Contributions from
the Column
Focus

“Evolving transnational communities”

Development work with the diaspora

Permanent right of abode

A reluctant immigration country

Turkish diaspora in Germany


10/2004 		 

“Evolving transnational communities”

On assignment by UN General Secretary Kofi Annan, the Global Commission on International Migration took up its work in December. Its 19 members are preparing a report on the worldwide consequences of mass migration. The document will be published next summer and will make policy suggestions. Professor Dr. Rita Süssmuth, the German member of the commission, was available for an interview.


[ Interview with Rita Süssmuth ]

What impact does migration have on societies?
All forms of migration have an impact on the socio-cultural and political development of both the countries of destination and of origin. This impact should not be ignored, but should be structured in a beneficial way. Migration changes both the immigrants themselves and the members of the receiving society. For example, both expand their eating and drinking habits, modes of dress, lifestyles, gender roles and knowledge concerning forms of education, religion and of government.


What does this mean for the destination countries?
Destination societies are challenged to perceive these new influences as positive and enriching rather than to insist on traditional ideas of membership to society based purely on territory or descent. This is especially true for ”new” immigration countries. Destination countries depend on immigrants to fill gaps in the labour market which occur for demographic as well as economic reasons.


But even though immigration is economically necessary, not everybody wants to accept it.
It is important that the issue of increasing social diversity is emphasised in the immigration debate. Politicians as well as the media must focus on the positive aspects of immigration in order to avoid fanning flames of discontent, insecurity and intolerance. Migration policy must not be abused as a controversial subject for election campaigning or similar purposes. Even though Diaspora communities often remain excluded from political participation which is available only to the citizens of the destination country, Diaspora communities often make their interests heard in the receiving society through their good organisational and networking skills. All members of a society, including Diaspora communities, should engage in social and political dialogue. All members of society should have the possibility to contribute to the development of the nation in which they live.


What advantages does migration offer to the countries of origin?
There are, for example, economic advantages. In 2003, migrant remittances to developing countries amounted to 93 billion dollars worldwide. That was one and a half times as much the amount of official development aid. These remittances support capacity building, the exchange of information, technology transfer and investment in business. Admittedly, transfer costs account for approximately 15 to 20 percent of all remittances, which is why G8 representatives are considering measures to reduce these costs. Migrants’ remittances support family members who have remained in the countries of origin, enable children to get an education, promote investment, strengthen the purchasing power of the beneficiaries and thus stimulate the local and regional economy. But unequal remittance levels can also provoke conflicts and envy in certain communities, families, etc. Returnees additionally face the risk of resentment from those who remained at home. All temporary labour migration programmes should take such aspects into account.


Are there any expedient initiatives at the national level?
Some projects are being developed. I’ll give a few examples:
– In Canada, financial skills are being promoted among migrants in an effort to encourage them to open bank accounts,
– in France, measures are being taken both to reduce transfer costs and to extend credit facilities to migrants in a “co-development strategy”,
– in the USA, transfer costs for remittances to the Philippines are being reduced,
– in Brazil, the “Federal Economic Bank of Brazil – CAIXA” offers migrants cheaper remittance transaction online to family members and offers possibilities to long term investment in savings accounts, and
– in Mexico, the government, state and municipalities are pledging one dollar to each dollar invested by migrant associations in their municipalities of origin.


Means of communication and transport are becoming better and cheaper all the time – what are the effects?
Diaspora communities have the opportunity of staying closely in touch with their home countries. Transnational communities are evolving and forming cross-border networks. Through contacts and experiences in countries abroad, which often expose transnational communities to new forms of democratic political organisation. These transnational communities can contribute not only to the economic, but also to the socio-cultural and political development of their countries of birth. For instance, development can be transferred through such communities when democratic legal norms are communicated back to countries of origin. Transnational communities are both a cause and result of the changing, “traditional” concept of belonging to one state. A new concept of belonging is emerging in which the country of origin becomes the country of cultural identity, the country of residence becomes the country of rights and obligations, and the transnational community becomes the basis for political activity. The traditional pattern of migration (with emigration and immigration) is expanded to commuter migration, circular migration and repetitive migration, with numerous movements between the countries of origin and destination.

Can illegal migration increase economic development?
Illegal migrants have only limited opportunity to organise and fight for their collective interests. They lack rights and fear being brought to the attention of state authorities. For this reason, illegal migrants do not publicly fight for their rights. Only legal migrants enjoy protection provided by their country of origin in the country of destination. Those migrants categorised as illegal migrants cannot effectively integrate into the receiving society, resultantly, they live in isolation. Due to their fear of detection by state authorities, they are forced to live as inconspicuously as possible. In the case of illegal immigrants, the vigorous exchange and transfer described above is virtually impossible – perhaps with the exception of remittances, which, however, are mainly sent through informal channels. That is, neither the country of origin, the receiving society, nor the migrants themselves can benefit fully from the positive aspects of international migration when immigrants migrate illegally.

Is it possible to outlaw migration?
Restricting legal migration is often linked to a rise in illegal immigration and to increased activities of smugglers. The more a country of destination restricts temporary migrants’ length of stay, and particularly their rights of re-entry, the greater the efforts of immigrants to stay in the country of destination permanently. These issues must be acknowledged and reflected in a balanced immigration policy. A further important factor to be considered in migration management is domestic security – particularly after September 11, 2001. The challenge is to make sure that security measures do not prevent legal and humanitarian migration.

What has to happen for migration to benefit – rather than damage – the development of poor countries?
When trained workers emigrate, there is always the risk that this could lead to a shortage of skilled laborers in their home country. If these workers go abroad permanently, then their home country’s investment in their education represents a net loss for that country. In other words, the country of origin loses their investment in human capital to the host country. However, in some countries workers in certain sectors are trained specifically for the foreign job market and are then “exported”. This may indeed be lucrative for the countries of origin from the point of view of remittances and relief of the domestic job market. At the same time, improvements in the country of origin’s local job market can be postponed through the emigration of skilled workers. Especially when those leave permanently and thus, to some extent, reduce the country’s chances of development and modernisation. The “export ” of skilled workers is vulnerable to changing qualification needs in the destination countries. If integrated approaches to migration management do not link labour migration with development strategies, then brain drain, and in some cases even “youth drain” will remain a constant challenge to countries of immigrant origin.


Under what circumstances does migration of skilled workers mean brain gain rather than brain drain?
Brain gain is possible for countries of origin when skilled workers do not migrate permanently, but, rather take part in temporary or circular migration. Through temporary migration and return to countries of origin, immigrants gain valuable experiences abroad, which they may then utilize upon return.Circular migration must be supported through assisted reintegration, opportunities for renewed migration and promotion of investment in the country of origin. Circular migrants should be able to remain in contact with their country of origin for the duration of their stay abroad. Additionally, contacts with the home country and remittances should be encouraged. Remittance transactions should be simplified and the transaction costs of these lowered to enable the specific use of remittances for investment in the country of origin. A system of migration management must be developed by all countries involved in order to support circular migration and its positive effects. This system should promote strategies for sustainable development in the countries of origin.


In which ways should rich countries change their migration policy?
Rich countries of destination should avoid recruiting skilled labour migrants from the poorer countries that have skilled labor shortages. Neither should they allow low-skilled foreign workers to be underpaid and they should ensure that illegal migrants, who hardly have any rights, are not exploited for their illicit labor. Migration policy should not only react to short-term and unilateral needs, but must set long-term, sustainable and development policy-friendly principles which are helpful to countries of destination and origin, as well as to the migrants themselves. Furthermore, it is vital that countries of destination do not interpret their humanitarian obligations based on their economic needs. They must also recognise the link between restrictions on legal migration and increases in illegal migrants.


What are the main risks and main objections to this?
It is not always easy to gain the support of the general public for migration policy that focuses on the long-term benefits of migration. There is the danger that short-term domestic policy issues become confused with migration issues – for instance, when local short-term unemployment levels are measured against long-term migration objectives such as consistently gaining low numbers of highly skilled workers for long-term economic growth or fulfilling humanitarian obligations through allowing the immigration of refugees. Social unrest and discontent surrounding long-term migration policies in the receiving society can induce politicians to confine themselves to short-term and ad hoc migration policy solutions. It is deplorable when such emotions, which are usually based on insufficient information, are intentionally stirred up in the general public and utilised by political parties during election campaigns.


How is German policy assessed internationally?
Germany’s acceptance of quite remarkable numbers of refugees over an extended period of time – even in proportion to our total population – has received international recognition. Most recently, the passing of the German Immigration Act was of particular international interest. The original text of this immigration reform would have made the new German Immigration Act a role model for other European states. One phenomenon, which is often not understood by the international community was Germany’s self-perception of not being an immigration country. With the immigration reform, this self-perception is being countered.


What migration policies do you recommend to poor countries?
It is important for source countries to conclude bilateral agreements with main destination countries and to offer their citizens a certain degree of protection abroad. Regional alliances are a good way of representing the interests of individual countries and can be used to conceive and implement communal migration policies. To counteract brain drain, it would seem important to promote contacts between the Diaspora communities and their countries of origin, to improve working conditions at home and to inform everyone concerned about the possibilities of legal migration, as well as the dangers of illegal migration. Emigrants should be offered unproblematic options for returning home and re-entering countries of destination, so that countries and regions of origin can benefit from the transfer of knowledge and technology. The migration policy of source countries should also take sustainable development into account.



Website:
http://www.gcim.org


Prof. Dr. Rita Süssmuth
is a member of the Global Commission on International Migration (GCIM) and Chairperson of the Independent Council of Experts on Immigration and Integration, appointed by the German Government in 2002. Before this she headed the Immigration Commission which proposed recommendations to the German government for new immigration legislation. From 1985 to 1988 she was Federal Minister for Family Affairs, Women, Youth and Health and from 1988 to 1998 President of the German Bundestag. From 1987 to 2002 she was a member of the CDU/CSU faction in the German Bundestag.