More people than ever before are migrating, or seeking to migrate, from regions afflicted by poverty and insecurity to more prosperous and stable parts of the world. Around 175 million people - 2% of the world’s population - now live in a country other than the one in which they were born. Tougher immigration policies, however, have led to an expansion of illegal international migration and undermined the system of international refugee protection.

A policy briefing from the World Institute for Development Economic Research argues that more needs to be done to understand the relationship between globalisation, migration pressures and the potential role of development assistance in reducing migration. The increase in international migration has been facilitated by the pressures and opportunities of globalisation: growing inequality in the level of development in different parts of the world; improved transportation, communications and information technology systems; the expansion of ‘transnational’ social networks across geographic regions; and the emergence of a commercial (and sometimes criminal) industry devoted to moving people across international borders.

While industrialised states derive many benefits from immigration – cheap and flexible workers to fill gaps in labour supply being the most important– there remains considerable public and political resistance to any relaxation of immigration and asylum policy. This resistance is linked to a range of concerns about the apparently negative impact of immigration and refugee flows on employment, welfare systems, national security and identity. While such fears are often unfounded, governments and opposition parties continue to mobilise electoral support through promises to obstruct, deter or limit the arrival of foreign nationals.

The absence of legal routes for migration has led to a significant expansion in human trafficking and smuggling networks which are both dangerous and exploitative in nature. For the majority of would-be migrants, these routes represent the only way to enter an industrialised state.

Many of those most in need of asylum find themselves unable to leave their country or region of origin in order to seek asylum in an industrialised state. At the same time many migrants who do reach the West attempt to remain there by claiming asylum even though they are not genuine refugees. This has led to a decline in public confidence in asylum systems and increasing gaps in the system of international refugee protection.

Political pressures to restrict immigration policies have encouraged states to limit recruitment to the highly skilled. Such selective migration policies have exacerbated the ‘brain drain’ problem experienced by many low-income countries, thereby impeding development.

The authors suggest five options for policy-makers:

• Easing restrictions on labour mobility for larger numbers of low-skilled migrants – any move to do so, however, would have to address the reality that resistance to liberalising labour mobility is rooted in an emotional response, rather than one based on economic logic.
• Promoting protection in regions of origin to take the pressure off overwhelmed asylum systems and reduce the demand for trafficking.
• Addressing the root causes of movement by targeted use of development aid, foreign direct investment, trade liberalisation, humanitarian assistance, human rights promotion and conflict prevention.
• Influencing perceptions of migration: tackling the misinformation which can lead migrants to make wrong choices of destination or dangerous choices of route and addressing fear and ignorance about immigrants in recipient countries.
• Establishing an international migration regime: a forum to address the multiple causes and impacts of migration, to develop norms and standards for managing migration and to share information and national best practice.

Policies must take into account the often conflicting interests and values at stake – refugee protection, the rights and welfare of migrants and asylum seekers, concerns about state sovereignty, development goals and internal stability in receiving or transit states. While none of these policy options provides a single solution to the challenges of migration and asylum, they might in combination lead to a more effective and equitable international response to the issue of human mobility.

Source(s):
‘Poverty, international migration and asylum’ by Christina Boswell and Jeff Crisp, World Institute for Development Economics Research, United Nations University, Policy Brief No 8, March 2004 Full document.

id21 Research Highlight: 23 April 2004

Further Information:
Jeff Crisp
Global Commission on International Migration
GCIM Secretariat
Rue Richard-Wagner 1
1202 Geneva
Switzerland

Tel: +41 22 748 48 50
Fax: +41 22 748 48 51
Contact the contributor: crisp@gcim.org

Global Commission on International Migration, Geneva

Christina Boswell
Head, Migration Research Group
Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA)
Neuer Jungfernstieg 21, room 402
D-20347 Hamburg
Germany

Tel: 49 (0) 40 42834-357
Fax: 49 (0) 40 42834-451
Contact the contributor: Christina.boswell@hwwa.de

Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA)

UNU-WIDER Publications
Katajanokanlaituri 6 B
00 160 Helsinki
Finland

World Institute for Development Economic Research (WIDER)

Other related links:
'Harnessing the investment potential of migrants’ remittances: the importance of family ties'

'Locking away potential: What host countries lose when they keep refugees in camps'

'Myths around asylum seeking: a more coherent approach to forced migration?'

'The consequences of refugee flows and managing the aftermath'

'Responding to displacement: Balancing needs and rights'

University of Oxford, Refugee Studies Centre

'Guide to International Refugee Law Resources on the Web'