London: Every spring and summer, when the weather improves, the number of people trying to cross the Mediterranean Sea to Europe increases, sometimes tripling. Alarming images and headlines dominate the front pages, and politicians fuel negative narratives about migration. People migrate for many reasons: safety, work, education, family or adventure. However, politicians prefer to divide migrants into neat categories, such as refugees and economic migrantsThe messy reality is that most people fit into multiple categories at once. This makes it even more difficult for governments to prevent it from happening, try as they might.
Some take a “send them back” approach, similar to the UK’s proposed Rwanda policy. The “cash for migration controls” approach is also popular, effectively turning countries on Europe’s edges into “border guards”. An example of this is the EU’s recent agreement with Tunisia, which has promised 150 million euros (128 million pounds) to promote Tunisia. migration control Attempt.
A saying often heard is that the best way to address migration is to “deal with it”. root causes“- Improve people’s lives in their country of origin so that they are less likely to need or want to migrate in the first place.
This approach proposes giving aid money to poor countries to, for example, help create local jobs and improve schools and health care.
This approach makes sense, and seems more humane and certainly less unpleasant than implementing a Rwanda-style deportation plan. But there is not much consensus on what the root causes of migration actually are, and there is little evidence to show that addressing them actually reduces migration.
At MIGNEX, an EU-funded research project on global migration, I worked with a team of researchers to look at what motivates people to leave their families and communities and move to another country. We looked at 26 communities in ten countries across Africa, Asia and the Middle East, using data from more than 13,000 interviews.
dealing with root causes
People living in poor countries experience many social and economic challenges. These are often discussed as “root causes” – which MIGNEX defines as widely experienced difficulties that are perceived as persistent, immediately threatening, or both, and to which migration is a possible response. .
But what are the most important factors for people to take a big step like leaving home for a new place?
The problem with migration policymaking – which often relies on intuition and guesswork rather than evidence – is a scatter-gun approach that lists a whole range of issues as root causes. An example of this is the European Trust Fund for Africa which funds development projects to promote resilience, economic and equal opportunities, security and development, and eliminate human rights abuses.
Policy makers believe that addressing all these issues will reduce people’s desire to migrate. But often, these assumptions do not hold true. Through our research, we have found that reducing poverty and increasing educational levels can actually increase desires to migrate, because it gives people the means to do so and broadens their horizons.
For example, having a PhD increases migration aspirations by 22 percent compared to those with no formal education.
Addressing other drivers – such as scarce livelihoods and lack of good jobs – may be more effective, but it still takes generations before international migration is no longer desirable.
Creating jobs is also incredibly expensive, for example the World Bank estimates that an investment of the equivalent of £8 million in Tunisia would create a maximum of 300 jobs in the trade and construction sectors, at a cost of £24,000 per job. ,
Instead, what we have found is addressing Corruption The key is to reduce people’s migration aspirations. People living in communities where being asked to pay a bribe for a service is common are 36 percent more likely to have a strong desire to migrate.
Corruption is not just a nuisance but a symptom of deeper and less obvious social challenges. Corruption in hospitals, schools and police forces may indicate low wages, inadequate management and lack of accountability.
For example, in Redef, a declining mining town in the Tunisian desert, high levels of corruption prevent many qualified young people from getting the most desirable jobs, creating an overwhelming sense of hopelessness. Therefore, tackling corruption can improve lives and strengthen people’s confidence to build their future locally rather than looking for opportunities elsewhere.
Aid and migration control
None of this evidence makes efforts by rich countries to help poor countries reduce poverty, create jobs, and expand education any less necessary. These policies remain important in their own right, and often make a significant difference to improving people’s lives and well-being.
Dealing with the root causes of migration is not an easy, short-term solution to stopping migration. Governments allocating aid must separate it from the issue of migration, so that the money can be used for what it is actually intended for: addressing economic, humanitarian, political and security issues.
Meanwhile, any policy response to manage migration must be tailored to the specific local context – people’s concerns and motivations for migration differ from place to place.
Some take a “send them back” approach, similar to the UK’s proposed Rwanda policy. The “cash for migration controls” approach is also popular, effectively turning countries on Europe’s edges into “border guards”. An example of this is the EU’s recent agreement with Tunisia, which has promised 150 million euros (128 million pounds) to promote Tunisia. migration control Attempt.
A saying often heard is that the best way to address migration is to “deal with it”. root causes“- Improve people’s lives in their country of origin so that they are less likely to need or want to migrate in the first place.
This approach proposes giving aid money to poor countries to, for example, help create local jobs and improve schools and health care.
This approach makes sense, and seems more humane and certainly less unpleasant than implementing a Rwanda-style deportation plan. But there is not much consensus on what the root causes of migration actually are, and there is little evidence to show that addressing them actually reduces migration.
At MIGNEX, an EU-funded research project on global migration, I worked with a team of researchers to look at what motivates people to leave their families and communities and move to another country. We looked at 26 communities in ten countries across Africa, Asia and the Middle East, using data from more than 13,000 interviews.
dealing with root causes
People living in poor countries experience many social and economic challenges. These are often discussed as “root causes” – which MIGNEX defines as widely experienced difficulties that are perceived as persistent, immediately threatening, or both, and to which migration is a possible response. .
But what are the most important factors for people to take a big step like leaving home for a new place?
The problem with migration policymaking – which often relies on intuition and guesswork rather than evidence – is a scatter-gun approach that lists a whole range of issues as root causes. An example of this is the European Trust Fund for Africa which funds development projects to promote resilience, economic and equal opportunities, security and development, and eliminate human rights abuses.
Policy makers believe that addressing all these issues will reduce people’s desire to migrate. But often, these assumptions do not hold true. Through our research, we have found that reducing poverty and increasing educational levels can actually increase desires to migrate, because it gives people the means to do so and broadens their horizons.
For example, having a PhD increases migration aspirations by 22 percent compared to those with no formal education.
Addressing other drivers – such as scarce livelihoods and lack of good jobs – may be more effective, but it still takes generations before international migration is no longer desirable.
Creating jobs is also incredibly expensive, for example the World Bank estimates that an investment of the equivalent of £8 million in Tunisia would create a maximum of 300 jobs in the trade and construction sectors, at a cost of £24,000 per job. ,
Instead, what we have found is addressing Corruption The key is to reduce people’s migration aspirations. People living in communities where being asked to pay a bribe for a service is common are 36 percent more likely to have a strong desire to migrate.
Corruption is not just a nuisance but a symptom of deeper and less obvious social challenges. Corruption in hospitals, schools and police forces may indicate low wages, inadequate management and lack of accountability.
For example, in Redef, a declining mining town in the Tunisian desert, high levels of corruption prevent many qualified young people from getting the most desirable jobs, creating an overwhelming sense of hopelessness. Therefore, tackling corruption can improve lives and strengthen people’s confidence to build their future locally rather than looking for opportunities elsewhere.
Aid and migration control
None of this evidence makes efforts by rich countries to help poor countries reduce poverty, create jobs, and expand education any less necessary. These policies remain important in their own right, and often make a significant difference to improving people’s lives and well-being.
Dealing with the root causes of migration is not an easy, short-term solution to stopping migration. Governments allocating aid must separate it from the issue of migration, so that the money can be used for what it is actually intended for: addressing economic, humanitarian, political and security issues.
Meanwhile, any policy response to manage migration must be tailored to the specific local context – people’s concerns and motivations for migration differ from place to place.
