| Abstract: | The rise in migration for employment since the mid-1970s has had serious consequences for many Asian countries. This discussion examines the issues raised by the migration abroad of thousands of skilled workers and the efforts that sending countries have made in recent years to bring the effects of labor migration more closely into line with their development objectives. It also considers several problem areas requiring the attention of policymakers and authorities responsible for the administration of overseas employment policies. It is estimated that between 1976-81 annual labor migrant flows from the 8 major sending countries in Asia increased sevenfold, from a mere 146,400 to over 1 million. The Asian migrant workers tend to be young, male, married (with dependents in the sending country), and better educated than the average home population. Most of them come from rural areas and are predominantly employed in construction and labor. The most distinctive feature of these workers is their concentration in a few blue collar occupations--carpenters, masons, electricians, plumbers, lorry drivers, mechanics, and heavy equipment operators. These production and trnasport workers outnumber the professional and technical workers by anywhere from 3 to 1 (Philippines) to 17 to 1 (Pakistan and Sri Lanka). At the aggregate level labor emigration affects the sending country's economy through its impact on the labor market, on the financial market, and on the market for goods and services. It can be argued that the outflow of a significant proportion of the labor force should lead directly to a rise in labor projectivity in the sending country since capital per worker among those left behind will increase, yet it can also be argued that since migration sifts out the most skilled and experienced workers there will be an erosion of the country's human captial resources. Specific measures have been adopted in most labor sending Asian countries to protect the welfare of migrant workers, to regulate conditions of employment abroad, to restrict the outflow of scarce skills, and to secure new overseas markets for nationals. Despite the efforts of governments to ensure that workers have satisfactory contracts on going abroad, many cases of "contract substitution" have been reported. The present attitude of many governments toward private recruiters seems to reflect both an acknowledgement of their effectiveness in finding job placements overseas and a growing concern to regulate their activities. The present trend seems to be to allow private agencies easier access while exercising greater supervision over those permitted to operate. The impact of labor migration on the labor markets of sending countries has not been uniformly damaging, but most of the countries have adopted 1 kind of policy or another to reduce the outflow of scarce skills. The use of material and other incentives for retaining workers in the country has obvious advantages but is not very widespread. |
