Introduction
In the present day, immigration is regarded as one of the most debatable issues in the globalized world, especially in countries with a substantial number of immigrants. It goes without saying that people traditionally leave their homes in order to improve the quality of life for their families, relatives, and themselves. In general, migrants may be defined as the constituent elements of global development that substantively contribute to the host countries’ technological growth and economic prosperity. However, the question of whether immigrants should be allowed to return to their native countries after one year of living in a host country is currently the subject of much controversy.
This paper focuses on the advantages of migration for host states and the economic aspects of temporary migration. The results of this research demonstrate that the return of immigrants at home after one year has a highly negative effect on the economy and migration policy of a receiving country. They need more time for emotional and economic growth in order to become fully valid members of a new society and avoid specific obstacles in the process of family reunification.
Immigration Advantages
Despite the permanent existence of immigration throughout all course of human history, this process is currently transforming North America and Western Europe. This massive inflow traces its origin to the middle of the 20th century that may be regarded as “a period of recovery and expansion after the devastations of worldwide economic depression and war” (Alba and Foner 1). At the present moment, the United States is a country with the largest foreign-born population, and more than 40 million immigrants (Alba and Foner 1). In general, the potential improvement of economic prospects is a paramount motivation for a prevalent number of these people.
Immigration traditionally benefits not only people who travel abroad but the economic status of host countries as well. Although immigrants send substantial amounts of money home by the medium of remittances, they invariably spend salaries locally on food, accommodation, healthcare, and leisure. Migration is highly beneficial for labor productivity, poverty reduction, foreign direct investment, and trade (Cantore and Calì 697).
In addition, immigration considerably contributes to the labor market expansion as a prevalent number of people additionally move abroad for professional growth in order to improve career prospects in the future. In this way, immigrants simultaneously stimulate the economy of a receiving country. Their economic contribution is directly proportional to the efficiency of their involvement in the host country’s labor force. Moreover, through the labor market expansion, immigrants substantively increase the production level that indicating the host country’s economic growth.
Immigration has a highly positive impact on the economic conditions of receiving countries with demographic disproportion. If an aging population is prevalent, the economy requires the support of young people who may join the workforce. That is why a reasonable influx of immigrants who pay taxes may mitigate the crucial problem of certain countries’ unbalanced demographic situation. Another positive reason for immigration is connected with people’s professional competencies. In some circumstances, immigrants may bring specific skills that are not available in the host country’s local labor market. In addition, they frequently hold management positions in large companies or start their own business.
Temporary Migration
The temporariness of migration is regarded as a fact that was frequently omitted in the economic literature dedicated to the processes of migration. The ignorance of this phenomenon may be crucial as it may impart “a distinct dynamic element to immigrants’ economic behavior” and generate potential consequences for non-migrants in native and host countries (Dustmann and Görlach 98). According to the report of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), with respect to time periods and countries, 20-50% of immigrants leave host countries within the first several years after their arrival (Dustmann and Görlach 98).
In addition, the results of the OECD’s recent monitoring demonstrate that in certain countries, such as Japan and The Republic of Korea, foreign-born outflows currently stand at a ratio of almost 90% (Dustmann and Görlach 98). These figures emphasize “the non-permanence of many migrations” all over the world that substantively influences the economic conditions of host countries (Dustmann and Görlach 99). In addition, migration temporariness should be considered in the analysis of various aspects of economic behavior typical for immigrants.
Despite the fact that the impact of migration temporariness is not properly examined by a prevalent number of scientists, certain scholars began to investigate this aspect. Dustmann and Görlach conducted research dedicated to the interdependence between the immigrants’ economic behavior and the period of residence in a host country (100). They analyzed this correlation using the imagined example of an immigrant from Poland who arrived in the United Kingdom (Dustmann and Görlach 100). The same migrant was considered in two scenarios – permanent and temporary immigration.
In the first variant, she will remain in the receiving country for life while in the second, the immigrant plans to return to her native country after three years. Under the scenario of temporary migration, the substantial difference in salaries between the two countries and economic prospects will motivate the immigrant to work intensively during several years of planned residence. In turn, permanent immigration implies equal attention of the migrant to all spheres of her life, including leisure time.
Moreover, the temporariness of migration will force the woman to accept inappropriate jobs with a lower reservation wage (Dustmann and Görlach 100). This example illustrates not only different economic behavior but the insufficiency of immigrants to grow economically and emotionally if the period of their residence is substantively limited.
Another disadvantage of temporary immigration is connected with additional challenges posed to its measurement. Temporary migration frequently takes more complex forms in comparison with simple return migration. In other words, migrants may “transit across different countries before settling in a final country” or move between native and host countries staying in both states for limited periods (Dustmann and Görlach 107).
World globalization provided “the perfect vehicle to accelerate and facilitate temporary labor migration” (Howe and Owens 10). However, it creates measurement problems as the accurate registering of immigration periods, and arrival numbers are frequently not possible. Transitory migration may be potentially measured by the use of retrospective surveys and the combining of the countries’ administrative data sources (Dustmann and Görlach 107). Although the progress in the migration temporariness measurement is currently observable, challenges still remain.
Family Reunification
Families are regarded as one of the most essential reasons for temporary immigration that negatively influence the economic and emotional growth of people in a new country. Unfortunately, in the United States, immigration laws and migration patterns “have reshaped family composition and have resulted in the prevalence of transnational families” (Maddali 109). Such families have their members separated by borders due to deportations or the inability to re-unify (Enchautegui and Menjívar 32). That is why the number of women with children and unaccompanied minors crossing the U.S.-Mexico border is constantly increasing (Maddali 107).
Historically, the typical immigration pattern, especially for Hispanics and Mexicans, implies the husband’s arrival to a host country while his family remains in their native country. In the present day, the reunification of family substantially depends on the status of the immigrant’s visa, the absence of penalties for immigration violations, and the period of stay in a host country (Maddali 109). That is why people who moved to another country and did not leave it for several years have legitimate reasons to reunify with their families without significant obstacles in the process of immigration.
Conclusion
For an immigrant, the start of his or her life in a foreign country may be challenging, however, it implies the following of a certain guideline to become a stable and productive member of a new society. It goes without saying that appropriate integration requires time, and no one is able to improve life quality and grow either economically or emotionally within a short period of residence. Families are regarded as the weakest point and one of the most essential reasons for temporary immigration that force people to return to their native countries. However, the prohibition for immigrants on their departure from a host country after one year will contribute to their socioeconomic status.
That is why they will have legitimate reasons to reunify with their families without significant obstacles in the process of immigration. Moreover, permanent or long-lasting immigration will facilitate the immigration processes related to residence and citizenship, lower the cases of transitory migration, and improve the host country’s economic conditions in general. Taking all advantages of long-lasting migration into consideration, it is possible to confirm that the immigrants’ leave should be allowed after more than two years of residence in a host country with the proof of the establishment.
Works Cited
Alba, Richard, and Nancy Foner. Strangers No More: Immigration and the Challenges of Integration in North America and Western Europe. Princeton University Press, 2015.
Anita Ortiz. “Left Behind: The Dying Principle of Family Reunification Under Immigration Law.” University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, vol. 50, no. 1, 2016, pp. 107-173.
Cantore, Nicola, and Massimiliano Calì. “The Impact of Temporary Migration on Source Countries.” International Migration Review, vol. 49, no. 3, 2018, pp. 697-726.
Dustmann, Christian, and Joseph-Simon Görlach. “The Economics of Temporary Migrations.” Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 54, no. 1, 2016, pp. 98-136.
Howe, Joanna, and Rosemary Owens, editors. Temporary Labour Migration in the Global Era: The Regulatory Challenges. Hart Publishing, 2016.
Maddali, Enchautegui, Maria E., and Cecilia Menjívar. “Paradoxes of Family Immigration Policy: Separation, Reorganization, and Reunification of Families under Current Immigration Laws.” Law & Policy, vol. 37, no. 1-2, 2015, pp. 32-60.