The various forms,reasons and motivations for return migration of persons who voluntarily decide to return to their countries of origin

In the Federal Republic of Germany, the government's efforts to integrate foreigners wishing to stay in the country have as a precondition that the number of foreigners taken as a whole will remain at approximately the same level. In September 1974, the foreign resident population in the Federal Republic of Germany amounted to about 4.127 million; by September 1985 it had risen to 4.365 million. Behind this slight increase is hidden a considerable flow of migrants in both directions. During the period 1974-1984, there were a record 4.774 million arrivals and 5.124 million departures. Thus, the increase in the foreign resident population is attributable entirely to the foreign children born. Since 1% of foreigners are expelled, the 5.1 million departures were almost exclusively voluntary decisions to return to their countries of origin. A bill adopted by the Federal Government in 1983, and which expired in 1984, promoted the willingness of migrants in the Federal Republic of Germany to return to their countries of origin. 2 of its particularly strong incentives follow: 1) Return assistance for all foreigners who had become unemployed as a result of bankruptcy and the closing down of a factory or firm for foreigners who had worked at least 6 months on shortened hours was covered. If a foreigner and his family permanently left the Republic before September 30, 1984, he received DM 10,500 plus DM 1500 for each dependent child. About 39,000 foreigners together with their families returned to their home countries with this incentive. 2) Payment of the employers' contribution to the official social security fund was made. More than 250,000 foreigners together with their families left the Republic under this scheme. Another bill to provide returning foreigners with building savings loans for housing construction is expected to go into effect at the beginning of 1986. Foreigners from other than the European Community member states are entitled to benefit from this plan. Loans are not to exceed DM 60,000 and will be paid out up to the end of 1993.     

New migration policies in Europe: the return of labor migrants,remigration promotion and reintegration policies

On the basis of the working papers presented at t conference, new information on the subject of return migration in Europe and conclusions on the effectiveness of policies to promote remigration were discussed aiming to stimulate further research on this subject. Mainly 3 findings resulted from the discussions. 1) On the subject of promoting remigration, the effects of the law to encourage voluntary return to home countries from the Federal Republic of Germany have remained far below expectations. 2) Concerning effects of the migration policies on the foreign residents in the host countries, it was stated that these prevent a clear definition of their status by the foreigners themselves, because they obscure the decision whether to stay or leave the host country. Especially regarding the increasingly critical attitude of the population of the host country towards the guest workers, a growing insecurity of the foreigners must be noted, which has led recently to overhasty emigration decisions with alarming economic and social results for those affected. 3) Concerning possibilities for international cooperation on return migration, it was stated that the indirect instruments of promoting return have shown little success. On the other hand, direct promotion by means of financial incentives is to be rejected because of its mainly negative side effects on the expectations of the labor migrants and also on those of the indigenous population. New and promising approaches to remigration policy must consider the economic and social interests of the countries of origin and improve their economic, political, and administrative capacities.     

French immigration policy since May 1981

Examining the immigration policy changes undertaken by Socialist President Francois Mitterand between May 1981 and September 1982, this discussion provides backgroung information for the study of immigration policy reform in France, discusses the institutional and historical contexts within which recent policy changes have occurred, and examines the initial measures taken, the new immigration legislation adopted in October 1981, the "Exceptional Regularization" carried out in 1981-82, and various other immigration measures announced during the period under study. The discussion also identifies some of the problems which arose and are likely to arise as a result of the new policies. The French government has historically taken great pains to track the movement of both foreigners and natives within its territory. All citizens are issued a national identity card, and all foreigners residing in the country for longer than 3 months must obtain a residence permit from their local prefecture of police. The entry of some 347 million people annually into France must contribute to the problem of exercising strict control at entry. French measures to enforce immigration laws within its borders have not prevented the development of clandestine immigration nor the employment of undocumented foreigners. French law requires that all employers and employees contribute to the system of the Securite Sociale and to a variety of other government programs providing social and economic assistance to workers and their families. The year 1932 marks the date of the first French laws limiting immigration. On July 5, 1974 the French government closed the country's borders to immigration and have not reopened them since. Following that date a more severe attitude towards clandestine immigration became evident. Despite the anti-immigration policies of the 1974-81 period the number of foreigners residing in France did not diminish. 3 basic goals guided the new government in the development of its policies: to limit the entry of new foreigners; to end the precariousness which has characterized the existence of many immigrant families in France; and to examine immigration problems through bilateral negotiation with various sending countries. The immigration policy developed and carried out by the Mitterand administration during its first 15 months in office expressed an attitude of generosity towards established immigrants and external rigor vis-a-vis new immigration. The generosity of the new government is evident in the limitations placed on expulsion and detention, the guarantee of due process of law and all job-related rights for undocumented foreigners, the reaffirmation of family reunification, easier access to "privileged" immigrant status, the extension of the right of employment to foreign students and to Polish and Lebanese refugees, and new legislation guaranteeing the right of association to immigrants. The government's desire to control immigration more effectively is evident in the tightening of control at France's borders and in the substantial increases in sanctions against employers of clandestine workers.     

Argentine experience in the field of illegal immigration

This article provides a brief history of Argentine policy toward migratory flows from neighboring countries and Europe, and concludes with statistics on the number of foreigners in Argentina in the 1970-80 period. Measures passed during the 1940s and 1950s were aimed at providing amnesty for foreigners who were residing in Argentina without immigrant status. However, the lack of an adequate administrative structure to regulate foreigners at the borders was a drawback for migration authorities and limited the possiblility of applying admission criteria effectively. By 1970, there were 583,000 foreigners from neighboring countries living in Argentina, which represented a 25% increase from 1960. 42% of these migrants were in the metropolitan region of the country, indicative of a shift away from employment in agriculture. Decree No. 87, passed in 1974, represented an extension of a migration policy aimed at granting ample facilities for permanent residence to aliens from contiguous countries and was designed to prevent abuse of clandestine workers by employers. As a result of this measure, 150,000 foreigners were able to settle legally in the country. A 1981 law, yet to be implemented, establishes a new legal framework aimed at fostering immigration and regulating the admission of foreigners. To attain the objective of settling workers in areas of the country considered of prime importance to economic development, the law provides for infrastructural investments and promotional measures in areas such as tax exemption and the granting of credit. The 1980 National Population Census indicated there were 677,000 foreigners from neighboring countries in Argentina. In that year, foreigners comprised 2.4% of the country's population and 3.1% of the inhabitants of the metropolitan region. These figures are indicative of a decline in the growth of immigration, most likely due to the decline in the purchasing power of workers' salaries in the late 1970s.     

The guests who stayed--the debate on 'foreigners policy' in the German Federal Republic

The recruitment of "guest workers" between 1956 and 1973 by West German employers has given rise to new ethnic minorities. The Federal Republic of Germany (GFR) claims that it is not a country of immigration--a controversy that reflects the basic dilemma over policies towards foreign residents, who now comprise about 7% of the total population. The shift from temporary labor migration to long-term settlement has been accompanied by structural changes in the foreign resident population. The logic of the migratory process is inescapable: virtually all migrations, whether organized or spontaneous, start with movements of young adult workers. When recruitment stated in the late 1950s state migration policies were concerned only with short-term fulfillment of capital's labor requirements. The state established a system of institutionalized discrimination, through which temporary guest workers could be recruited, controlled, and sent away, as the interests of capital dictated. This policy was impracticable because many firms found that rotation led to problems of labor fluctuation and high training costs. The trend toward restrictive policies on migration continued in the early 1980s; rising unemployment and urban problems led to widespread hostility towards foreigners. 3 key issues need resolving quickly: 1) the granting of security of residence status, so that migrant families have a clear basis for planning their own future, 2) the extending of political rights to foreign residents, and 3) the issue of citizenship. Like other West European countries, the GFR has become a multiethnic society through the postwar labor migrations. The early reform of legal structures to give migrants more rights is a precondition for social peace, and for achieving the benefits which multiculturalism can offer to all members of society.     

Best Practice Options: Yugoslavia

Several Cooperative Efforts to Manage Emigration (CEME) members visited the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) in early June 2001 to examine the new Government's approach to migration issues. We found that both the Federal Government and the Serb Republic are faced with three principal issues related to immigration and refugees that require substantial cooperation with North American and European countries that are donors of international aid, as well as recipients of Yugoslav migrants and third country nationals transiting the FRY.
First, they are faced with migration issues that the international community considers priorities, including demilitarizing border management; combating human smuggling and trafficking; and drafting and implementing an aliens law, which includes asylum policies and procedures consistent with international standards.
Second, they need to plan for the return or integration of 350,000 refugees from Croatia and Bosnia, and another 150,000 internally displaced Yugoslavs from Kosovo, primarily by offering dual citizenship in the FRY, and Croatia and Bosnia so refugees can integrate in the FRY, but retain rights and privileges according to Croatians or Bosnians.
Third, it is important to build bridges to Yugoslavs abroad in order to attract remittances and the return of the professionals needed to rebuild the FRY.     

Effects of migration on family structure in the receiving country

The recognition of the right to family reunification in 1976 brought far-reaching changes in the characteristics of the foreign population in France. Today, France's immigrant population has the following characteristics: 1) 42.6% are female, 2) 40% are under 25 years of age, and 3) foreigners are increasingly dispersed throughout France. Those with residents' cards may automatically obtain residents' cards for their spouses and children. France's reception policy calls for a social worker to visit a recently arrived family, to assess their need for and to promote social services. Problems of adaptation include 1) wives' social isolation and 2) changes in relations between father and children. The integration policy conducted by public authorities has 4 main aspects: 1) socio-educational activities, 2) cultural activities, 3) vocational training, and 4) activities connected with housing and lifestyle. In 1975, France began offering assisted return procedures to dismissed unskilled workers. In 1984, the authorities introduced public assistance in reintegration for workers under threat of dismissal or who had already been dismissed. The number of foreigners resident in France should remain stable over the next few years, making the integration of immigrant communities within French society a vital task.     

Las Migraciones en el Proceso de Integracion de las Americas: Seminario Internacional (Migration in the Integration Process in the Americas: International Seminar). Conference report

This conference report of the Centro de Estudios Migratorios Latinoamericanos and the Center for Migration Studies pertains to meetings held in August 1992. Summary information on migration movements in Latin America is presented by region and subject. The topic of integration in the Americas was presented by Mr. Lelio Marmora. Other topics and presenters include the new Colombian Migration Policy (Mr. Carlos Adolfo Arenas), the integration policies in Central America (Mr. Pilar Norza of Costa Rica, Raimundo Alvarado of El Salvador, and Luis Armando Gusman of Nicaragua), the Andean Pact agreements (representatives of each country), US immigration policy (Charles B. Keely), the Mexican integration with Latin America and immigration to the US (Jorge Bustamante), migration to Bolivia and Argentina and Chile, and transnationalism in the Caribbean (Professor Andre Corten). Migration policy needs to be tailored specifically to the situation in Latin America, and greater attention needs to be devoted to labor migrants' rights and working conditions. There are still fundamental differences among countries in policies regarding the free circulation of persons across borders. There is a division among those who support migration and those who are realists. National sovereignty issues are solvable because of a common national past and a relatively homogenous population. Another opinion is that Latin America is more diverse than commonly recognized. Capital is protected more in international agreements than is migrant labor. Regional integration for the US does mean immigration from Mexico. The US sees Mexican migration as a policy problem, and Mexico sees migration as a labor opportunity.     

Immigration policies that include or exclude: a South African public opinion study of immigration policy preferences

South Africa is a regional hub for migration on the African continent and is home to a growing documented international migrant community. Foreigners in the country, however, often face violations of their established rights and are the victims of abuse. This paper examines public support for policies that would exclude international migrants from the country. Data from the 2013 South African Social Attitudes Survey, a nationally representative opinion poll (N = 2739) of all adults in the country, are used. This poll found that many South Africans favoured restrictive immigration policies and opposed granting foreigners the same rights as citizens. Multivariate analysis is employed to discern determinants of this opposition. Respondents’ perceptions of the population sizes of foreigners in their communities did not affect support for inclusion. It can be inferred, therefore, that the growth of the immigrant population has not provoked exclusionary attitudes in the country. Rather, results revealed, it is national pride (cultural versus political) and fears about the consequences of immigration that drive such attitudes. Programmes and policies designed to improve public perceptions of how foreigner impact society and the promotion of a nationalism characterised by inclusive multicultural civic patriotism may improve public support for the inclusion of international immigrants.     

Social effects of migration in receiving countries

This paper examines the impact of post-1945 migration into Western, Middle, and Northern Europe from Southern Europe, Turkey, and Northern Africa, and migration to the traditional immigration countries by Asian and Latin American immigrants, on the social structures of receiving countries. Between 1955 and 1974, 1) traditional migration to the US and Australia became less important for European countries while traditional receiving countries accepted many immigrants from developing countries; and 2) rapid economic revival in Western and Northern Europe caused a considerable labor shortage which was filled by migrant workers especially from Southern Europe, Turkey, and Northern Africa, who stayed only until they reached their economic goals. Since 1974, job vacancies have declined and unemployment has soared. This employment crisis caused some migrants 1) to return to their countries of origin, 2) to bring the rest of their families to the receiving country, or 3) to lengthen their stay considerably. The number of refugees has also significantly increased since the mid-970s, as has the number of illegal migrants. After the mid-1970s, Europe began to experience integration problems. The different aspects of the impact of migration on social structures include 1) improvement of the housing situation for foreigners, 2) teaching migrants the language of the receiving country, 3) solving the unemployment problem of unskilled migrants, 4) improvement of educational and vocational qualifications of 2nd generation migrants, 5) development of programs to help unemployed wives of migrants to learn the language and meet indigenous women, 6) encouraging migrants to maintain their cultural identity and assisting them with reintegration if they return to their original country, 7) coping with the problems of refugees, and 8) solving the problems of illegal migration. Almost all receiving countries now severely restrict further immigration. [Those policies should result in improved development of aid policies towards sending countries. Immigration from other countries to those of the European Economic community should be limited to that for humanitarian reasons.     

Framing and immigration through the trump era

For the last decade, undocumented or illegal immigration has been one of the most contested policy issues in the United States, with significant news attention on policies affecting the undocumented population, ranging from deportations to comprehensive immigration reform, the DREAM Act, and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. Despite these prominent and multifaceted policy debates, scholarship on media framing and public opinion remain more focused on the portrayal of immigrants rather than policies affecting them. In general, scholars find that policy frames are far more consequential to public opinion than equivalency frames (variations in how news media describe unauthorized immigrants, either as “illegal” or “undocumented”) or episodic frames (whether news articles are heavy on human‐interest stories rather than policy facts and statistics). Also, negative frames generally have stronger effects than positive frames, and these effects sometimes vary by partisanship and family migration history. Finally, the relative infrequency of powerful frames in news stories, like a life spent in the United States, provides opportunities for advocates to move public opinion on immigration policy. These findings have important implications for future battles over immigration policy in the United States, which show no signs of abating.     

Ausländer, Eingebürgerte und das Problem einer realistischen Zuwanderer-Integrationsbilanz

The use of the legal term “foreigner” in German official statistics and in sociological research on migration and integration is questioned. During the 1990s, naturalization has created a gap between the numbers of migrants and of foreigners. Legal and administrative factors cause an unobserved selectivity in the process of naturalization and increasingly blur the meaning of citizenship for social science purposes. Drawing on two German survey samples, the article reveals a considerably more favorable socio-economic placement of naturalized persons compared with foreigners of the same origin. Any stock-taking based on foreigners alone would exclude the most successful migrants in terms of education, labor market participation and income, and depict the participation of the immigrated population as overly deficient. An appropriate representation of naturalized people in official statistics is called for.     

Managing Migration: The Role of Economic Instruments

This paper reviews economic policies and instruments available to the developed countries to reduce unwanted migration from developing countries, not all of which is irregular migration. Countries generally welcome legal immigrants and visitors, try to make it unnecessary for people to become refugees and asylum seekers, and try to discourage, detect, and remove irregular foreigners. There are three major themes: 1. There are as many reasons for migration as there are migrants, and the distinction between migrants motivated by economic and non–economic considerations is often blurred. Perhaps the best analogy is to a river – what begins as one channel that can be managed with a dam can become a series of rivulets forming a delta, making migration far more difficult to manage. 2. The keys to reducing unwanted migration lie mostly in emigration countries, but trade and investment fostered by immigration countries can accelerate economic and job growth in both emigration and immigration countries, and make trading in goods a substitute for economically motivated migration. Trade and economic integration had the effect of slowing emigration from Europe to the Americas, between southern Europe and northern Europe, and in Asian Tiger countries such as South Korea and Malaysia. However, the process of moving toward freer trade and economic integration can also increase migration in the short term, producing a migration hump, and requiring cooperation between emigration and immigration destinations so that the threat of more migration does not slow economic integration and growth. 3. Aid, intervention, and remittances can help reduce unwanted migration, but experience shows that there are no assurances that such aid, intervention, and remittances would, in fact, lead migrants to stay at home. The better use of remittances to promote development, which at US$65 billion in 1999 exceeded the US$56 billion in official development assistance (ODA), is a promising area for cooperation between migrants and their areas of origin, as well as emigration and immigration countries. There are two ways that differences between countries can be narrowed: migration alone in a world without free trade, or migration and trade in an open economy. Migration will eventually diminish in both cases, but there is an important difference between reducing migration pressures in a closed or open world economy. In a closed economy, economic differences can narrow as wages fall in the immigration country, a sure recipe for an anti–immigrant backlash. By contrast, in an open economy, economic differences can be narrowed as wages rise faster in the emigration country. Areas for additional research and exploration of policy options include: (1) how to phase in freer trade, investment, and economic integration to minimize unwanted migration; (2) strategies to increase the job–creating impacts of remittances, perhaps by using aid to match remittances that are invested in job–creating ways.     

Does ethnic origin determine integration success? A comparison of immigration policies in Germany and Japan

The paper analyzes public policy and public opinion responses toward immigrants in Germany and Japan, two countries whose immigration policies have relied on blood purity (jus sanguinis). The paper retraces the rationale for jus sanguinis and contends that it was adopted at the turn of the century in both countries out of political convenience. The principles and goals of immigration policies are compared cautioning that better principles must not mean better outcomes.

It is reiterated that Germany has made a politically motivated move away from the ethnic monocultural concept, whereas Japan still hangs on more or less to the old model of silent and subtle assimilation. The more dissuasive Japanese model of tight immigration control, deportation and monocultural assimilation isthen compared to the more permissive German immigration model. A comparison of identity discourses in the form of Japanese Nihonjinron and German Leitkultur shows that both countries struggle with identifying and asserting their core values and that this has a negative impact on integration issues. The paper concludes that Germany has failed to bear the full consequences of its ambitious plans by taking into account the values, beliefs and worldviews of its immigrants, whereas Japan continues to treat immigrants as temporary guests denying any need for long-term integration.     

The Jewish Emigration from the Former Soviet Union to Germany

Since the end of the 1980s a massive emigration of Jews from the former Soviet Union (FSU) can be observed. Israel and the United States were the most important receiving countries, followed by Germany, a comparatively new immigration destination for Jews from the successor states of the USSR. One of the reasons the German Government allowed the admission of Jews from post-Soviet states was the Jewish community's claim that this immigration might rejuvenate the German Jewish population in the longer run. Using an index of demographic aging (Billeter's J), the following article examines if this has actually happened. Findings suggest that immigration actually initiated a process of rejuvenation in the Jewish population in Germany. However, it was reversed during the end of the 1990s because of an unaffected low fertility.     

American Public Opinion on Immigration: Nativist,Polarized, or Ambivalent?

For Dauvergne (2016), one consequence of the “end of settler societies” is nativism, or what she calls “mean-spirited politics”: anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, anti-Multiculturalism. This accords with the prevailing tone of public opinion literature on the subject, which links anti-immigrant hostility in settler societies to influxes of diversity and associated racial threat. In this essay, we determine just how closely this stylized vision of anxiety-fuelled nativism resembles the true state of mass opinion about immigration. Using a variety of surveys fielded in recent years, we show that Americans: 1) hold generally positive views about immigration, though with a substantial dose of ambivalence about its consequences; 2) are not especially consistent in their policy attitudes over time; 3) express policy attitudes that readily depart from their underlying predispositions, and; 4) have only become more pro-immigrant in recent years, and whatever partisan polarization exists on the issue stems from the fact that Republicans are becoming more positive at a slightly slower pace than Democrats. All of this suggests that, while there is a hard core of ethnocentrism and "mean-spiritedness" in the U.S., the prevailing tone is much less negative than the standard portrayal assumes.     

Young migrants of the second generation in Europe: education and labour market insertion prospects

This paper compares the situation of second generation migrants in employing European nations with first generation migrants in the countries of origin. The study focuses on intergenerational changes in employment, unemployment, and further migration. High rates of failure, underachievement, and non-attendance are often found among migrant school children. Girls and boys show high occupational aspirations from age 10-14, but more realistic aspirations by their last year of school. Although vocational training interests many young foreigners, they usually do not get enough training to compete successfully in the labor market. Unemployment affects young foreigners more, and their employment is more unstable, unskilled, and without advancement. Indecision dominates their attitudes about return migration. The country of origin usually cannot provide employment, especially for women, and the longer young migrants have been in employing nations, the less likely they are to want to leave. Difficulty in migrating and the parental desire for superior schooling also limit return migration. On return, migrants 1) experience no continuity of employment or promotion, 2) often find that the skills they have acquired are not valued, 3) must use parallel labor market and cottage industry work to find employment, 4) find that, especially for women and young workers, the unstable employment experienced abroad also affects them on return, 5) find temporary employment or have difficulty in obtaining a job, 6) find both positive and negative views are held by employers concerning them, 7) find that family and connections are the primary means for finding jobs, and 8) discover return migration may not be an end since many second generation migrants will re-migrate for economic and social reasons. School performance, language mastery, social integration and access to training plague migrants and young nationals of similar socioeconomic background. They are unprepared to succeed in the new country and experience conflict of aspirations. First and second generation return migrants experience great frustration, since employment conditions are poor, and may be forced to migrate to a third country.     

Nigerians in China: A Second State of Immobility

China’s rapid economic development has been accompanied by new forms of immigration. Investors and professionals from developed countries are increasingly joined by a diverse group of immigrants from around the world. While there is a large body of academic literature on Chinese emigration, China’s new role as a country of immigration has received less scholarly attention. This paper addresses the dynamics of South–South migration to China through a study of Nigerians in Guangzhou, a major international trading hub. The analysis is based on qualitative interviews and participant observation among African traders and migrants in Guangzhou. The paper contends that Nigerian immigration to China epitomizes global migration trends towards a diversification of migration flows, commercialization of the migration process and increased policing of foreigners within national borders. China was rarely the preferred destination of this study’s Nigerian informants but, rather, a palatable alternative, as their aspirations to enter Europe and North America were curtailed by restrictive immigration regimes. They escaped a situation of involuntary immobility in Nigeria through short‐term visas obtained with the help of migration brokers. However, opportunities for visa renewals are scant under the current Chinese immigration policy. Undocumented migrants find their mobility severely inhibited: They must carefully assess how, when and with whom they move about in order to avoid police interception. This is a business impediment, as well as a source of personal distress for migrants who engage in trade and the provision of trade‐related services. The situation can be described as a “second state of immobility”: the migrants have succeeded in the difficult project of emigration, but find themselves spatially entrapped in new ways in their destination country.     

The evolution of French immigration policy after May 1981

Changes and continuities in French immigration policies, following the assumption of power by the socialist government in 1981, are described. Attention is focused on the political implications of immigration and on the role of immigrants in French politics. Efforts to restrict immigration to France were initiated in 1931, but clandestine immigration, especially from Portugal, remained largely unchecked for 4 decades. In the early 1970s, stricter enforcement measures were adopted, but these measures met with considerable international and national opposition. In 1977, the government altered its approach to immigration by offering financial aid to help illegal migrants return to their countries of origin. These efforts met with little success, and in 1980 the government initiated measures to promote the integration of immigrants into French society. The socialistic government basically adhered to the immigration policies of the preceding government. The current government seeks: 1) to stop further illegal immigration through the intensification of border controls, 2) to grant amnesty to illegal aliens who currently reside in the country and who meet certain employment requirements, 3) to penalize employers who hire illegal aliens or who contract to bring illegal aliens into the country, and 4) to improve living conditions for legal immigrants. The politicalization of immigration has increased in recent years. Current issues center on the human and political rights of migrants and on arbitary administrative efforts to control immigration. It was expected that migrants would acquire political rights after the 1981 election; however, this expectation was not realized, and the political status of immigrants remains an unsettled issue. Consequently migrants have become pawns in the political struggle between different groups in the population both at the national and the local level. Immigration threatens to become an explosive issue. At the same time, migrants themselves are playing an increasingly prominent role in political activities, such as rent strikes and protest movements.