Abstract
This article introduces the Special Issue on “The Economics of Migrant Labour”. In this paper, our attempt is to summarize the topic and organize the article into three main thematic areas, wherein the first topic delves into the novel evidence on migrant selection. The next set deals with the core literature of the labor market impacts of immigration. And the final group of papers deals with more specific topics like refugee migration, undocumented migration and the political consequences of migrant flows. In the concluding remarks, we have extracted from the different papers some guidance for future migration policies.
Introduction:
International migrants made up to 272 million people worldwide in 2019 (3.4% of the world’s population), an increase of 51 million since 2010. One third of migrants are from only 10 countries of origin, and about half of migrants live in just those 10 nations. Nearly 19% of all migrants live in the United States alone (about 51 million people in 2019), and the Mexico-U.S. corridor is the largest in the world, with nearly 12 million Mexican migrants living in the U.S. About 82 million immigrants live in Europe, making up nearly 30% of all migrants worldwide. The majority of them (about 50 million) reside in the EU14+UK region (United Nations, 2019). It is anticipated that rising fertility in Mexico and other Latin American nations, along with a relative improvement in their political and economic circumstances, will gradually lessen the pressure on migration to the United States. On the other hand, the opposite is true for European nations, which are directly exposed to regions of Africa and the Middle East that continue to exhibit high levels of both fertility and instability (Hanson and McIntosh, 2016).
The overwhelming opposition to further increases in the immigrant population in the major recipient countries conflicts with these expected rising tendencies in international migration (Pew Research Centre, 2018). Not only do locals in host societies usually overestimate the percentage of immigrants in the total resident population, but they also frequently underestimate the educational levels and socioeconomic integration of immigrants while highlighting the disparities in their cultures and religions (Alesina, Miano, and Stancheva, 2019). These false beliefs imply that educating people about the truth can help to reduce anti-immigrant prejudice (Grigorieff, Roth, and Ubfal, 2020). These conflicts are the basic foundation of modern immigration policy.
Aftermath of the Immigration Rules:
Through their immigration rules, receiving nations often attempt to control migrant flows. They want to select the greatest people and meet the demands of their labor markets, so they want to be able to regulate the inflow’s quantity and characteristics. In recent years, a growing number of nations (such as Canada, Australia, the U.S., and the U.K.) have enacted selective immigration policies in an effort to promote the immigration of specific workers, most of whom are highly qualified, in order to meet the high demand for specialists in a number of occupations, which is fueled by skill-biased technological change. The outcome of these discriminatory practices—as well as their general efficacy in vetting Immigrants- is critically influenced by their structure and how they interact with the natural selection of people who migrate from their countries of origin.
Part 1:
What amounts to Migration Selection?
Given sufficiently high skill portability between the source and destination countries and time-equivalent migration costs, the migration selection model predicts that labour migrants are negatively (positively) selected on unobservable characteristics, such as abilities and productivities, if the source country has more (less) dispersion in its earnings distribution, and positively (negatively) selected on observable skills, such as education. This is because moving would be more difficult (less rewarding) for individuals with greater skills than those with lower skills.
Part 2:
“Theory does not predict exactly what the Labour Market effects on Immigration would be”
The talents of immigrants, the skills of the host workforce, and the features of the host economy all play a significant role in how immigration affects the labour market. If the economy and labour demand are able to react to the rise in labour supply, they are also likely to vary over the short and long terms. Because it increases the number of workers in specific economic sectors, immigration has an impact on the labour supply. In addition, when consumer demand for certain goods and services increases as a result of immigration, there will likely be a rise in the need for workers. That is, while immigration may make it harder to get a job in some industries, it can also lead to the creation of new ones.
The degree to which immigrants have skills that can replace or supplement those of existing workers determines the immediate short-term consequences of immigration on wages or employment (e.g. Borjas 1995). Immigration is anticipated to increase competition for jobs and temporarily lower salaries when migrant employees are used to replace existing workers. Regarding employment, the willingness of current employees to accept the new lower earnings determines how much unemployment or inactivity is increased by dropping wages. The earnings of current workers can be anticipated to grow if, on the other hand, the abilities of migrants complement those of present workers, increasing productivity for all workers. Since the skills necessary for those positions are less specialized and easier to obtain, workers in low skilled occupations may anticipate to encounter greater competition from migrants.
Part 3:
The most common Refugee Crises:
Changes in supplies also influence migration patterns. In spite of the efforts of destination nations to influence migration through their immigration regulations, phenomena like refugee and unauthorized migration serve as a reminder that migration might occur. A “refugee crisis” occurred in Europe between 2015 and 2016, for example, as tens of thousands of people fled political persecution, conflict, and violence in Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, and other nations and sought sanctuary in European nations. As a result, a number of European nations have seen yearly increases in the percentage of immigrants in their populations of around one percentage point. Over 5.2 million Venezuelan individuals have emigrated to neighboring countries as a result of the ongoing refugee crisis in that country, which has further increased the number of forcibly displaced persons worldwide.
Findings from the above graph:
1. Syria continues to be the most displaced country, around 6.8 million Syrians of the country were displaced by the end of 2021.
2. Turkey hosted around 3.8 million refugees, which was then followed by Columbia (1.8 million), Uganda and Pakistan (1.5 million) and then Germany (1.3 million).
The Political Effects of Immigration
Despite the fact that Indians have been moving to other countries for thousands of years, widespread migration didn’t start until the abolition of slavery in the 1830s. The majority of migrants moved to South or Southeast Asia; 42% settled in Burma, 25% in Ceylon, 19% in British Malaya, and the remainder in Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America and the Caribbean. The bulk travelled as indentured servants.
From the late 1960s onward, two unrelated causes led to the next significant wave of emigration.
First, the Middle East had a significant demand for foreign labour due to a dramatic rise in oil prices and the ensuing economic boom. Even though there were significantly more skilled migrants than in previous migration waves, the majority of emigrants were unskilled or semiskilled. Indian migration to the Middle East has always been transient because of the policies of the countries there, which have made it very difficult for people to settle permanently. Despite the fact that the majority eventually went back home, some talented migrants moved on to other nations like Australia and Canada. Second, a significant influx of highly qualified professionals and students who wanted to study in and subsequently reside in the United States followed the relaxation of US immigration law in 1965. Another wave of young professionals immigrated to the United States in the late 1990s due to the high demand for information technology jobs there. However, because the majority arrived with temporary work permits, a comparatively higher, though still small, percentage of them left for home. When compared to other immigrants to the United States and to other waves of Indian emigration, this migration stream has been the most educated.
Key Findings about USA Migrants:
More people are immigrants in the United States than any other nation in the world. Approximately one-fifth of the world’s migrants, or more than 40 million Americans, were born outside of the United States. Additionally, the immigrant community is extremely diversified, with immigrants from nearly every nation in the world.The majority of immigrants living in the United States are from Mexico. There were around 11.2 million immigrants living in the United States in 2018, making up 25% of all immigrants. Those from China (6%), India (6%), the Philippines (4%) and El Salvador (3%), the next largest origin groups, were listed. Comparable to the percentage of immigrants from Mexico (25%), immigrants from Asia collectively made up 28% of all immigrants. Other regions with smaller percentages include the Caribbean (10%), Central America (8%), South America (7%), the Middle East and North Africa (4%) and sub-Saharan Africa (5%). Europe, Canada and other North America (13%) and the Caribbean (8%).
It can be comprehended from the above bar graph, that over the past three decades, the number of migrants as a percentage of the total U.S. population who are foreign-born, have substantially risen from about 4.7% to about 13.7%. This increase of nearly 9% has been regarded as the highest increase in the number of migrants since the 1850s. The Immigration and Nationality Act, which is also known as the Hart-Cellar Act, eliminated the quota system based on national origin, which led to the setting up of limits on the number of individuals who can be migrated to the U.S. from any given nation. This was cited as the primary reason for a decline in the number of migrants from 1900 to 1970.
Conclusion:
Countries of origin gain significantly from migrant workers’ remittances and the skills they learn during their migration experience, while migrant workers themselves contribute to growth and development in their countries of destination. However, the migration process entails difficult problems with governance, the safety of migrant workers, connections between migration and development, and international cooperation. The ILO seeks to develop policies that will make the most of the advantages of labour migration for all parties concerned.
Ragini Gambhir
MemberBibliography:
This article has been written by taking help from the following articles/sources:
1. The economics of migration: Labour Market Impacts and Migration Policies, Written By: Francesco Fasani, Joan Llull, Christina Tialdi
2. Migrant Labour and Economic Development, Oxford, Written By: Marvin P. Miracle & Sara S. Berry
3. Pew Research Centre: Key Findings about U.S. Migrants