Memorandum submitted by Oxfam GB
SUMMARY
1. Oxfam believes that there is a significant
link between migration and development. Migration is a feature
of our globalising world and can, if properly managed and facilitated,
do three things. First it can have positive effects on the labour
markets, economies and societies of the host countries in the
West. Further, it can provide important sources of finance and
human capital in order to stimulate development in the sending
countries. And finally, it can be an immensely positive experience
for the migrants themselves, above all because of its potential
to improve their incomes and livelihoods, and those of their families.
2. The causal effect between development
and migration is complex and goes both ways. Development characteristics
of both sending and host countries such as income, political stability
and public spending affect the number and characteristics of migrants.
Conversely, migration can have an impact on development. Emigration
can have both positive and negative effects for a developing country,
by reducing unemployment and generating higher local wages, by
causing "brain drain", by generating return of capital
(financial, human and social) that can be invested, by supplying
remittance flows, by promoting stronger trade links.
3. States have a fundamental obligation
under international law to protect refugees, and this must not
be compromised by measures to "manage migration". Measures
to control illegal migration cannot continue to result in a closure
of avenues for refugees to access a territory to claim asylum,
and development and humanitarian assistance must be adequate to
meet the basic needs in safety and dignity of the displaced and
host communities.
4. Within this context Oxfam recommends
that the UK and EU governments reframe their migration policies
to integrate social and economic development in migrants' home
countries with entry and integration in host societies. Within
this there is a case for increasing the legal mobility of labour
as a tool for the development benefit of both sending and host
countries. Migration policy needs to be joined up with asylum,
development, humanitarian, trade and foreign policies in order
both to effectively address the root causes of migration, safeguard
the legal obligations towards forced migrants and ensure the best
and most equitable migration outcome for the individual, host
and sending countries.
5. The increasing feminisation of migration
should be recognised, and a gender analysis should be integral
to any new policies. This should include guaranteeing protection
from exploitation, especially trafficking for the purposes of
forced labour and sexual exploitation, and opening up opportunities
for women to gain work in the UK labour market. Asylum policy
or international assistance to forced migration situations must
take into account the different needs, experiences and causes
of flight of women refugees.
INTRODUCTION
6. Oxfam welcomes the International Development
Committee's inquiry and the opportunity to submit evidence based
on Oxfam's extensive humanitarian and development experience overseas
and in the UK. Our work on forced migration includes programmes
addressing the needs of refugees, internally displaced people
(IDPs) and host communities in conflict and post-conflict situations
around the world. In the UK we undertake advocacy and research
on asylum issues and support refugee organisations. Oxfam has
also carried out research with the Fabian Society into the causes
and consequences of migration between Albania and the UK[89].
7. Migration is a general term to describe
the movement of men and women from their homes for more than just
a visit. It can be temporary, followed by return; or permanent,
with no return. Migration is a highly gendered process, with changing
and differentiated patterns of movement by women and men. Any
study of migration, and policies and programmes to address it,
must be based upon a thorough gender analysis differentiated on
the basis of class, economic position, race and ethnic identity.
8. Voluntary migrants include those moving
for personal or economic reasons. Professionals moving between
wealthy countries to pursue career opportunities fall into this
category, as do those moving from developing countries due to
livelihood insecurities of lack of employment opportunities. Forced
migrants include asylum seekers, refugees and those in need of
other forms of international protection from violence, conflict
and persecution. They also include internally displaced people
(IDPs) who flee for the same reasons as refugees but do not cross
an international border. For the terms of this submission we will
understand forced migrant as IDP, asylum seeker, refugee or person
in need of other international protection, and voluntary migrant
as an economic migrant from a developing country.
9. The debate on migration in the UK has
been negatively cast, with confused and racist myths about "floods"
of "bogus" asylum-seekers, and little rational or well-informed
public, media or political discussion.[90]
Alarmist rhetoric prevails, and economic migrantswhose
very intention is to contribute their labour to the host countryare
portrayed as seeking to abuse the welfare system or as threatening
the employment prospects of indigenous British workers. Refugees
and asylum seekers fleeing violence and persecution are similarly
demonised, with no reference to the receiving state's basic obligation
to protect them. Overall, while migrants do access infrastructure
and public services, there are many economic, social, cultural
and fiscal benefits for receiving countries. Indeed, the evidence
increasingly suggests that migration stimulates the economy, enhances
competitiveness and contributes £2.5 billion a year net to
the UK Treasury[91]
DEVELOPMENT, POVERTY
REDUCTION AND
MIGRATION
What is the predicted pattern and scale of migration
over the next 25 years?
10. Recent data synthesised by international
bodies such as the United Nations (UN), Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the International Organization
for Migration (IOM) suggests an upward trend in international
migration[92].
The total number of people living in a country other than that
of their birth was 175 million in 2000, up from 105 million in
1985; most of this increase occurred in North America and Europe.
Refugees make up 9% of the global migrant total; most of these
are in developing countries, with only three million in developed
countries. The ratio of refugees to local population in some developing
countries is therefore extremely high. For example the ratio of
refugees to 1,000 of local population in Liberia is 87, in Georgia
is 51 and in the UK is 3.2.
11. In terms of forced migration global
trends, predictions are hard to make as large outflows are caused
by unpredictable large scale conflict or human rights abuses.
According to UNHCR the numbers of refugees in the world rose from
2.4 million in 1975 to a peak of 18.2 million at the end of the
cold war in 1993. By 2000, the numbers had declined to 12.1 million[93].
Political rhetoric also suggests that there is a significant year
on year rise in the number of asylum applications made in Europe,
however statistics show that there has been an overall decrease
in the last 10 years and a specific decrease from 1999-2002 of
3.8%[94]
12. This decline does not reflect a decline
in the numbers of people suffering violence and persecution but
a shift in the kind of displacement. With a change in the nature
of the world's conflicts, there has been an increase in internal
displacement. According to the Global Internally Displaced People
(IDP) Project, in the first part of 2002, about 25 million people
were estimated to be internally displaced, up from an estimated
five million in the 1970s and outnumbering refugees by 2 to 1.[95]
13. A new pattern in migration flows is
the rise of "circular" migrationwhen a migrant
moves several times between his/her country of origin and host
country. This requires a redefinition of traditional descriptions
of migration as "permanent" or "temporary",
"immigration" or "emigration", and the use
of policy approaches that respond to these new patterns.
14. A significant trend in international
migration to which we wish to draw attention is that of "human
smuggling" and "trafficking", terms which are often
confused. Human smuggling involves moving people across borders
for profit and although it can be dangerous or abusive essentially
involves the consent of the migrant. Trafficking is non-consensual
and aims at profit from the sexual services or labour of the trafficked
person, elements of violence, exploitation and deception are involved,
such as the trafficking of women for prostitution. Human smuggling
and trafficking constitutes a multi-billion-dollar industry and
is increasingly run by international criminal networks such as
Chinese triads and the Italian mafia. It would appear that as
legal routes to access developed countries are increasingly limited,
so the illegal migration industry proliferates. Figures are almost
impossible to verify but some quote that around 500,000 people,
many of them women and children, are smuggled or trafficked into
Western Europe each year[96]
and that up to two million women and children are trafficked globally
every year.[97]
15. Demographic trends in Europe also have
potential implications in terms of migration policy. Fertility
rates are low and falling across the EU, such that the population
of the EU (including countries that are expected to join by 2007)
is predicted to fall from 482 million today to 454 million in
2050a decline of 6%. Given rising life expectancies, this
implies that the number of pensioners per worker will soar, unless
there is a substantial increase in immigration.
What rules, structures and incentives are needed
to maximise the (development) benefits and reduce the (development)
costs of migration?
16. To maximise the development benefits
of economic migration Oxfam recommends that the UK and EU governments
reframe their migration policies to integrate social and economic
development in migrants' home countries with entry and integration
in host societies.
17. Migrant workers themselves have a highly
vulnerable status and therefore should be entitled to special
protections above existing legislation protecting the rights of
all individuals in the UK. Oxfam therefore calls for the UK Government
to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and
their Families and to take active steps to enforce the protection
of these rights.
18. Sending countries need policies in place
to maximise remittance flows from e«migre«s, promote
the productive use of remittances and return capital, to encourage
return of migrants with capital and to use their overseas citizens
to strengthen trade links.
19. As a host country, the UK should pursue
a policy of positively managed economic migration, especially
for low skilled workers, which creates a legal route of entry
separate from other existing routes, such as asylum, family reunification
or high skill economic migration. This should build upon the steps
which have already been initiated by the Government towards legal
and managed migration for some low-skilled workers. Particular
attention should be paid to opening up opportunities for women
to gain work in the UK labour market, reflecting UK Government
policy of promoting equal opportunities in employment.
Canand shouldaid try to prevent
migration by promoting local development?
20. Migration is a feature of our globalising
world, and will continue to be so. As Oxfam has seen in the case
of Albania, the pressures that drive the movement of people are
immensely powerful and entrenched. It is unrealistic and self-defeating
for the prosperous, industrialised countries to pursue a policy
of preventing immigration: this will merely subvert it into irregular
and increasingly illegal forms of entry and integration. By contrast,
we contend that the development of systems of managed and facilitated
migration are likely prove to be of benefit to both sending and
receiving countries, as well as migrants themselves.
21. Development aid should aim to address
the root causes of poverty and to promote human development as
the key to sustaining social and economic progress as set out
in the Millennium Development Goals. Oxfam welcomes an integrated
approach where aid policies aim to tackle the causes of forced
migration in coordination with appropriate policies for entry
and integration into the host country. However, Oxfam would be
concerned if aid policies were to be used as a conditional mechanism
to prevent migration rather than to ensure that there are development
benefits from migration.
22. For example, in the case of Albania,
from 2002 to 2004, the EU has agreed to spend £49 million
in Albania on border management, policing and judicial reform,
but just £29 million on economic and social development in
Albania[98].
This disparity in aid does little to help Albanians make a decent
living from their land. Many choose instead to migrate to other
countries.
23. Moreover, a great number of migrants
to Europe come from middle-income countries, particularly Central
and Eastern Europe and the Mediterranean basin, because they have
most access to information about the opportunities in rich countries
and can finance the journey.[99]
In many cases it is not a low level of development that causes
emigration, but a lack of opportunities for further growth.
24. Finally, it should be mentioned that
many countries can benefit considerably from having citizens overseas.
The Philippines, for example, have followed a national development
strategy that specifically involves the export of labour, from
which they receive an estimated $7 billion in remittances alone
each year, almost seven times more than overseas aid receipts
and a valuable source of foreign exchange and investment capital.
MIGRANTS AS
A DEVELOPMENT
RESOURCE
The co-development experience of other countries
25. Historically, several European countries
have actively promoted development within their migration policies
(albeit mostly because they wanted temporary migrants to depart
at the end of their visit). For example, the Netherlands has remitted
social funds and security benefits for its migrants, and offered
vocational training for reintegration; France and Belgium have
offered financial premia to departing workers, and Germany has
offered vocational training, salary subsidies and credit subsidies
for those starting businesses on return to their country of origin.
26. One example of a comprehensive co-development
programme has been between Germany and Turkey. A commonly noted
experience of Turkish-German migration is that many "temporary"
migrants became permanent settlers. Nonetheless, return migration
was substantial: approximately two-thirds of guest-workers eventually
went back to Turkey. Remittance flows were also high, and remained
so even after the migration stream had matured. From a development
perspective, outcomes were often positive, although contrary to
expectations the return of workers from Germany did not form an
industrial proletariat as the Turkish authorities had hoped, as
return migrants had a strong preference for small business ownership
and self-employment. Policy interventions which were aligned with
migrants' interests were particularly successful. For example
the German and Turkish governments, the European Resettlement
Fund and the Development Bank of Turkey offered credit assistance
which helped returning migrants establish enterprises such as
the Abara Elektronik factory, which reached sales of over $10
million and a workforce of over 300. [100]
REMITTANCES
What is the importance of remittances for (a)
development and (b) poverty alleviation?
27. Remittances are a key factor in development
and poverty alleviation, as a few statistics highlight:
Remittances to developing countries
are worth almost $80 billion per annum.
They constitute a significant proportion
of GDP for many countries21% in Jordan, 12.3% in El Salvador,
and 8.9% in the Philippines, for example. In Mexico, remittances
equal tourism revenue, while in Colombia they equal half of coffee
revenue.
Remittance flows rank second to Foreign
Direct Investment (FDI) in the overall external financing of developing
countries.
Remittances can reach a wide proportion
of the population in the sending country: in El Salvador approximately
75% of households receive them.
28. Remittances are useful both from macro
and micro perspectives, as a source of foreign exchange, and as
a boost to household incomes. They may be used for consumption,
investment, and as a form of insurance. Although there has been
criticism that spending remittances on consumption is "unproductive",
this is counter to evidence. For example, expenditures on housing
and education may be counted as consumption, whereas in developing
countries they should really be understood as investment. Moreover,
when migrant households satisfy their more immediate consumption
needs, they typically devote more of their income to non-consumption
items.
29. Remittances are especially beneficial
to low income developing countries. They form a greater share
of GDP for low income than for middle income countries (1.9% vs.
0.8%)[101]
They are spread more evenly across countries than aggregate capital
flows. And they are the most stable source of external finance,
in some cases even being counter-cyclical and buffering economic
shocks, as migrants tend to send more money home in difficult
periods, and more workers emigrate.
How can the developmentespecially job-creatingoutcomes
of remittances and return financial capital be maximised?
30. The most important criteria for the
productive use of remittances (as indeed of any type of capital
flow) are a good investment climate and adequate infrastructure.
This includes stable exchange rates, low inflation, the absence
of excessive bureaucracy and corruption but also reliable power,
decent roads and other communications. This is obviously challenging
for many labour-exporting countries since many people often emigrate
precisely because of the weak economic climate at home.
31. Governments can also promote financial
instruments targeted specifically at migrants. In South Asia,
for example, Non-Resident Indians accounts, Pakistan's Bonus Voucher
Scheme and FX Bearer Certificates, and Bangladesh's Wage Earners
Scheme have offered high interest rates for foreign currency accounts.
In the Zacetas scheme in Mexico, authorities encourage investment
of remittances by matching each dollar returned from the US with
three extra dollarsone from the municipality, one from
the state, and one from the federal government.
32. Reducing the costs of getting abroad
can also be beneficial, so that migrants do not spend years repaying
loans that financed the original journey. This can be done both
by sending countries supervising recruitment agencies, and receiving
countries making the entry process easier and more transparent.
Increasing the legal avenues of entry is essential so that migrants
are not pushed into the hands of criminal, costly and hazardous
smuggling networks. Lastly, migrant associations and hometown
associations can help channel remittances and capital into investments
specifically designed to benefit the migrants' communities of
origin.
How can the "transaction costs" of remittances
be reduced?
33. This is a crucial question, since fixed
transfer charges and foreign exchange fees can reduce remittance
values by 15-20%, and clearance of migrants' cheques can frequently
take several weeks.[102]
Financial services are largely provided by the private-sector
but governments can intervene to encourage a better provision
of services for migrants. Some possibilities for reducing transaction
costs are:
Migrants are often deterred from
sending remittances through formal channels by the difficulties
of opening bank accounts. Relaxing minimum balance or personal
identification requirements could help.
Some US-based transfer agencies now
offer free telephone cards for the purpose of confirming receipt
of remittances. The International Remittance Network links credit
union cooperatives (eg of unionised agricultural workers) with
Citibank branches in the United States and Latin America, charging
just $6.50 per transfer, compared to an average of $20-30 by the
big companies.
Some remittance-receiving banks make
a particular effort to design packages suited to migrants, such
as the "My family, my country, my home" programme run
by Banco Solidario in Ecuador, which provides loans to migrants
returning from Spain, to set up small businesses and buy property.
Governments can work with migrants
associations to increase the transparency of commissions, fees
and exchange rates that financial institutions provide.
Where bank branches are thinly spread
in developing countries, partnerships between banks and the government
post office network may be effective.
34. It is worth noting that, where they
work well, financial institutions for migrants can have a positive
impact on development beyond merely transferring money. Using
banks for remittances may introduce poor people to financial services
for the first time, encouraging the growth of the financial sector.
BRAIN DRAIN
VERSUS BRAIN
GAIN
Do skills acquisition/preferential quota systems
in Europe strip developing countries of their talent?
35. This has been a principal concern for
some time, particularly in the medical profession. Nelson Mandela
memorably called upon the UK in 1997 to stop poaching nurses from
South Africa. The UK does have an ethical code that covers recruitment
of medical professionals from developing countries, although it
could be more rigorously enforced.
36. It is also true that the majority of
legal migrants to the industrialised world are educated88%
of migrants to the OECD have a secondary education, and two-thirds
of those also have a tertiary education. However, the proportion
of highly educated people that actually leave developing countries
is relatively low indicating that the "brain drain"
is not as severe as has been feared.
37. There can also be benefits from allowing
the emigration of skilled workers. First, they send higher remittances
and are more likely than unskilled workers to return with new
skills. Second, a country with an educated diaspora can see so-called
"network effects", ie stronger business contacts, investment
links and technological assistance from its overseas citizens.
Third, returns to education in developing countries are typically
low, reducing the incentive to invest in human capital. If people
believe that education brings a chance of finding work abroad,
there may be more investment in education, to an extent that gains
to average education outweigh the losses from the departure of
the top 10%.
Do returning migrants bring with them skills and
capital, and thereby build capacity?
38. There are many individual cases of migrants
using the skills they have acquired overseas positively. From
Oxfam's experience in Albania, we have seen that some migrants
working in the agricultural sector in Greece have returned to
use these skills to increase their own vegetable production and
train other farmers. Moreover, there is more to human capital
than mere formal skills. Simply by exposing people to new ideas,
migration can have a profound impact on social and cultural patterns,
as well as economic activitiesin both sending and receiving
countries.
39. However, while return migrants do typically
bring financial capital, the overall evidence on human capital
is unfortunately fairly unfavourable, especially for low-skilled
migrants. Early studies of guestworkers returning from Germany
to Turkey suggest that less than 10% had received any useful training
whilst abroad[103],
while recent research confirms it for Thailand where, among 424
male returnees, "scarcely 2% took occupations which might
have imparted new skills"[104].
Regrettably, a low level of skill acquisition is perhaps unsurprising,
given that host employers are often trying to fill low-paid, unattractive
positions that domestic workers will not accept. Even in the cases
where skilled workers are required, they often do not work to
their full potential.
How important is the mobility of lower-skilled
workers?
40. The mobility of service-supplying and
low-skilled workers is crucial to developing-country interests.
For instance, despite the movement of cross-border electronic
commerce, almost two-thirds of India's exports are supplied through
the temporary movement of labour to clients overseas. Restrictions
on movement hamper the development of markets for Indian firms.
More broadly, barriers to the movement of labour, which are far
higher for unskilled than skilled workers, cost developing countries
billions of dollars. According to one estimate, a movement of
labour from developing to developed countries equivalent to 3%
of the industrialised world's workforce would generate $200 billion
annually[105].
Much of this would flow directly to developing countries in the
form of remittances, balancing the deficit on financial and other
services. Moreover, the money would be concentrated directly in
the hands of workers, with obvious benefits for poor communities.
41. Oxfam recommends that the UK pursue
a policy of positively managed economic migration for low-skilled
workers to ensure that developing countries also benefit from
the opportunity of their citizens working abroad. Within this,
Oxfam recommends that:
Entry criteria should be flexible
enough to allow migrants to adjust to the prevailing labour market
and social conditions within the UK, and for their personal migration
projects to be realised.
The UK Government should establish
a comprehensive support and education system for migrants on arrival
in the UK, aimed at educating migrants about the UK labour market,
their legal rights and obligations as workers, advice and support
on finding a job, how to access services, general social and cultural
information about the UK, and English language teaching.
What will be the role of GATS Mode 4, temporary
movement of natural persons?
42. Looking at movement of labour in the
WTO context highlights how current regulations of the international
economy are biased in the interests of industrialised countries.
Free flows of capital are promoted fiercely, because most capital
comes from rich countries, whereas free movement of labourwhich
could have huge benefits for developing countriesis effectively
outlawed. The weak commitments made by OECD countries under GATS
Mode 4 make this discrepancy clear.
43. Unsurprisingly, many developing country
governments are extremely anxious for industrialised countries
to extend their GATS Mode 4 commitments. Only 17% of commitments
relate to low-skilled workers, despite these constituting the
majority of workers in developing countries, and economic needs
tests (ENTs) are fundamentally against the spirit of international
trade. Members cannot refuse to import foreign goods on the grounds
that domestic substitutes are available, nor does TRIPS allow
governments to refuse to award patents because the local economy
"does not need them". From a developing country perspective,
ENT provisions should at least be made more transparent, preferably
harmonized across countries, and ideally removed altogether, save
for temporary safeguards which would be equivalent to those applied
to trade in goods. Finally, the absence of GATS provisions on
the rights of migrant workers stands in stark contrast to WTO
disciplines on infringements of intellectual property rights.
44. Clearly, GATS Mode 4 commitments can
be extended to give wider benefits to developing countries. Still,
changes in GATS provisions alone would be an insufficient response
to the pressures for development-friendly migration. Mode 4 does
not cover natural persons seeking access to an industrialised
country labour market independently of their service-supplying
employer; nor does it address permanent settlement, or encourage
greater sending of and productive use of remittances and return
capital, or any of the other policies which would help developing
countries to benefit from migration. Improvement to Mode 4 should
therefore be seen as one aspect of a wider strategy for making
migration development-friendly.
45. Oxfam is broadly supportive of the position
of developing countries which propose that the temporary migration
of natural persons be included in the WTO General Agreement on
Trade in Services. This would reduce the double standards in the
current global system which restricts on movement of labour in
contrast with the philosophy of free movement of capital which
industrialised countries espouse.
CONFLICT, REFUGEES
AND MIGRATION
Can aid prevent violent conflicts and reduce the
number of international asylum seekers?
46. Whether or not, or how effectively aid
can prevent conflict is a complex question. It is however widely
assumed that poverty and underdevelopment somehow precipitate
conflict and that therefore aid can prevent conflict. Research
by Oxfam International and Amnesty International into the global
arms trade has drawn the vicious circle between poverty and conflict[106].
As per capita income halves, the risk of civil war roughly doubles[107]
and a typical civil war leaves a country 15% poorer, with around
30% more people living in absolute poverty[108].
47. There is a clear link between violent
conflict and the flight of people to seek refuge in other countries.
Recent research has shown that conflict and/or repression or discrimination
of minorities is a common feature in the top 10 countries of origin
of asylum seekers to EU countries[109].
A current example is the ongoing conflict in the Democratic Republic
of Congo (DRC)the source of more than 2.4 million uprooted
people at the end of 2002, including 2 million or more internally
displaced persons and nearly 410,000 refugees and asylum seekers.
An estimated quarter of a million people newly fled their homes
during the year 2002.[110]
48. However, it is important to recognise
firstly that not all those fleeing violent conflict become asylum
seekers, and secondly that violent conflict is not the only reason
that people flee their home and seek asylum elsewhere.
49. Asylum seekers are by definition internationalthey
are people who cross an international border to request protection
in the territory of another state. But in cases of mass movement
in extreme violent conflict, for example the crises in the Balkans
and Great Lakes, many become "de facto" refugees and
never enter the asylum decision-making process of a state. Also,
vast numbers of those who flee do not cross an international border
to become refugees or asylum seekers but are internally displaced
people (IDPs). There are approximately 25 million IDPs worldwide,
outnumbering refugees by two to one. In April 2002, it was estimated
that there were 1.3 million people internally displaced by the
conflicts in Indonesia and nearly 300,000 displaced by the conflict
in Chechnya.[111]
50. It is also evident that violent conflict
is not the sole cause of flight for asylum seekers claiming Convention
refugee status or other forms of international protection, such
as humanitarian or temporary protection. Conflict is included
as grounds for granting asylum under regional refugee conventions
(the Cartagena and OAU conventions) but the 1951 UN Refugee Convention
definition of a refugee is someone who has fled their country
"owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons
of race religion, nationality, membership of a particular social
group or particular social group or political opinion"[112]
These kinds of human rights abuses by state or non-state actors,
which are often though not necessarily linked to violent conflict,
are key push factors for refugees.
51. It is therefore essential that in order
to comprehensively address the question of forced migration through
aid, both root causes and forms of displacement be understood
more broadly. Aid must also not only be targeted at preventing
or resolving those violent conflicts that produce significant
numbers of people seeking asylum in donor states, but at all situations
of persecution that result in forced migration. Oxfam's analysis
of the funding for the UN Consolidated Appeals for humanitarian
emergencies in July 2003, highlighted a clear skewing of aid towards
emergences in the political spotlight. Approximately $17 per capita
of people in need was committed for DRC, in Chechnya $11 and in
Indonesia $7, where as in Iraq it was $74[113].
Any further skewing of aid according to migration management priorities
of donor states would be unacceptable.
What are the differences in developmental terms
between voluntary economic and forced migration?
52. The difference between forced migration
and voluntary economic migration in legal and humanitarian terms
is fundamental to understanding the development factors associated
with their migration. There are many categories of both forced
and economic migrant and much overlap and the distinction between
economic and persecutory push factors can be blurred, as what
may have begun as a voluntary movement can become forced and vice
versa. For example, the trafficking of women, girls and boys is
at the extreme end of the migration continuum representing forced
movement for exploitative labour.
53. According to the 1951 Refugee Convention
and other regional instruments a refugee is someone fleeing persecution
or violence and is therefore entitled to protection in another
country. Others fleeing for reasons not specified within the 1951
Convention, such as widespread conflict may be eligible for other
forms of humanitarian or temporary protection. IDPs flee for the
same reasons as refugees but are unable to cross an international
border. Voluntary migrants move for economic reasons and are not
entitled to humanitarian protection under law. There are of course
areas at the "migration asylum nexus' where the two categories
overlap, for example persecution of minorities such as the Roma
in Eastern Europe has a strong dimension of economic exclusion.
54. There are different development dimensions
within as well as between the two groups. For forced migrants,
development factors may contribute to the immediate cause of flight,
may cause onward or secondary movement from the first country
to which they flee, and are central in the realisation of durable
solutions, particularly integration and repatriation.
55. In terms of impact on the host country
and contribution to the country of origin from abroad, key factors
underlying difference are that forced migrants move first and
foremost to find protection, not economic opportunities, their
flight is unplanned, they are suddenly severed from their livelihoods
and often deprived of the means to a livelihood in the host state.
In the UK for example, asylum seekers are prohibited from working.
This is because of political perception that this is a pull factor[114],
opinion which is disproved by Home Office research. Oxfam believes
that the right to work for refugees and asylum seekers is a central
part of ensuring a life with dignity and can bring significant
economic and social benefits to the individual and to the host
community.
56. In developing countries the impact on
the host country also depends on the scale of the migration. A
mass influx of refugees to a neighbouring country can have a extremely
negative development impact as already stretched local resources,
including water, land and firewood, are put under extreme pressure,
particularly where international humanitarian assistance falls
short of the levels necessary to meet the basic needs of the refugee
population. Oxfam's experience in displacement settings across
the world has shown that hosting large numbers of refugees has
a real impact on the resources and stability of local populations.
In Western Pakistan our programme found that the establishment
of camps hosting Afghan refugees resulted in a drain on water
supplies and exacerbated violence among local warring factions.
57. As an additional development impact,
mass departure from communities has a significant demographic,
hence developmental, impact on the remaining population, particularly
women and the elderly whose livelihoods are often already suffering
from the effects of conflict.
58. Return of forced and voluntary migrants
also has different development implications. In the case of refugees
or IDPs they may choose to return to their homes once the threat
to their lives or safety has passed. In many cases this involves
the return of large numbers to a country or region in an immediate
post-conflict phase where infrastructure and livelihoods have
been destroyed and basic resources are scarce, as for example
in Afghanistan.
SOUTH-SOUTH
MIGRATION
Does aid to those countries which border conflict
areas act as a pull factor and increase the number of refugees?
59. Refugees fleeing violence and persecution
to neighbouring countries are severed from their means of subsistence
and have a right to protection, including safety, dignity, durable
solutions and the fulfilment of their basic needs including shelter,
food and water. The flight to a neighbouring country is a forced
and spontaneous one in the face of danger. As many neighbouring
countries are themselves underdeveloped and often suffering from
the effects of conflict, it is impossible for them to meet the
needs of significant numbers of refugees without international
assistance.
60. The poor conditions for refugees in
neighbouring countries serve as a strong counter-indication to
the assertion that aid is a pull factor. Indeed in some cases
conditions have proved so dire that refugees have been faced with
the choice of returning home to face violence and conflict or
remaining in the neighbouring country to face starvation and disease.
Oxfam continues to witness situations where basic provision fall
well below the Sphere minimum standards for humanitarian response[115].
This is well illustrated by the situation for over 500,000 Burundian
refugees in Tanzania. The entire refugee population in camps is
dependent on monthly food distribution for its nutritional needs
as movement is restricted to a four kilometre zone around the
camps. Until recently the World Food Programme was forced to cut
basic food rations by 50% due to inadequate donor support. Over
the past five years the UNHCR budget has been cut by 38%[116].
Conditions for Afghan refugees at the Pakistan border present
a similar situation of insecurity and inability to meet basic
needs.
61. Whilst in many situations lack of basic
provisions is a result of assistance shortfalls, in others cases
states have taken the deliberate and unacceptable measure of cutting
off assistance including food, in order to coerce refugees to
leave. There has been evidence in a number of situations that
this has been used in combination with other means of coercing
refugees to return home to an uncertain and potentially unsafe
situation. Oxfam's experience showed that when the Government
of Indonesia cut off already inadequate aid to East Timorese refugees
in West Timor, the result was not only increased returns, but
also a worsening health status of the remaining refugee population,
and further pressure on host community resources.
62. There are evidently sensitivities around
the provision of aid to refugees in regions where the basic needs
of the local population are often unmet. UNHCR's Agenda for Protection,
a global set of goals for all actors involved in refugee protection,
calls for refugee issues to be anchored within national and regional
and multilateral development agendas and for states "to consider
allocating development funds, possibly a percentage thereof to
programmes simultaneously benefiting refugees and the local population
in host countries."[117]
DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION
AND POLICY
ON MIGRATION
How consistent (in both a national and international
context) are donor government's approaches to migration with their
policies on development cooperation, humanitarian relief and refugee
protection?
63. Migration policy, asylum policy, development,
humanitarian trade and foreign policy need to be joined up in
order both to effectively address the root causes of migration,
safeguard legal obligations towards refugees and ensure the best
and most equitable migration benefits for sending and hosting
states and the individual. However, to date donor government's
resolve to combat illegal migration has not been matched with
similar commitments to assume responsibilities and international
obligations to tackle the root causes and rights of the displaced.
64. Many donor governments' deterrence-focussed
preoccupation with "migration management" has to date
been notably at odds with their international obligations of refugee
protection. One illustrative area is that of border controls and
interception. Significant resources have been channelled towards
EU and member states agreements in this area at both a bi-lateral
and multi-lateral level prompting fears that they fail to adequately
incorporate human rights and refugee protection safeguards[118].
In the run up to enlargement, the EU spent £145 million on
enhancing border controls but only £7 million on improving
asylum systems in accession countries.[119]
Recent research for the UK Home Office stated that there was "strong
circumstantial evidence that visa, border, carrier and interceptions
measures aimed at preventing access to the EU has led to "growing
trafficking and illegal entry of bona fide asylum seekers"[120]
placing them in the hands of smugglers, often stopping them from
reaching a country to claim asylum and fuelling the illegal migration
networks that European policies aim to combat.
65. Also policies on development cooperation
and humanitarian relief markedly at odds with other areas of policy
that influence root causes of economic and forced migrationie
trade policy and arms policy respectively. In a linking of the
two issues, a recent agreement between Italy and Libya on combating
irregular migrants stipulates that Italy provide financial support
to assist Libya in combating illegal migration. It has been reported
that Italy is also urging EU partners to ease the restriction
on the sale of military equipment to Libya so as to provide this
country with more sophisticated materials to combat illegal immigration.[121]
66. Since the early 1990's there have been
calls at the EU level for coordinated policies in order to address
the causes of forced migration. The cross-pillar High Level Working
Group on Asylum and Migration was an initial move towards this,
but its "action plans' have been widely criticised for their
focus on migration control rather than human rights or refugee
protection, a lack of consultation with countries concerned, and
a failure to generate follow-up actions.
67. The debate around integrating migration
into EU external relations has also prompted criticism, particularly
around suggestions that development assistance to third countries
may be made conditional on "migration cooperation" ie
readmission, interception measures, and other means of preventing
outward and onward movement. These were evident in proposals at
the June 2002 Seville EU Summit and also in the drafting process
of the EU Commission's December 2002 Communication on "Integrating
Migration in the European Union's Relations with Third Countries'.
In negotiations around the latter document tensions were evident
between the departments for development cooperation and humanitarian
aid, and the DG for justice and home affairs, the former calling
for aid to be targeted towards the root causes of displacement,
and the latter arguing that development aid can be a useful tool
to combat irregular movement, and return irregular migrants.
68. Whilst the final Seville Summit Conclusions
talk of "not jeopardising development cooperation objectives'
and the Commission Communication calls for an "incitative"
rather "penalising" approach to migration cooperation,
Oxfam would caution against any future aid conditionality, either
direct or indirect, or the adoption of measures that would run
counter to commitments to address root causes.
Should DFID adopt a less neutral approach and
develop a policy on development-friendly migration? If so, how
should it fit with DFID's own Country Assistance Strategies and
how should DFID promote such a policy across government?
69. By ignoring the potential benefits of
migration flows to developing countries, a neutral approach denies
one of the major potential sources of development. In the meantime,
migration policies made by other government departments have implications
for development. DFID should engage with these policies, for example
by working with the Home Office to make the new temporary migration
schemes development-friendly, and by bringing a protection perspective
to the debate on refugees and asylum seekers. Challenging some
of the negative myths about migrants would also help. DFID's Country
Assistance Strategies should analyse and aim to address the root
causes of migration, especially forced migration, and support
sending countries to provide a policy environment which maximises
the development benefits of migration.
GENDER AND
MIGRATION
70. While many suggest that there is an
increasing feminisation of migration, others suggest that women
already made up 46.6% of the global total of international migrants
in 1965 and that the issue is more that women are less visible
and over-represented in undocumented migration[122].
It is also important to realise that women are increasingly migrating
as independent or at least semi-independent agentsin contrast
to the past when they were seen purely as the "followers'
of their male relatives who were the "primary" migrants.
71. An important dimension of undocumented
migration is the smuggling and trafficking of women, primarily
as domestic workers and for forced labour and sexual exploitation.
The migration of "Third World" or East European women
to work as domestic helpers in wealthy countries has been a major
growth area since the 1980s. Usually these women migrate on their
own or are the principal wage-earners for themselves and their
families but they can be particularly vulnerable to isolation
and exploitation. For example, Oxfam's work in the Lebanon suggests
that many migrant women from Sri Lanka and the Philippines are
denied their rights, beaten by their employers, forced to work
long hours and had their passports taken away. Protection should
therefore be guaranteed for the increasing number female migrants
working as domestic or care workers and those who are vulnerable
to trafficking.
72. Gender affects all aspects of a migrant's
experience, from the initial decision to migrate (eg at which
stage of life and in which capacity), to experience in the labour
market (recruitment, working conditions), the sending and use
of remittances, the decision to return, and the change in social
position caused by migration. At its best, the migration experience
has the potential to challenge existing social norms and rigid
hierarchical structures, expanding the opportunities of previously
restricted groups. This is true for household behaviour and the
social position of women. For example, many women interviewed
during the Albanian research left to pursue a more free and rewarding
life in a less patriarchal environment. Particular attention should
therefore be paid to opening up opportunities for women to gain
work in the UK labour market, reflecting UK Government policy
of promoting equal opportunities in employment.
73. UNHCR estimates that in any refugee
population approximately 50% are women and girls. Women and men
are affected differently at every stage of the forced migration
chain including reasons for flight, vulnerability on their journey,
procedures and provisions in the country of refuge and long-term
solutions. In camp situations in region of origin donors and agencies
must ensure that the rights, needs and vulnerabilities of refugee
women and girls are taken into account. In industrialised countries,
including EU member states, there is a notable lack of disaggregated
data on refugee or asylum seeking women, which indicates a more
entrenched gender-blindness. Oxfam calls on governments in these
countries, including the UK to ensure that asylum systems, including
determination procedures and reception provisions are adequately
tailored to the particular needs and experiences of female asylum
seekers.
SUMMARY OF
RECOMMENDATIONS
Oxfam recommends that the UK and
EU governments reframe their migration policies to integrate social
and economic development in migrants' home countries with entry
and integration in host societies.
Oxfam calls for the UK Government
to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and
their Families and to take active steps to enforce the protection
of these rights.
UK should continue to pursue a policy
of positively managed economic migration, especially for low skilled
workers, which creates a legal route of entry separate from other
existing routes, such as asylum, family reunification or high
skill economic migration.
Entry criteria should be flexible
enough to allow migrants to adjust to the prevailing labour market
and social conditions within the UK, and for their personal migration
projects to be realised.
The UK Government should establish
a comprehensive support and education system for migrants on arrival
in the UK, aimed at educating migrants about the UK labour market,
their legal rights and obligations as workers, advice and support
on finding a job, how to access services, general social and cultural
information about the UK, and English language teaching.
Oxfam would be concerned if aid policies
were to be used as a conditional mechanism to prevent migration
rather than to ensure that there are development benefits from
migration.
Oxfam is broadly supportive of the
position of developing countries which propose that the temporary
migration of natural persons be included in the WTO General Agreement
on Trade in Services.
Investment in conflict prevention
should be targeted according to need rather than in order to reduce
numbers of asylum seekers in donor countries.
Oxfam does not support the view that
provision of basic humanitarian assistance in countries neighbouring
conflict is a pull factor. The threat to cut aid should never
be used as a migration management tool to deter or return refugees.
Migration policy, asylum policy,
development, humanitarian trade and foreign policy need to be
joined up in order both to effectively address the root causes
of migration, safeguard legal obligations towards refugees and
asylum seekers and ensure the best and most equitable migration
benefits for sending and hosting states and the individual.
Oxfam calls for particular attention
should be paid to opening up opportunities for migrant women to
gain work in the UK labour market, reflecting UK Government policy
of promoting equal opportunities in employment.
The rights, needs and vulnerabilities
of refugee women and girls must be an integral and active consideration
in humanitarian assistance and in asylum systems of the UK and
other developed countries.
November 2003
89 Exploding the Migration Myths: Analysis and Recommendations
for the European Union, the UK and Albania. R King, N Mai, M Dalipaj.
Oxfam and Fabian Society. Back
90
See Ronald Kaye: "Blaming the victim" in Russell King
and Nancy Wood (eds) Media and Migration: Constructions of
Mobility and Difference. London: Routledge, 2001, pp. 53-70. Back
91
See Sarah Spencer Mousetraps are not enough The Guardian
Oct 28th, 2003; Sarah Spencer (ed.) Back
92
Exploding the Migration Myths: Analysis and Recommendations for
the European Union, the UK and Albania. R King, N Mai, M Dalipaj.
Oxfam and Fabian Society. Back
93
UNHCR The state of the world's refugees: In Search of solutions,
OUP, 1995, UNHCR, Global Report 2000. Geneva. Back
94
UNHCR: asylum applications lodged in industrialised countries:
levels and trends 2000-02, UNHCR statistical yearbook 2001. Back
95
Internally Displaced People: A global Survey. Norwegian Refugee
Council, 2002. Back
96
Hugo: op cit, p 49; Salt and Hogarth: op cit, p 31. Back
97
IOM: World Migration Report 2000, p 46 Back
98
Albania: Country Strategy Paper 2002-06 & Multi-Annual Indicative
Programme (MIP) 2002-04, European Community Cards Programme,
30 November 2001 Back
99
John Salt, "International Migration and the United Kingdom:
Recent Patterns and Trends", December 2001, p 126. Back
100
Bimal Ghosh, "Return Migration: Reshaping Policy Approaches"
in Return Migration: Journey of Hope or Despair? ed. Ghosh (Geneva:IOM
2000), 185. Back
101
Dilip Ratha, "Ch 7: Workers' Remittances: An Important and
Stable Source of External Development Finance", in "Global
Development Finance 2003-Striving for Stbility in Developmnet
Finace" World Bank (2003) p 158. Back
102
Ref: Donald Terry. Back
103
Paine (1974), cited in Russell King, "Generalisations from
the History of Return Migration," in Return Migration: Journey
of Hope or Despair? Ed Bimal Ghosh (Geneva: IOM, 2000). Back
104
Ref: Sussangkarn and Chaiamong (1996), cited in Ghosh. Back
105
Rodrik, D. "Immigration Policy and the Welfare State",
paper presented at the Conference on Immigration Policy, Trieste,
23 June 2001 cited in "Rigged Rules and Double Standards:
trade, globalisation, and the fight against poverty". Oxfam
International 2002. Back
106
Shattered Lives: The case for tough International Arms Control.
Oxfam International and Amnesty International 2003. Back
107
Development and Peace, Paul Collier, in Global Future, First Quarter
2003. Back
108
The global menace of local strife, The Economist, 24 May 2003. Back
109
States of Conflict: Causes and patterns of forced migration to
the EU and policy responses. Stephen Castles, Heaven Crawley and
Sean Loughna, IPPR 2003. Back
110
USCR World Refugee survey 2003. Back
111
Internally displaced people a global survey, Norwegian Refugee
Council 2002. Back
112
Article 1A (1), 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. Back
113
Beyond the Headlines: An agenda for action to protect civilians
in neglected conflicts. Oxfam International 2003. Back
114
See UK Nationality Immigration Act 2002. Back
115
Sphere Project. Humanitarian Charter and Minimum standards in
Disaster Response. Geneva 2003. Back
116
Evidence compiled by Oxfam GB humanitarian staff in Tanzania. Back
117
UNHCR Agenda for Protection. 6 June 2002. A/AC.96/965/Add.1. Back
118
Refugee Council's response to the House of Lords Select Committee
on the European Union's enquiry into New Approaches to the Asylum
process. www.refugeecouncil.org.uk. Back
119
???????? Back
120
An assessment of the impact of asylum policies in Europe 1990-2000;
R Zetter, D Griffiths, S Ferretti, M Pearl. June 2003. Back
121
Migration Policy Group, Migration News Sheet, August 2003, p 8. Back
122
Annie Phizacklea: Migration and globalization: a feminist perspective,
in Khalid Koser and Helma Lutz (eds): The New Migration in
Europe. London: Macmillan, 1998, pp 21-38, ref p 22. Back
|