🗊Презентация International Migration is an important aspect of development

International Migration is an important aspect of development. Plan: The interactive nature of migration and globalization. International Migration in Different Economic Eras.

● The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA); ● The International Organization for Migration (IOM); ● The Global Migration Group (GMG); ● financial globalization; ● to foster full respect for the rights of migrants; ● the wage and job opportunities; ● the globalized world; ● difficult living conditions; ● countries as sources or recipients; ● empowerment - расширение прав и возможностей; ● spur – стимулировать; ● unilaterally - в одностороннем порядке; ● disparity – неравенство, несоответствие; ● an uncertain employment outlook (прогноз).

International migration is as old as human history and continues to define and reshape nations, cultures and the day-to-day life of many millions of people. It would be wrong to assert that its impact has always been soft, particularly for local populations, but today it is also increasingly evident that migration consistently benefits countries of destination and origin, as well as migrants themselves.  

In our globalized world, it is important to recognize migration as a key enabler (способствующий) for equitable, inclusive and sustainable social and economic development. However, to fully realize the potential of migration for the creation of wealth, trade, jobs and social empowerment, we need policies that recognize the positive contribution of migrants, protect their human rights and better manage their movements.  

International migration is a complex issue that calls for comprehensive and collaborative solutions. No government can address the migration issue alone. It affects every region, with South-to-South movements as significant as those from South to North. The 2013 United Nations General Assembly High-level Dialogue on International Migration and Development is an opportunity for Member States to lay the foundation for improved local, regional and international migration policies and to highlight the importance of migration in preparing the post-2015 development agenda.

Human mobility is a fact. People have always migrated to adapt to, or escape from, difficulties and disasters, or spurred by dreams of a better life. What has brought particular attention to migration in recent years is the scale and complexity of movements, touching almost all countries around the world, catalyzed by speed of information flow and means of transportation, and the increasing awareness of the countless developmental opportunities and challenges which mobility offers to migrants, their families, communities and societies.  

As our knowledge of the importance of migration for development has grown, so has the international system around migration. Global governance of migration embraces (охватывать) broad infrastructure of State and non-State institutions, policies, laws, practices and partnerships at the national, regional and international level addressing migration issues. This multi-level, multi-actor form of governance has made significant strides (шагать) since the call for more interstate cooperation on migration by the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development.

1994 International Conference on Population and Development: the first responsibility to deal with migration in ways that protect and support their citizens abroad and the migrants within their own borders. However, attempts to manage international migration unilaterally have not been successful and states have turned to international cooperation, ranging from bilateral labor agreements to regional consultative processes on migration and global dialogue platforms.

Migration touches on issues of human rights, development, population, children, family, education, gender, health including reproductive rights and access to reproductive health, environment, trade, labor, economics, social protection, security and social cohesion – to name just the main ones. Just as countries have looked for collaborative approaches at the inter-State level, governments are increasingly pursuing “whole-of-government” approaches domestically. In all of these endeavors States have been supported by, indeed have partnered with, the United Nations system and the International Organization for Migration.

The best outcomes are only possible where migrants and their families are able to exercise their basic rights, so they can move in safety and dignity. The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) The International Organization for Migration (IOM) The Global Migration Group (GMG)  A large range of international organizations and entities inside and outside the United Nations contributed towards this endeavor (стремление). The process cemented consensus among the contributors around migration and revealed the high degree of cooperation that exists between the various entities on the ground.

In previous eras, population movements have taken place side by side with the development of contacts and flows between different societies and cultures. In particular, large human migrations played a fundamental role during the first phase of globalization, which took place between the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In this respect, the present situation is paradoxical, because in a world which is more interconnected than ever, in which financial and trade flows have been liberalized, the mobility of persons runs up against severe barriers which restrict it.

As Tapinos and Delaunay (2000) point out, international migration currently seems to be excluded from the new globalization process. This exclusion is the biggest difference between the new trends in the world economy and the two great previous periods of globalization. This narrow view of “globalization”, leaving out the human mobility factor, raises a threefold question of ethics, political realism and economic effectiveness, as well as the question of the long-term sustainability of this type of world development strategy.

The difficulties placed in the way of migration just at a time when real-time exchanges are being promoted (to which end barriers impeding (препятствующий) the free circulation of goods and ideas are being demolished (разрушены) — reveal (раскрывать) the asymmetrical aspects of a form of globalization which includes some individuals, population groups, countries and regions but at the same time excludes others (Castells, 1999).

Although the number of migrants has always been small compared with the world population, at other times in the past —such as that of the boom in trade which accompanied the first phase of globalization— it nevertheless represented a much larger proportion than the present level of 3%. Clear signs of the limited nature of the present degree of globalization of migration —compared with financial globalization— are that free movement of persons between countries is limited almost exclusively to one region of the world (the European Union) and is the subject of debates and case-by-case negotiations on international agreements aimed at permitting only temporary movements of persons with qualifications directly connected with business or the provision of services.

The fact that most migrants move in spite of the persistent barriers to their entry shows up the incompatibility between the restrictive approaches adopted and a world which is advancing towards growing liberalization of other flows. It is this inconsistency which is largely responsible for the big increase in the number of migrants without official papers and the emergence of migrant transit areas, as well as providing fertile ground for one of the most serious crimes against human rights: the trafficking of persons across frontiers.

Some analyses show that there is an enormous gap between what is generally imagined and what is really the case as regards the magnitude and consequences of immigration. Although sounder and more general evidence is still needed, that which exists is very different from the simple opinions which emphasize the negative repercussions of migration and only serve to heighten prejudices and increase the feeling of rejection against some immigrants.

One example of how great this gap is may be found in a study commissioned by the United States Congress from a broad group of specialists (Smith and Edmonston, 1997). Leaving aside the inherent complexity of the wide range of factors involved, this study concludes that the existing evidence shows that immigration has had a relatively minor impact on the wage and job opportunities of the competing local groups. Immigration affects above all the wellbeing of the immigrants themselves.

In reality, the “condemnation” (осуждение) that popular opinion applies to immigrants has no backing in scientific knowledge (Mármora, 2001). Only very rarely has it been shown that immigrants adversely affect working conditions and social services. Why, then, are prejudices persisting and even sometimes getting worse? The answer to this question calls for profound reflection on aspects going beyond the ambit of migrtion itself.

It is no longer sufficient merely to identify countries as sources or recipients, since it is also necessary to consider those which, because of their geographical position, have become areas of transit towards a final destination, and there has also been a big increase in the number of such destinations.

Furthermore, migration is no longer limited to such a clearly identifiable human group as in the past: the range of the types of persons involved —whose migration affects the social reproduction of their families and the development of their communities of origin— is increasingly broad, and in their places of final destination they establish links with diverse social groups, build up networks of contacts which stretch across national borders, and use different strategies and means for their movements.

The basic determinants of international migration lie in the inequalities which exist in levels of development, and the enormous magnitude (величина) and persistence of those inequalities in the globalized world of today heighten the so-called pressures for migration (UNFPA, 1998).

The very uneven distribution of the benefits offered by the international economy is very evident in the region, whether in terms of the shortcomings in human capital and knowledge, the changes in the role of the State in the social field or, more generally, the structural insufficiencies of development. At the same time, the precarious nature of employment and the heightening of social tensions have given rise to a generalized feeling of social vulnerability in the region; in view of the widespread widespread perception of insecurity,

in view of the risks and defenselessness —reflected in public opinion surveys widely disseminated by the mass media—, emigration is being increasingly seen as an option for coping with difficult living conditions, an uncertain employment outlook, and dissatisfaction with the results of the development pattern. The reduction of social disparities and convergence of economic conditions are fundamental for reducing the incentives for migration in the long term; the countries of the region will have to live with international migration, facing up to its many consequences, but also taking advantage of the opportunities it offers.

The increase in such situations highlights the need to promote broader agreements among countries to secure better governance of international migration, to recognize the fundamental role of civil society in formulating measures regarding human migrations, and to foster full respect for the rights of migrants.

The developed economies have always needed workers from less developed countries. This demand, which is sometimes beyond the immediate influence of business cycles, operates through the establishment of dual labor markets which offer opportunities for the employment of foreign workers at both extremes of the range of skills. In theory, to the extent that the inflow of foreign workers helps to fill the gaps in the domestic supply of labor, migration can be a means of adjustment in the recipient countries, but it can also operate as a factor to keep down wage increases and drive up capital surpluses, and this is basically why local workers are against large scale immigration.

International Migration is an important aspect of development. Plan: The interactive nature of migration and globalization. International Migration in Different Economic Eras.

● empowerment - расширение прав и возможностей; ● spur – стимулировать; ● unilaterally - в одностороннем порядке; ● disparity – неравенство, несоответствие; ● benign – в легкой форме; ● outlook – прогноз; ● deliberate – умышленные; ● scarce – редкий; ● drain – дренаж; ● reinsertion – перепрививка, пере-прошивка.

It is well known that the immigrants with the lowest levels of skills enter the labor markets to occupy jobs that are usually scorned by the local population (in sectors such as primary industries, agriculture or personal services, for example). Through the possibility of reducing labor costs, some employers obtain benefits from such migrant flows.

At the same time, the foreign workers may build up social capital and attain upward occupational mobility. Although there is a demand for these workers and many of them carry out activities which are vital for the expansion of the economy, they are generally subject to strict regulations on migration and in a number of cases these represent barriers to their entry and permanent residence; this causes some migrants to work without the necessary official papers, thus heightening the negative perception of immigration which often exists in the recipient countries.

The migration of skilled workers has other features. Although it is not a new phenomenon, the growing demand in the developed countries for foreign workers with specific skills means that the barriers impeding their mobility need to be reviewed. Those with high qualifications are in a better position to take an active part in such mobility, as reflected in the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), which, among the ways of providing services, includes their provision by natural persons, with emphasis on the temporary movement of skilled personnel.

This General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) provides for quantitative restrictions and additional requirements (such as a work permit), which are a source of controversy in its application —since they involve the consideration of each case separately— the basic idea is that such movements are complementary to trade and allow the developing countries to increase their participation in world trade, which could help in the long run to reduce the incentives for migration (UNFPA, 1998).

The developed countries naturally make deliberate efforts to attract scarce, rare specialists —in some cases this forms part of their human resources policies— and these efforts are welcomed in many segments of the societies of origin of the migrants. Particularly striking is the increase in the demand by those countries for immigrants with increasingly specialized skills —such as those connected with engineering and technology in the general field of information processing— which causes them to offer conditions that cannot be matched by the nations of our region.

The traditional debate on the brain drain, which stresses its negative repercussions —since it is a factor which helps to widen gaps, undermines the formation of critical masses, and affects income distribution—, is now combined with proposals designed to stimulate the circulation and exchange of highly skilled human resources (“brain circulation” and “brain exchange”), with the aim of making migrants into links between the local and global scientific and technological development networks and agents for the transfer of knowledge and technology (Pellegrino, 2000).

From the point of view of the countries of origin, these proposals seek to take advantage of the opportunities opened up by globalization, but their practical application is hindered by the labor flexibility practices of the big corporations, the retention of the most outstanding students in the universities of the developed world, the enormous disparity between the working conditions and salaries offered by the two types of countries, and the absence of suitable environments for the reinsertion of former migrants.

The growing opportunities for individuals abroad are all too obvious compared with the very limited capacity of the developing countries to retain their most highly qualified personnel. However, these opportunities do not always become a reality: many skilled migrants do not succeed in maximizing their benefits because of difficulties in securing official recognition of their qualifications, and in addition to the requirements and limitations on free mobility they face obstacles in finding a suitable place in their countries of destination (such as rules giving priority to local personnel), so that their potential contributions are reduced (UNFPA, 1998).

In some recipient countries, there is a debate on whether the increase in the immigration of professionals and technicians is a factor tending to depress wages among the most highly qualified groups in the labor force: an association of events which was observed in the 1990s among scientists and engineers in the United States (Espenshade and others, 2001).

Although these circumstances bring in a note of caution with regard to the prospects of forming a global market of skilled human resources, they do not detract from the role that these migrants can play in the transfer of technology, and their importance should serve as an incentive to seek best practices —active policies— through which the source countries to make better use of their potential. The creation of employment opportunities —together with permanent training— for highly skilled workers is a priority task on the regional agenda.

Literature & recourses: 1) Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) (http://www.unhcr.ch). 2) R. Perruchoud, “Legal standards for the protection of migrant workers”, paper presented at the Symposium on International Migration in the Americas, San José, Costa Rica, 4-6 September 2000. 3) A. Schmidley and C. Gibson, “Profile of the Foreign-Born Population in the United States, 1997”, Current Population Reports, series P23-195, Washington, D.C., United States Bureau of the Census, 1999 (http://www.census.gov). 4) S. Lapham, The Foreign-Born Population in the United States. 1990 Census of Population, Washington, D.C., United States Department of Commerce, 1993 and Persons of Hispanic Origin in the United States. 1990 Census of Population, Washington, D.C., United States Department of Commerce, 1993. 5) L. Lollock, “The Foreign-Born Population in the United States. Population Characteristics”, Washington, D.C., United States Bureau of the Census, 2001 (http://www.census.gov).