Return Migration’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 60(1), pp. 133–176.