Introduction
Migration entails relocating from one place to the other. The relocation takes place for a number of reasons. More specifically, international migration occurs under instances where people cross state or national borders to settle in the host territory for a given duration of time (Newland 332). When this phenomenon occurs at a large scale, then it is referred to as global migration. As such, global migration can be viewed as the movement of people from one country to another on a worldwide scale (Newland 333).
According to Newland, the number of migrants has risen sharply in the recent past (332). For example, 214 million persons moved around the world in 2010 (Newland 332). The figure was approximately twice that recorded in 1965 (Newland 332). In addition, the scale of international migration is expected to grow more between now and 2050 (Marchi 323).
The expansion in international movement of people is expected to grow further due to the increasing demographic disparities. Other factors associated with this rise include shifting global economic and political dynamics. Technological innovations, social networks, environmental changes and other factors are also expected to facilitate the increase in international migrations.
The current study is written against this background of international movement of persons. In the paper, the author explores issues related to contemporary global migration with particular focus on governance. The study explores causes of international migration, governance of this form of movement, and failure of policies formulated to address it.
The growing number of migrants in the world highlights the importance of this and similar studies. Many immigrants are vulnerable and are exploited by external agents for a number of reasons. In addition, they are poorly protected by international institutions and individual states.
The Status of International Migration of Persons
The movement of persons across borders comes with both benefits and costs. The implications apply to both the migrants and the locals. For example, it can generate substantial gains in the economic sector given that the migrants are a source of low cost labour. However, a proper framework and well defined governance of global relocation of people is lacking.
For instance, it is a fact that moving into the developed countries is of benefit to people from underdeveloped nations. However, in spite of this, the relocation can significantly retard development back at home. The host nations may also be affected by wage pressures due to the influx of immigrants (Marchi 324).
The growing rate of global migration raises a number of pertinent issues. It is important to address these problems if the benefits of this movement are to be realised. They range from social to economic and political issues. One of the major issues entails governance in relation to international movement of persons.
Other issues include the status of the migrants in the society, globalisation of labour markets, and implications on local, regional, and international laws. Norms and human rights are additional factors that have to be taken into consideration in relation to international migration. All these problems arise in the context of the interconnected world. Currently, the issues shape the policy agenda, as well as the global architecture.
A coherent approach in relation to the formulation and implementation of migration policies is lacking at the global level (Aderanti 5). The increasing movement of people between international borders calls for changes in the current global governance structures. Apparently, other issues facing the global society are subject to regulations at the international level.
For instance, international trade is regulated by World Trade Organisation (WTO). In addition, financial matters cutting across borders are controlled by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. The World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) deals with matters to do with copyrights and related issues. However, there is lack of an entity that is solely dedicated to the movement of people across borders (Aderanti 6).
Global Migration: Causes and Impacts
Globalisation of migration is an emerging issue in contemporary society. It refers to the spread of the impacts of migratory movements across borders (Munck 1228). As such, international migration is viewed from the perspective of a revolutionary globalisation process. It reshapes political systems, cultural parameters, and economic dynamics of various nations.
A number of factors are behind the rapid rise in global movement of persons. Golash-Boza and Menjivar postulate that the direction of movements taken by global migrants is determined by the spectacular push and pull factors (1214). The factors are either in the country of origin or in the intended end-destination. The latter is where the prospective migrant stands a chance to enjoy a wide range of interests.
Among the leading causes of international migration in the contemporary society include religious, political, and economic oppression. In addition, military pressure may also prompt people to move from one country to the other (Newland 332). Apparently, the leading causes of international migration are push factors. They usually force individuals to leave their countries either to seek better conditions or asylum in the destination country.
Other push factors facilitating global migration include hostile conditions in the home country. Others include disasters, lack of social and economic opportunities, as well as poor health infrastructure (Munck 1229). Each of these factors has its particular consequences, both to the country of origin and desired destination. For instance, political intolerance has been the leading cause of refugees globally (Newland 332). Many countries for instance in Africa have experienced massive populations of refugees due to civil unrests.
Some of the popular pull factors leading to global migration include better living standards, enjoyment, better education and jobs, lower crimes, and family links. Wealthier nations have been instrumental in triggering migrations from poorer nations (Munck 1230).
For instance, some of the wealthier nations use economic interventions, labour mobilisation, and even direct incentives. An example is the migration of Turks to Germany in 1970s and 1980s, to supply unskilled and semiskilled labour during the recovery of the German economy (Marchi 327).
Golash-Boza and Menjivar categorise causes of global migration into three broad categories (1213). The categories include migration flows created by state actions and policies, migrants travelling for fulfilment of their human rights, and migrations induced by restrictions in home countries. Apparently, the focus of these categorised causes of global migration is on push factors although expressed differently.
The North-South divide is a major cause of global migration today (Castles 210). The argument is advanced on the basis that international borders significantly help in maintenance of inequality. In light of this, Castles postulates that the North-South divide refers to the social-political differences between “the powerful nations of North America, Japan, Western Europe and Oceania, and the poorer countries of Asia, Africa, and Latina America” (211).
The divide symbolises the growing disparities in relation to incomes, human rights, social conditions, and security linked to globalisation. The disparities have given rise to considerable pressure to migrate, especially by the southerners. The moving individuals are seeking security, freedom, and better living conditions (Castles and Davidson 211).
It is noted that weak economies and dysfunctional states go hand-in-hand. As such, global migration is also facilitated by people moving to escape cases of human rights abuse and impoverishment. Castles argues that “the multiple motivations lead to a migration-asylum nexus making it very difficult to distinguish between refugees and economic migrants” (212).
Consequently, a perceived ‘migration crisis’ has erupted in reference to the North-South relations. The numerous gross inequalities coupled by uneven development are among the leading factors facilitating this crisis.
Betts postulates that globalisation is one of the major factors behind global migration (77). In essence, this phenomenon refers to movements across borders in relation to commodities, capital, ideas, and, more importantly, people (Marchi 327). The developed countries are essentially competing as they seek to attract the skilled labour such as specialists and managers.
A good example is the demand for IT professionals from India, and Asian and African medical personnel for the British healthcare system. Majority of the developed and developing countries are also in need of unskilled workers in construction, agricultural, industry and services sectors. However, many of the countries have failed to recognise this need formally. As a result, most workers seek for illegal channels of migrating (Newland 332).
The global media has also contributed immensely to global migration by idealising images of First World lifestyles in the poor economies (Newland 332). Electronics communication has made dissemination of knowledge regarding migration routes, and the opportunities of doing so very easy. In addition, long-distance travels have become much cheaper, and easily accessible, hence also significantly contributing to facilitation of global migration.
Despite of the apparent migration between the North–South divide, Munck however argues that, only a quarter of international migrants go from the South (non-OECD countries) to the global North (OECD countries) as opposed to two thirds (1230). The argument is that globalisation has generated uneven poles in relation to development within the South, hence promoting migration.
The rate of migration within the South has been facilitated by globalisation and the opportunities for development between these countries (Munck 1230). In addition, the media has focused on the rate of migration across the South-North divide at the expense of migrations within the South. A wide range of agents have been very instrumental in perpetuating global migration. According to Duffield, these are regarded as key players in an emerging migration business (38). They are interested in gaining from the situation.
The migration business is associated with significant economic opportunities. The reality has increased the rate of global migration (Duffield 39). Apparently, the migration industry has a significant portion of global illegitimate business. The illegitimate component of global migration incorporates human and migrant traffickers.
The two businesses generate billions of dollars every year. The reason is that most people are ready to relocate to a new country regardless of the costs involved. The factors facilitating global migration are numerous as evident. The pull and push factors especially have been very significant in leading to the present state of affairs. However, it is apparent that the major driving force of the rapid mobility of individuals between territories is globalisation.
Global Migration and Governance
Global interdependence between countries is an apparent fact which numerous countries are recognising. Consequently, they are seeking collaborated and coordinated efforts through which they can address global migration related issues. In the past, administrative issues to do with environment and trade have changed very slowly. However, currently, the rate of global migration is growing at a very rapid pace, necessitating similar response in terms of global migration governance (Marchi 324).
According to Betts, the management of global migration reflects multilateralism and other forms of formal arrangements (77). A number of administrative issues go beyond the jurisdiction of a single state (Koser 302). In addition, global migration governance essentially exists across three broad levels. The three are multilateralism, embeddedness, and informal networks.
With regards to multilateralism, management of international migration is regarded as a very sensitive issue. According to Betts, most of the issues addressed at this stage are similar to those handled by countries during the inter-war period (78). Multilateralism is also closely related to the introduction of a passport regime around the world.
Other areas of global migration governance do apparently illustrate the reluctance by states to pursue formal multilateralism. The existence of the UN Convention on the Rights of All Migrant Workers and their Families is an indication of this reality (Betts 76). Another illustration is the suffrage dynamics with the UN in 2006. The vote addressed the issue of UN High-Level Dialogue on Migration and Development (Betts 76).
In addition to formal multilateralism institutions, other institutions have been established. However, these additions cannot be explicitly labelled as migration centred. They deal with issues to do with the reaction of states in relation to migration. According to Betts, these establishments are not ‘migration institutions’ (76). On the contrary, they are part of the global policy of other areas (Ghosh 318).
A case in point is the International Migration Law (Ghosh 318). The legislation is not an autonomous body of law. On the contrary it draws from and is based on implications existing states obligations within other aspects of public international law (Marchi 324).
Examples of these public global legislations include the international human rights law. Others are the international maritime World Trade Organisation legislations. Other organisations also have mandate on international migration, as exemplified in UN Coordination Structure. An example is the Global Migration Group [MGM] (Marchi 324).
Another level of migration governance deals with the dynamics of informal systems. It deals with, among others, the Regional Consultative Process (RCP). According to Munck, the process was started in 1985 (1285). Its introduction was a culmination of Intergovernmental Consultations on Asylum, Refugees and Migration [IGC] (Munck 1228). It covers most parts of the world.
Munck defines RCPs as networks comprising of policy makers, emanating from various governments (1228). Individuals who formulate these policies congregate in flexible and unbinding settings. Their major concern is best practice, sharing of ideas, and capacity building (Munck 1228). The processes can also be found at different levels. At the regional level, it highlights matters related to irregular migration (Castles and Davidson 57). At the international stage, management of migration is assuming the structure of these informal systems.
Governance in relation to migration differs according to the area being addressed. According to Castles and Davidson, the increasing mobility by individuals across multiple borders has facilitated changes in global migration governance (68). For instance, the migration dynamics are pushing countries towards greater cooperation, so as to develop coherent approaches to migration policy.
Global migration discourse is apparently dominated by two major themes. One of the themes is management of migration, on the basis of desire to control entry and exit of workers legally, and consequently their access to employment opportunities. The second theme entails migration-development link or nexus (Castles and Davidson 69). The second theme focuses on poverty alleviation in poorer nations of origin, by facilitating migration to the well-off nations, which would result to remittances.
The migration development nexus discourse seems to provide a more positive viewpoint towards migration, as opposed to the more influential current securitisation discourse. Discussion of global migration discourses at the level are characterised by narrow viewpoints of development, whereby the central economic aspects are shaped by neoliberal ethos (Betts 79).
The apparent global migration governance frameworks are apparently ineffective as evidenced from the preceding analysis. For instance, it is apparent that global governance of migration is founded on the premise of normative interpretations (Munck 1229). This is coupled by practises linked to understanding of human mobility from the perspective of need to regulate and control on one hand. On the other hand, global migration governance is linked with economic development potential for the origin countries.
The current state of global migration governance makes apparent the failure of the governance system. Various shortcomings of the system have exposed migrants to abuses of their human rights among other issues. These shortcomings can be attributed to the failure of migration policies from the national, to the global level (Betts 79).
Failure of Global Migration Governance Policies
The UN lacks any organisation focused in global migration as an entirety. Other networks of intergovernmental organisations, either inside or outside the UN do exist.
The networks address specific elements of this phenomenon. Sovereign states are however recognised as the principal actors, in matters relating to migration governance. A number of countries transfer their responsibility to different international establishments. In addition, they may opt to empower regional organisations, although in a low capacity (Castles and Davidson 86).
Castles postulates that “legal and normative migration frameworks cannot be found in any one document” (205). However, some of the existing models were derived from customary laws. In addition, some were sourced from regional and global legal frameworks. The frameworks also draw from policy understandings that have been arrived at by states at both the regional and global levels (Castles 205). Majority of the elements in the current migration governance frameworks are however not migration specific.
The reasons why majority of states are reluctant in conceding national control over international migration are understandable (Castles and Davidson 86). The duty and responsibility of determining who enters or settles in their territory is their obligation. In addition, international migration ends up affecting other critical aspects of national sovereignty. Such issues include economic rivalry and social integration. Others include national security and the wellbeing of residents (Castles and Davidson 87).
Some of the problems associated with global migration may appear to be impossible to overcome. In particular, the developed nations want to protect their labour markets by admitting migrant workers on selective basis (Newland 332). On the other hand, the developing nations are rapidly expanding and have youthful populations in demand of these labour markets without access restrictions.
Consequently, the restrictions have lead to the youths searching for any available alternatives for accessing these labour markets, leading to major problems in global migration.
The slow progress in the development of effective global migration governance framework is attributed to existing international institutions. The institutions are unwilling or unable to extend their mandates. In addition, they are often competing with one, leading to their failure of cooperation even on the essential basic issues such as shared access to migration data and common terminology (Newland 332).
The relevant and extent of changes to the current global migration policies are a source of disagreement, especially to the reforms advocates (Betts 77). Various ambitions are exhibited with regard to more effective cooperation at all levels. For instance, while some advocate for new legal and normative frameworks development, others advocate for newer institutional arrangements for delivering the reforms. In addition, even factors such as terminologies, forms of governance and regimes are disagreed upon (Betts 78).
A number of national migration plans have been unable to achieve their objectives. Such developments lead to the proliferation of irregular migration in the world. Restrictive immigration and asylum policies have been very significant in facilitating irregular migration (Castles 207). The effect has however been unintentional. Legal movements have become increasingly restricted by these policies, especially in the destination countries of the developed world.
Numerous people are increasingly seeking opportunities to migrate. However, such openings are very limited. Migrant smugglers have identified this opportunity, and hence exploited it. The main job of migrant smugglers is overcoming these obstacles, which are a result of migration policies (Betts 79). Examples of these restrictions include excessive border controls and visa restrictions.
Ghosh argues that it is possible to remove such obstacles (320). The objective can be achieved by promoting legal migration. As a result, the illegal activities of smugglers will be dealt with effectively (Ghosh 320). In other instances, migration policies regimes have been faulted for failing to enlighten people on proper procedures. For instance, some migrant seek smuggler services due to irregular situations such as lack of understanding in relation to administrative procedures (Ghosh 321).
Global migration policies have failed in the sense that the architecture of international migration should be such that form follows function; which is not the case currently (Castles and Davidson 72). Majority of states globally have still not agreed the function that institutional arrangements should be vested. For instance, the kind of institution necessary for governing global migration has not been determined.
Various questions regarding a global migration governing body are raised. For instance, some people wonder whether or not it is possible to structure such an entity to look like WTO. Should the organisation be an expert resource body like the UN Joint Program on AIDS or should it be a monitoring office like Commission on Human Rights (Munck 1230). Such queries have also facilitated the ineffectiveness of global migration governance policies, leaving migrants very vulnerable.
Despite of the apparent failures by the various organisations and institutions pursuing global migration governance, much has been achieved and still remains to be done. The ideal global migration govern, has emerged in various conceptualisations. Through the vigorous actions by these bodies and institutions, global migration policies can be streamlined to protect the rights of migrants, as well as the interests of origin and destination countries globally.
Enhancing Global Migration Governance and Related Policies
It is a human right for an individual to leave his or her home country at any one given time. However, the present state of global migration governance is exposing migrants to various vulnerabilities, such as human trafficking, illegal migrants among others. Individuals need to be protected either in the country of origin or destination, if the proper, efficient and effective frameworks and policies were developed. The current state of global inequality is directly facilitating global migration.
Consequently, unless global migration policies address these root causes, then they are definitely doomed to fail (Marchi 325). Globalisation is currently the only force with capability of producing the prominent North-South gap. In addition, globalisation also holds the technological and cultural means of addressing this issue.
The leading forces undermining global migration governance are transnational networks. The underlying counter-strength by these networks is their basis of national logic. In additional these networks are still bound to fail if they are separated from the mainstream policies with regard to trade, aid, governance and development (Betts 78).
The European Union (EU) is a major global influencing force, which bears witness to the fact that even supranational bodies are subject to the issue of global migration governance. If the EU does not overcome the national control logic, then its endeavour for migration governance will be in vain.
Duffield postulates that a major challenge concerning migration governance relates to establishment coherence between existing international institutions (61). There is lack of clear plan with regards to global governance is lacking. In addition, an articulate leadership structure is missing. Trade-offs provides the best solution in addressing global migration governance. Stakeholders should not only look for the ‘win-win’ opportunities in addressing this issue.
According to Duffield, most policies concerning migration governance have major weaknesses (47). For example, most of them are unable to strike a balance between the various competing interests (Duffield 47).
They fail to establish equilibrium between national security, human rights, and economic development. Substantial vision will however be attained if only all parties are open for trade-offs migration governance policy-making. All stakeholders must realise the existence of both winners and losers in any effective migration governance model.
Making global migration governance effective will also require understanding of the migratory process, as well as the importance of transnational factors. Ghosh argues that these transnational factors are linked to analysis policy formation process by various bodies and states (320). Examination of interests as well as policy articulation, and functioning of various political systems can be used as the starting point.
Castles and Davidson postulate that migration processes are usually long-term in nature, while policy cycles on the other hand are short-term (102). In addition, policy-cycles are usually determined by the electoral periods. Lack of these considerations undermines the efforts of the present global migration governing institutions and regimes. Although developing policies which satisfy all stakeholders is difficult, this can be achieved as highlighted earlier through trade-offs, especially at the supranational level.
Betts postulates that effective global migration governance relies on plurilateralism perpetuated by initially establishing the functions of global migration governance (79). Consequently, the functions require examination, to establish to which they currently address and meet the collective interests of all stakeholders.
One of the major gaps existing in the current global migration frameworks and which requires addressing is normative oversight (Betts 79). Institutional authority in the current frameworks should be established such that it oversees implementation of the existing International Migration Law obligations by states. It is important to foster inclusive dialogue channels in relation to this issue.
Provision of services should also be a major function of global migration governance. Several organisations currently support capacity building in various countries, with regard to migration. However, most of them have focused their efforts on issues concerned with border control, forensics, and travel documentation (Ghosh 321). Such initiatives should be enhanced, and global migration governance policies and recommendations incorporated therein.
Political facilitation is also a crucial factor that can be used to facilitate global migration governance, as well as enhance coherence between states (Betts 79). Through facilitation, international institutions can help overcome the collective failures of institutions. For instance, by identifying the areas of mutual interest, the institutions can put forward international coordination or collaboration function (Duffield 104). Essentially, this can help overcome numerous failures in the policy field (Duffield 104)
Ultimately, the function of knowledge capacity can increase the efficiency of the current global governance frameworks immensely (Betts 79). Migration governance essentially needs to identify areas requiring international cooperation. In addition, knowledge capacity is required so that developments in migration can be engaged analytically, for instance in terms of the issue, its institutional and political contexts (Betts 79).
Conclusion
The present realities as well as the future pressures from global migration require that we rethink our approach to the issue and rebuild better frameworks to address the same.
The primary objective should be developing a global approach to migration governance, and managing associated risks while at the same time reaping benefits. Nations should be encouraged to share and cooperate in an international effort, while in return they can expect more local benefits. Leaders and policymakers should be encouraged to think and act globally, while pursuing local consolidation.
Works Cited
Aderanti, Adepoju. “Placing International Migration in the Context of the 3D’s: Demography, Development, and Democracy.” International Migration 44.4 (2006): 3-13. Print.
Betts, Alexander. “The Global Governance of Crisis Migration.” Forced Migration Review 45.14 (2014): 76-79. Print.
Castles, Stephen, and Alastair Davidson. Citizenship and Migration: Globalisation and the Politics of Belonging, London: Macmillan, 2000. Print.
Castles, Stephen. “Why Migration Policies Fail.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 27.2 (2004): 205-227. Print.
Duffield, Mark. Global Governance and the New Wars: The Merging of Development and Security (Critique. Influence. Change). 2nd ed. 2014. London: Zed Books Ltd. Print.
Ghosh, Bimal. “The Global Financial and Economic Crisis and Migration Governance.” Global Governance 16.3 (2010): 317-321. Print.
Golash-Boza, Tanya, and Cecilia Menjivar. “Causes and Consequences of International Migration: Sociological Evidence for the Right to Mobility.” The International Journal of Human Rights 16.8 (2012): 1213-1227. Print.
Koser, Khalid. “Introduction: International Migration and Global Governance.” Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organisations 16.3 (2010): 301-315. Print.
Marchi, Sergio. “Global Governance: Migration’s Next Frontier.” Global Governance 16.3 (2010): 323-329. Print.
Munck, Ronaldo. “Globalisation, Governance, and Migration: An Introduction.” Third World Quarterly 29.7 (2008): 1227-1246. Print.
Newland, Kathleen. “The Governance of International Migration: Mechanisms, Processes, and Institutions.” Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organisations 16.3 (2010): 331-343. Print.